BREAKING: Official Synopsis For Star Trek Into Darkness Revealed | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

BREAKING: Official Synopsis For Star Trek Into Darkness Revealed November 26, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Today the 2013 Star Trek: Into Darkness movie took another big step forward. Paramount Pictures issued the official approved synopsis for the film, which reveals some details about the plot. Read the synopsis below (minor spoilers).

 

Trek Sequel Official Synopsis

Here is the official synopsis for Star Trek Into Darkness...

In Summer 2013, pioneering director J.J. Abrams will deliver an explosive action thriller that takes Star Trek Into Darkness.

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

First thoughts….

Title Declares

Right off the bat you can see how JJ Abrams team see the title "Star Trek Into Darkness" not as a title and subtitle but as a declarative phrase.

Return to topical allegory

Long before the film went into production the team talked about getting more allegorical, like was often the case with TOS. Mentions of "terror," "war zone," and "weapon of mass destruction" certainly feel like topical issues.

The Enemy Within?

Also "within their own organization" implies that a bad guy could be within the Federation or possibly even Starfleet itself.

Kirk’s big test

We have heard things before from the cast about how the villain in the film "tests" Kirk and crew, and how Kirk "earns" his Captain’s chair this time. This bit about it being personal for Kirk, and Kirk sacrificing for true family could imply an evolution for the character. In the 2009 Star Trek film Kirk fell into the role of leader. It sounds like this time Kirk faces an even bigger challenge and one where he could grow into the captain we know who isn’t selfish but has only one true love…The Enterprise and her crew.

Source: Paramount Pictures

 

Synopsis Poll

Sound off below and in our new poll.

 

Does Star Trek: DS9 fit with Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek future?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

 

 

Comments

1. Harry Ballz - November 26, 2012

Holy sheepshit!

2. Derek - November 26, 2012

DEFINITELY Gary Mitchell…. In my opinion!

3. Devin - November 26, 2012

Detonated. Odd choice of words. Sounds good…

4. Harry Ballz - November 26, 2012

If Kirk only has his crew left as family, that must mean that his mother and brother are killed during the attack on Earth.

5. Khan was Framed! - November 26, 2012

Yes!

6. Jerry Modene - November 26, 2012

Either Mitchell, or maybe it’s Ben Finney. ;)

7. Sxottlan - November 26, 2012

Trying not to read until I see the trailer!

*closes eyes, plugs ears*

8. cleverclogs - November 26, 2012

Ummm “detonated the fleet”. If that means all ships blow up… that’s kinda lame.

9. Darkthunder - November 26, 2012

-If- it’s Gary Mitchell, that suggests it’s a terrorist-revamped version of him. Which I suppose fits the time, since most of Trek’s “best episodes/movies”, had analogues to then-current events. “The Undiscovered Country” for example dealt with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

If this is a 23rd century analogue to current events, it highly suggests some form of terrorism. As Spock would say… Fascinating.

Now we just need confirmation on who the villain actually is.

10. Khan was Framed! - November 26, 2012

Yeah what does “fleet detonated” mean?

All self destructs initiated by remote?

what’s that all about?

This movie sounds really good.

11. MattR - November 26, 2012

That phrase really makes no sense.

12. Khan was Framed! - November 26, 2012

“One man weapon of mass destruction” sounds like Khan.

13. bunk - November 26, 2012

Love the phrase “epic chess game if life and death.” I hope there is something to this.

14. Aix - November 26, 2012

Awesome! This is like hitting two birds with one stone. You have the villain and the environment as threats for the manhunt. More exploration, yay!

15. Zachary - November 26, 2012

Perhaps “decimated the fleet”?

16. JP Saylor - November 26, 2012

Detonated? Wtf?

By the way, thanks for raping the franchise, J.J.

17. Dennis Bailey - November 26, 2012

Kh-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-an!

18. Darkthunder - November 26, 2012

“Fleet” has been used on a few occasions, to describe just one smaller part of the whole (usually what is referred to as a Task Force). It’s possible, that the “Fleet” are the unnamed ships that were headed into the Laurentian System in Trek 09.

19. Beamer - November 26, 2012

Section 31

20. Tom - November 26, 2012

The last paragraph is so damn depressing. And does that mean that his mother will die in this movie?

21. MattR - November 26, 2012

#18. I don’t think anyone has problem with “fleet”, its the “detonated the fleet” that makes no sense.

22. steve - November 26, 2012

But I thought Nero already “detonated” the fleet just before ANNIHILATING Vulcan…

23. Devon - November 26, 2012

Excellent!

24. igloo - November 26, 2012

oh man now i’m itchin’ for that trailer

25. Tanner Waterbury - November 26, 2012

Wow… I am really looking forward to this now. This universe may turn out to be an interesting one.

26. Chris Doohan - November 26, 2012

Great synopsis. Can’t wait

27. Mantastic - November 26, 2012

Methinks they need to redo the official synopsis. Very clumsily worded.

28. mhansen0207 - November 26, 2012

This sounds like it could be EPIC!!

And enough with JJ “raping” the franchise. If you don’t wanna see the movie, don’t see it. Plain and simple.

29. DonDonP1 - November 26, 2012

I am so looking forward to the 12th big screen adventure from “the final frontier.” I hope the teaser would be attached to Universal’s “Les Miserables.”

30. @fitzentoaster - November 26, 2012

Clearly Garydict Mitchellbatch! Called it! Quite excited for this tho… he’ll make a great Mitchell

31. Tanner Waterbury - November 26, 2012

I bet it’s Cupcake that detonated the fleet! I KNEW WE SHOULDN’T OF TRUSTED HIM!

32. Bob Tompkins - November 26, 2012

Interesting.
Have they been throwing us curveballs the whole time about the relationship of the graphic novels to the movie universe? Gary Mitchell has already been dealt with and dispatched in the comic/movie universe.
Khan is not part of the Star Fleet or the Federation, yet the villain is a known quantity.
The first 9 minutes of the movie preceding the Hobbit will probably not tell the tale of who the villain is, just set it up with a load of digital destruction. We may not even see the crew.

33. Bob Tompkins - November 26, 2012

Look for Admiral Pike to be a casualty? He’s about the only ‘family Kirk has in Starfleet.

34. Josh C. - November 26, 2012

while “detonating the fleet” might be literal, the whole phrase ” has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for” suggests that it could be metaphorical (as in to put in disarray). I mean, wouldn’t destroy the fleet be more appropriate if that’s what happened?

Also, isn’t Garth of Izar a starfleet officer? Wasn’t there speculation at some time that he may be the villian?

35. Starfleet Battles - November 26, 2012

Garth of Izar. This one should be filled with starship combat, and no one could rival Jim Kirk in the chair, other than the original hero of the federation.

36. Brian Monson - November 26, 2012

@Harry Ballz (that was weird) If you read the Star Trek tie-in comics (which are established canon) Kirk’s brother actually survived on Deneva this time around and still lives there.

37. Newman - November 26, 2012

How does one “detonate” the fleet?

38. ginger - November 26, 2012

Sigh . . . ok Gary is already dead in the comics and his brother Sam is alive. So is Sam’s wife and son. We don’t know about his mom. In the comics he was raised/living with his uncle.

39. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

Khan.

40. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

Sounds like Gary Mitchell.

Before anyone says otherwise, Mitchell is the only human-type villain capable of detonating things by himself. Even Khan isn’t capable of doing that. Mitchell is essentially a superbeing.

You know, it’s so obvious from this synopsis that it’s Mitchell, and in retrospect, it’s somehow so understandable why it’s been such a secret, that I have doubts that it’s Mitchell just on general principles.

Nevertheless….

The storyline could be that Mitchell found out from the historical records of the Prime Universe that, there, he was a godlike being who was killed by Kirk. Cutting Kirk off at the pass, Mitchell goes to that planet, gets god-ified, and challenges his friend Kirk to stop him in this alternate reality.

This would also tie in with the possiblity of still more alternate universes as Kirk attempts to track him wherever Mitchell goes, which could be a number of timelines — again, using Mitchell’s omniscence and godlike powers.

Or Mitchell could attempt to change the past in some way, resulting in the destruction of the Federation “from within.”

Shades of the overarching Q plotline from “Encounter at Farpoint” to “All Good Things….” (TNG).

Also, the engine room and overall shape of the Enterprise could change depending on how the timeline is changed.

41. Ted - November 26, 2012

What a poorly worded description! Paramount should be proud.

42. Alex Prewitt - November 26, 2012

I hope Orci and Lindelof don’t screw this up.

43. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

Let’s not forget about Peter Weller’s character. He may end up being the mastermind of all of this….with Khan being the one carrying out his agenda.

44. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

Or Sam Mitchell, avenging his brother’s death.

Now, one should gird oneself for the inevitable criticism, whether it’s Gary or Sam or Khan, that Trek has once again succumbed to the “it’s a big bad baddie” syndrome.

If so, one can take solace in the fact that this time, it’s also an unstoppable force, not just some guy with a chip on his shoulder (Nero, Shinzon, Soran, Khan, et al.) According to the synopsis.

45. Hugh Hoyland - November 26, 2012

I still cant call it. Sounds like Mitchell. Yet I still still get a Khan vibe for some reason!

Sounds like a fantastic ride no matter what!!! :]

46. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

^^ How do you know Gary didn’t have a brother named Sam?

47. Greg2600 - November 26, 2012

Sounds like Chris Pine will appear as the new Jack Ryan in this film as well.

Gene Roddenberry would have run wrung JJ’s neck after reading such a war-intensive movie.

This sounds like Battlestar Gallactica not Star Trek.

48. Tom - November 26, 2012

It would awesomesauce if it is Gary Mitchell but man, that name just does not have a ring to it. Nothing iconic there. Haha. How shallow of me. But seriously.

49. Tue Sorensen - November 26, 2012

Aw no. Not ANOTHER threat “from within their own organization”. This type of plot is an excuse for not having a real story: you have an organization (CIA, Mission: Impossioble, Starfleet) and then they make the organization the story. Saves them from having to think up anything original or challenging. This is the WORST type of plot, and a trademark Abrams plot, which made ALIAS and three out of four M:I movies so bad. Empty entertainment to the extreme, with no intelligent substance. Sigh.

50. Missing Point - November 26, 2012

You’ve got to be kidding me – THIS is the actual synopsis? Didn’t we get ENOUGH of this “allegory” on Enterprise? Well it was nice to watch the BBC TNG Marathon over the weekend…

51. Onclephi - November 26, 2012

Gary Mitchel. It also fits with the time line. Khan will be the last villain of the trilogy.They studied Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises and realized that it’s best to keep your iconic villain for the third movie of the trilogy.

52. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

@Tom (48) — yeah, I read somewhere that Gary Mitchell sounds like assistant manager at your local Walmart.

However, we can get around that: It’s possible he had a fraternity name that he actually prefers in this timeline and uses just to taunt Kirk.

Of course, that wouldn’t be much help if it turned out that the nickname was something like “The Gare-ster.”

Alternatively, he could somehow delete, with his godlike powers, all but the last four letters of his last name….

53. Richard - November 26, 2012

Hard to imagine its anybody but Gary Mitchell as the villain now. Also, given the title and the synopsis, they seem to be going for a Trek version of Apocalypse Now.

54. shinzon's lover - November 26, 2012

Sounds like Garth of Izar.

Fat chance of a chubby it’s Khan.

55. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

“With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads…”

Khan will be shown to be responsible for the death of Sam Kirk or the death of Pike — that will be part of the first part of the movie. This will make it very personal for Kirk.

“Gene Roddenberry would have run wrung JJ’s neck after reading such a war-intensive movie.”

Conversely, I wish somebody would have wrung Gene’s neck after Seasons 1 and 2 of TNG.

56. jvzilen - November 26, 2012

“It’s definitely a character that will make fans of TOS excited. Think along the lines of Harry Mudd or Trelane or Gary Mitchell or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually it’s one of those that I named.” that was a direct quote from one of the movie head honchos ” i forget which. given the synopsis, it must be Gary. it makes the most sense. he is a force from within, and would give kirk reason to have a personal score to settle. it is plausible that he didnt really die in the comic. he was a god type being after all

57. Eagleman1969 - November 26, 2012

I don’t know.

Nero did in a substantial portion of the “fleet”; looked like he also wiped out MOST of Kirk’s fellow classes of cadets at the same time.

Are we getting into a rut already?

58. Devon - November 26, 2012

#47 “Gene Roddenberry would have run wrung JJ’s neck after reading such a war-intensive movie.”

Who gives a flying crap?!? Seriously. No one does.

No offense, but what “Gene” would have wanted or not wanted is irrelevant and has been for 30 years or more.

59. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Pretty much certain now that its Gary Mitchell, and NOT khan.
A force of terror from within their organization, and one man weapon of mass destruction
Khan was neither of these.

Gary Mitchell however can and does very much fit both.

I notice MJ is noticebly absent from commenting on this. maybe he is eating some crow pie.

60. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

“By the way, thanks for raping the franchise, J.J.”

Sheesh, I thought we had finally educated all the morons who keep inserting “rape” into their critiques of JJ Trek. That is just so inappropriate and WRONG!

Grow up, JP Saylor!

61. Anthony Pascale - November 26, 2012

The Mudd, Trelane or Mitchell quote was an unattributed rumor from some website well before they even started writing the script back in 2010. I can assure you the quote did not come from any of the real supreme court.

62. Devon - November 26, 2012

#56 – ““It’s definitely a character that will make fans of TOS excited. Think along the lines of Harry Mudd or Trelane or Gary Mitchell or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually it’s one of those that I named.” that was a direct quote from one of the movie head honchos ” i forget which.”

Actually that was Devin Faraci formerly of Chud.

http://trekmovie.com/2010/10/25/rumor-no-khan-for-star-trek-sequel-but-known-tos-villain/

63. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Oh and the Personal Score to settle, what Personal score to settle would kirk have with khan whom in this time line he has NEVER met.

I suspect that the trailer as well as the first 9 mins are going to reveal who the villian is. and all i can say its about gd bloody time.

64. Devon - November 26, 2012

Sorry Anthony, I posted that as you were replying too, didn’t mean to sound like I was echoing you.

65. Allen Williams - November 26, 2012

Why would anyone think Gary Mitchel? The only reason he was a threat was the energy field at the edge of the galaxy. That hasn’t happened in this timeline.

Ben Finey might want Kirk dead, but I doubt he would go after the entire fleet.

Khan maybe, but he was a bigger threat in the movie, which was due to the events of the series. Since that episode hasn’t happened yet, hes not nearly as bad as he was in the movie.

I’m hoping for a completely original villian.

66. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@59. “I notice MJ is noticebly absent from commenting on this.”

Huh? I actually posted before you on this thread, dude? What are you talking about?

67. Anthony Pascale - November 26, 2012

RE: Devin quote….well I am officially debunking it (again, I think I debunked it a while ago). Do I need to link to Vreenak?

68. somejackball - November 26, 2012

i like Cumberbatch and all, but i think Billy Burke would of made a better Gary Mitchell. still dieing for the trailer though!

69. Lt.LanaShelby - November 26, 2012

Weapon of Mass Destruction = Genesis Device

Expect Gary Mitchel and Carol Marcus.

That is all.

70. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Khan is not a one man weapon of mass destruction, he had his power in the gentics war through his followers and his intellect.
and even then he had to put himself into a deepfreeze sleeper ship to escape from Earth. And again he is not a part of starfleet.

MItchell on the other hand became very powerful, and has the potential to be a one an weapon of mass destruction, and is part of starfleet.

71. jvzilen - November 26, 2012

Ah, my Mistake with the quote. tho it still fits. he may not have died. and he is certainly a walking weapon of mass destruction.

72. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

MJ when i started typing my message you had NOT yet posted, I got called away fro my computer for a few mins. so i am guessing we started to post around the same time

73. Dadio - November 26, 2012

“leaving our world in a state of crisis” world solidarity revolution

74. jvzilen - November 26, 2012

my money says he survived on Delta vega, and found a way off. and has since brought with him Havoc

75. El Chup - November 26, 2012

No Khan, thank bloody God.

I had prayed all along it would be Gary Micthell. I was horrified at the prospect of trying to top Trek’s greatest ever villian. Khan was adn is something that should be left alone.

Anyhow, I am hopeful that the referal to tests that Kirk has to go through as being commentary on the human condition that made the original Star Trek so great. For that reasona I am completely unispired by “war-one” planet as, in turn, it makes me worried that in fact this is another tedious “blow sh*t up” movie that the modern age of cinema is all about.

I giess we will have to wait and see.

76. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#16.

You’re an a$$hole.

#47.

Gene Roddenberry has been dead and buried for the past twenty-one years. Nobody cares what he’d think if he were still alive today, anyway.

#59.

I see that you’re back to your old tricks of trying to bait the original MJ into responding to your asinine comments. Sad.

77. Anthony Pascale - November 26, 2012

BTW, I added a poll at the bottom of the article

78. jvzilen - November 26, 2012

on of the comic writers did say they were putting slight hints in the comics and that the first issue may have a slight scent of a movie subplot

79. Li'l Shat - November 26, 2012

@53

Or Heart of Darkness, a story written by Joseph Conrad which inspired Apocalypse Now.

Star Trek Into (the Heart of) Darkness

Anyway, in both Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now, the story is about a manhunt for a former trusted insider who has now set himself up as a god and who must now be hunted down and extinguished.

Why golly, I bet that’s just what this new Trek movie is going to be about! Still doesn’t tell us who the villain is though…

80. Anthony Pascale - November 26, 2012

JP Taylor
Warning for trolling

Red Dead Ryan
warning for flaming

lets calm down folks and dont feed trolls

As for anyone who claims to be able to speak for the dead. I suggest you find some paranormal site to do that on.

81. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Red Dead
please stop slinging acusations.(yet again)
when i made i began typing my comment MJ had not yet posted on here, and considering he has been going on and on about how khan is the villian and he predicted it yada yada yada.

this press release really does help to eleminate Khan, as he is not any of the things mentioned in the press release.

I guess I am going to go back to not responding to either of you again, since you have nothing better to do than call names and use profanity.

82. NCM - November 26, 2012

Argh! They’ve imploded Vulcan, now detonated the fleet in Starfleet, what do you have left but the lone Enterprise? This sounds more like BSG than Star Trek. Good thing ‘the court’s’ played up the infinite universes notions; it allows them infinite destruction of Trek universes and the possibility that if it all goes to hell, someone will be able to resurrect a closer version to what it was we all loved–years from now.

I hope “Detonated” the fleet is a gross over-dramatization. It’s not as if the word has any ambiguous meanings. This is the first I’ve actually entertained the possibility that this movie could be enormously disappointing, but I gotta hold out hope.

83. Lt.LanaShelby - November 26, 2012

Come on peeps – Genesis Device!!! No one else thinks so??

84. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Anthony It was not my intention to troll, and dont worry i wont respond to either of them again .

85. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#81.

Doesn’t eliminate Khan.

86. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Lt Lana,
No because its way to early for the genesis device to have even been created.
also its says ONE MAN weapon of mass destruction.

87. Lt.LanaShelby - November 26, 2012

Aww…

88. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Gary Mitchell is much closer to being a ONE MAN weapon of mass destruction. he also was a member of starfleet (prior to his so called “DEATH” in the comic book)

89. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@81. @84 Tucker, please take Anthony’s advice here and keep the discussion focused on the sequel and this story. And please don’t make up that you were responding to me here — you called me out with an unsolicited personal attack again — I never addressed you in this series of posts before that.

90. Lt.LanaShelby - November 26, 2012

@ MJ – How did he die in the comic book? I didn’t catch that one.. :(

91. CaptainDonovin - November 26, 2012

Is it May yet? Can’t wait!!

92. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

This is a bizarre and out-of-left-field suggestion, but why couldn’t the villain be another Gary — Gary Seven, of “Assignment: Earth”? Except that this version of Gary Seven has “gone rogue.”

Gary Seven is one of the few characters in Trek to immune to the Vulcan nerve pinch, which we’ve seen may be the case from leaked photos in battling nuSpock.

The female guest star could be Isis, the cat/woman.

The only reason it might not be that I can think of is that the “this time, it’s personal” factor is missing. But things could happen that would make it personal.

Picture this: Gary Seven from the Aegis organization decides that this timeline is horrifically wrong. He attempts to reshape history in some way, resulting in the elimination of nuStarfleet. Aegis sees that he’s gone rogue and shapes events so that Kirk goes after him, as Kirk was successful in the Prime Universe.

Remember kids: You read it here first.

Or not.

Of course, we still have the problem of having a villain named “Gary”….

93. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

The Gary Mitchell thing falls apart even further (i.e. beyond the comic book death) when you consider that they were initially trying to sign Benecio Del Toro to play the role of the villain. That initial casting choice just doesn’t fit as Gary Mitchell.

94. Richard - November 26, 2012

#79: Yeah, the Heart of Darkness motif seems to be at the heart of this as it was in Apocalypse Now.

Its more than a little derivative as far as plot ideas go but I’ll reserve judgement until the film hits.

On a side note, as most Trekkers know, the Heart of Darkness was meant to be the main theme of Insurrection until it got watered down during rewrites due to nobody liking Pillar’s first draft of the script.

95. Tom - November 26, 2012

I love that name! SEVEN! Yeah, that would work. Cool.

96. Jerry Silber - November 26, 2012

So in order to piss everyone off I will say Lost In Space and Space 1999 are much better, Star Trek V and Insurrection were the best of the Star Trek movies, Star Trek – TMP should have been three hours long.Vger was not big enough

97. Bill Peters - November 26, 2012

Detonated the Fleet could mean something other then blowing it up, the Fleet could be fighting with in itself because of Broken Loyalties, the fleet doesn’t mean every Ship in Starfleet but a Series of Ships with in Star fleet that may have been Set up for the Defense of Earth.

Ether Way this is cool News and Kirk protecting the Enterprise Family means he has grown up.

98. Jack - November 26, 2012

I don’t get Mitchell from this. Detonated doesn’t mean a single person actually blew up the Earth with his/her mind powers.

Plus, in the comics the guy was dead. It seems like a lot of ‘splainin.

It’s pretty amazing that NONE of this has come out before this. Well done, Bad Robot.

99. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@94. Agreed on the Heart of Darkness potential philosophical connection — I posted here about that potential connection to Kirk’s “journey” in this movie when they first announced the title of STID.

100. Jack - November 26, 2012

Oops, I meant the fleet, not the Earth. It’s late.

101. number6 - November 26, 2012

Charlie is our new darling.

102. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Jack, the comic left a pretty big window open for Mitchell to be resurected from his “Death”

103. It's Paramount - November 26, 2012

I noticed nobody has brought this up. Has anyone considered this enemy is a Talosian using the illusion to be someone within Starfleet that causes the destruction. Let’s think about this. Pike is the Admiral. In the prime timeline, Pike lives at the end of ‘The Cage’ and ‘The Menagerie’. In this timeline, the Talosians get in his head and makes him give up secret Starfleet codes that results in the fleet being ‘Detonated’. Now the synopsis states Kirk goes to a ‘War-Zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. If you remember in ‘The Cage’, the Talosians had to go underground because their planet experience a horrible war In this timeline, Kirk hunts the Talosian (Cumberbatch or Weller) to the Talosian home world to do battle. In the end, Starfleet forbids that anyone who goes to that planet gets the death penalty. It’s something for you all to ponder.

104. Adam E - November 26, 2012

Don’t forget.: in the spy camera shots Cumberbatch was wearing a Starfleet uniform.

105. Richard - November 26, 2012

#99: The similarities are glaring. It’s not a perfect match, but clearly heavily influenced by.

Apocalypse Now synopsis:

“During the on-going Vietnam War, Captain Willard is sent on a dangerous mission into Cambodia to assassinate a renegade Green Beret who has set himself up as a god among a local tribe.

Willard must follow the Nung River into the remote Cambodian jungle, find rogue U.S. Army Special Forces Colonel Walter E. Kurtz (Marlon Brando) and kill him. Kurtz apparently went insane and now commands his own Montagnard troops inside neutral Cambodia.”

Star Trek Into Darkness synopsis:

“When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.”

106. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

@Tom (95), the other good thing is that we could have “Aegis” as a general force that is unstoppable.

Frankly, I didn’t know that Aegis even existed (which it does in Trek fiction) until I Wikied Gary Seven just before I posted at 92.

As to how to deal with the Walmart-assistant-manager syndrome, here’s another suggestion: Give Gary Mitchell (if it’s Mitchell who’s the villain) a middle name. Jame’s Kirk’s is Tiberius. It would be a nice take on the “R” error on Kirk’s intended tombstone (which is really not an error since “T” apparently hadn’t been agreed upon at that point, but I digress) if “R” were actually Mitchell’s middle initial. In other words, Mitchell is making a sly reference to himself in this form of episode retconning.

As for the “R”, it could stand for anything from “Rex” to “Rhodes,” the latter being a place of importance for the Emperor Tiberius in (real) Roman history.

At least it’s better than “Gary.”

Just sayin’.

107. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

If the comic books are the countdown to the movie, then why would you want to kill a primary character (for the later movie) in the comics that then would require some special explanation to resurrect? That just doesn’t make any sense?

108. Chew on this... - November 26, 2012

Mark my words…

This is a member of Khan’s sleeper ship cadre who wields his super-intellect. Khan died in this universe when he was recovered; otherwise we would have seen Benecio del Toro or Javier Bardem cast.

The Botany Bay survivors were inducted into Starfleet. They see an opportunity to rebel. Prefix codes are activated to destroy Starfleet vessels, with a subtle nod to ST2:TWOK.

I maintain that Nimoy has a cameo. Prime Universe Spock suggested the Botany Bay was retrieved.

And the Klingons feel threatened by Nero’s actions, having worked towards super weapons of their own. This new threat pulls them into the storyline.

Frankly I’d like to think its a Gary Mitchell storyline. But Roberto Orci said the IDW comics are canon; they already did Where No Man Has Gone Before. Gary Mitchell is dead.

Maybe Alice Eve is Elizabeth Dehner… Or Carol Marcus.

109. T'Leba - November 26, 2012

Garth of Izar. Can’t wait!

110. JRT! - November 26, 2012

Chris Doohan-when can you confirm or deny that you’re in the movie?

I’m still hoping MJ is wrong and Khan’s not in it. Sorry. It’s been done,don’t wanna see a reboot of it,lol!

J-R!

111. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 26, 2012

I have been saying since I saw the first movie that what I wanted to happen was a new political force take power that wouldn’t have in the prime universe. Think about it, a almost Hitler Nazi-esque, main villain who is actually voted in to be president of the Federation because of Vulcan boom boom and the fleet loss. Kirk is out exploring and this person, maybe even in charge of Starfleet and not the president although I prefer the political angle rises up into power. He is brazen and rash and like Hitler war hungry… Who can he target? The Romulans as Nero was Romulan. Maybe he even decides to declare war on Romulus but lines are drawn… Traditionalists say no way but there are those who favor war or loyalty or even their own self gain and so the fleet is divided and civil war ensuing or very near to happening. Kirk must come home and take down this Hitler type character who may very well even legitimately have legal power but because he’s an extremist nutcase it needs to be done for the good of the many. Pike I have no doubt dies at some point and the whole movie leads to the setup for the third movie……. Romulan War… Kirk no doubt dethrones the bad guy but tensions have grown to tight with Romulus and now the fleet is weakened drastically so in the next movie a invasion by Romulus takes place with their fancy new cloak ships and those huge plasma ball weapons…

This is all in line with what I have been hoping for which was more of an edge and dark politics due to Vulcan which should have definitely had a huge effect on the mind set of the people. Think about 9/11… A lot of people still hate all middle easterners in the U.S. because of that now picture a whole state like Cali being blown up. The people and government could shift drastically and fast to support a more anti Romulan view.

I loved the politics intertwined into Star Trek 6 and think more of that would be good. I also think dark factions like section 31 and the Admiral who almost took over the Federation in DS9 (Layton I think?) are awesome things to delve into… I love when Star Trek does that because to me it really is very allegorical.

But no matter what… Naysayers are gonna nay.

112. NCM - November 26, 2012

@93: Cumberbrit doesn’t ‘fit’ Khan, either. Ever consider the possibility that villain casting may have been aimed at compensating for the lack of an Hispanic bridge character?

113. drm - November 26, 2012

maybe fleet=academy?

114. Richard - November 26, 2012

#107: This is scifi, nobody is ever really dead. There’s plenty of precedent for this sort of thing. Why kill Spock only to bring him back in the very next movie?

Ok, bad example, we all know he was brought back for financial reasons.

But the point remains, he’s probably ‘dead’ insomuch as the writers want Kirk and Starfleet (as well as us fans) to believe he’s dead to serve the plot.

115. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

Gary Mitchell had a hole blasted into his chest by Kirk, who killed him BEFORE Mitchell became too powerful to stop.

Plus as MJ said, it makes no sense to kill a character off in the comics, only to bring him back in the movie, only to (most likely) kill him off again at the end.

116. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

those of you who are saying because he died in the comic it couldnt be mitchell, have you actually READ that issue?
If you had you would see they left open the possibilty of his return.

117. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@112 But at that point where Del Toro turned them down they were in mid-December already, with filiming set to begin in three weeks — so they had to come up with either a bit or up-in-coming replacement, and BC had a killer audition.

So, their first choice, Del Tor, is much more indicative of who the villain is…and this definitely points to Khan.

118. Richard - November 26, 2012

Also, because Gary Mitchell has god like powers, he’s probably never going to be well and truly dead of we’re following fictional sci fi/fantasy rules.

119. sikkafa - November 26, 2012

this will suck bigtime!

120. Richard - November 26, 2012

#115: But was it really Gary Mitchell that was shot in the chest? Perhaps Gary Mitchell created an illusion to make Kirk believe he had shot him in the chest :)

You have to remember, these are sci fi/fantasy rules we’re playing by, not real life.

121. Justafan - November 26, 2012

I could see Peter Weller playing Seven, Maybe Benedict is playing Charlie X

122. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#112.

Why would they try to get a big name Hispanic actor to play the part of a bridge officer? The bridge officer would most likely be a bit part anyway, since the main cast are already playing bridge officers.

123. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

108 we could still see Alice Eve as young Carol Marcus, if they wanted to tip the hat to the old DC comics. SInce it was in those that it was implied that it was Mitchell who brought Kirk and Caroll togeather in the first place

124. Hat Rick - November 26, 2012

I’m having trouble reconciling the death of Gary Mitchell with the idea that Mitchell is the villain in this new movie.

So, because of that, and because it’s real late, I’m prolly gonna just sleep on it and tomorrow, magically, I will discover that the IDW comics will not exist and they were all just a dream.

;-)

Also, tomorrow I will discover that somehow Shatner has de-aged 40 years and is the new Chris Pine.

OMG, I need some sleep, stat.

125. StelArian - November 26, 2012

Sound’s like planet Earth based. No, urban exited…. but we will see :)

126. NCM - November 26, 2012

I think if the court decides to use Khan, they’ll do so in the third movie. Doesn’t make sense to do so for the second film; not unless they’re hoping for a bell curve trajectory.

127. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

I personally see Benicio more as having been considered for a Klingon over Khan.
and thats my PERSONAL OPINON maybe right, maybe wrong. you dont have to agree with that.

While i think personaly believe that this press synopsis definately leans more to gary mitchell or a character like him, i honestly will be ok with who ever it is, as long as its not Khan.
Iam ok with Khan in the 3rd or perhaps 4th movie, but Khan as the villian of the 2nd of the new trek movies is asking to much of a comparison to TWOK.

128. Aix - November 26, 2012

Man, I would hate it if a relative of Kirk dies again in this. That would be tiring since in the first movie his dad died already. But I cannot think of anything personal other than that. Pike would do.

129. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

126 and i would personally be A. OK with him as the villian of star trek XIII, i just dont want him on star trek Into Darkness

130. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#126.

Christopher Nolan used the Joker in “The Dark Knight”, the second of the trilogy. It made sense for him, and using Khan in the Trek sequel would make sense to the writers.

131. wedestroymyths - November 26, 2012

Comic talk–

Through the comic’s run, there have been references from the writers et al that we’ve seen hints building up to the new movie.

One thing that immediately came to mind was the retelling of “Return of the Archons.” The story is quite different from the original, and involves a shady Star Fleet experiment being revealed. The issue ends with Pike being chastised for not keeping Kirk on more of a leash.

So, is it possible that INTO DARKNESS is going to draw on that? This still leaves the door open for Khan–they’d just have to change his origin story to reflect some shady Star Fleet experiment.

132. Jack - November 26, 2012

102. True. But, it just all seems too convoluted. You’re right, though — that body floating out there definately left room for possibility. It’s all a little too Trek II and III, though (guy from the past with a grudge, magically re-animated body). I still assume Urban was taking the piss out of the reporter with his ‘reveal’

Again, I’m hoping for someone new. None of the characters mentioned (tracey, garth) interest me, other than Khan. And they don’t have the catchiest names (“R-ah-ah-ah-n! Ga-ah-ah-ah-rth!). And Gary Seven would mean some crap about the future. Whatever. If it works, it works.

133. Johnny - November 26, 2012

Face it, guys. We’re not going to know who the villain is until we’re actually watching the movie. Really got to hand it to Bad Robot for keeping everything so hush-hush.

134. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

I do have a question though, if the crew is the only family kirk has left, what happened to his nephew and sister in Law who were introduced in the comics a while back with the story that dealt with his brother?
not to mention his mother, i just cant believe his entire family is killed.

.

135. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@125. I think you missed the part where is says they visit a war zone world.

@126. You are entitled to believe that, but you are ignoring the circumstantial evidence that points to the contrary…especially if you are supporting the Gary Mitchell scenario.

I just hope that this movie isn’t some big metaphor on George Bush and 9-11. If so, its too late — 90% of us all all know we overacted to 9-11 and their were no WMD, yada, yada, yada…don’t need to no Star Trek lesson to help dumb ole me figure this out for myself. That is as bad as ST6 focusing on the Cold War when the Cold War had just ended…to late!

136. Jack - November 26, 2012

“leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

“Our” world? If I was Andorian, I’d totally be offended by this… and wait for the BluRay (or Skin-colorRay, as we’d call it).

Again, tired.

137. Jordan - November 26, 2012

Anyone get the sense we will see a trailer by week’s end with the release of this? I know they said it will be in front of the Hobbit but maybe they will surprise us. Hell I will take a teaser poster right now.

138. NCM - November 26, 2012

Red Dead, I’m saying casting efforts for the villain role may have simply reflected a desire to place an Hispanic actor in a big role, and all the big bridge roles were already taken–by supposed Anglo, alien, AA, Russian, and Asian.

139. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

I definately think the IMAX scene before the Hobbit will indeed tell us who the villian is.
and i would definately wager that the trailer will as well.

140. Peter Loader - November 26, 2012

So… we have a secret organization within Starfleet that wants to see it destroyed… obviously Kirk loses someone close to him during the destruction of the fleet and wants revenge. So the dress uniforms and Soviet style caps are for a funeral scene… My guess… Pike dies in this movie.

The plot sounds like a winner. Lots of action and faced paced suspense like the last one. Well done JJ… can’t wait to see the trailer!

141. echusa - November 26, 2012

“With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.”

A one man weapon means the person is causing the destruction and personal score means he knows him. Sounds like Gary Mitchell if you ask me.

“As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.”

Then to further support it a epic chess game the chess game from where no man has gone before was important and then friendship torn apart and love challenged well that is taken several ways but just adds to Gary hypothesis. Also could sound like Kahn but the way it’s worded and even what other things have shown like the comics I am saying it sounds more and more like Gary.

142. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#138.

So what you’re saying is, the much hyped Benedict Cumberbatch character is a…………………bridge officer? And that they were originally hoping for a Hispanic actor for politically correct reasons?

Ooookkkkkaaayyyyyyy, right! LOL!

143. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 26, 2012

BTW… With my post in #111… I feel Garth would be the perfect candidate for this.

AND MJ… Sadly I think your 90% projection is high. I hear ignorant people all the time that still say dumb things about middle eastern people WMD’s or not. They blame a whole culture still not a small extremist group… Like Hitler placed the blame on the Jews. That’s why I used the Hitler comparison because I think if they went that root the main villain would be far worse than Bush lol… IE a maniac like Hitler… Who could that be hmmmm Garth?

144. NCM - November 26, 2012

131. wedestroymyths – November 26, 2012

“One thing that immediately came to mind was the retelling of “Return of the Archons.” The story is quite different from the original, and involves a shady Star Fleet experiment being revealed. The issue ends with Pike being chastised for not keeping Kirk on more of a leash.”

Oh, someone’s thinking! Yes, they left that door standing wide open, didn’t they?

145. Richard - November 26, 2012

Why have Gary Mitchell in the prequel comic at all if he’s not going to be playing a big role in the movie. Kirk killing Mitchell may have been done to create more pathos for the film.

146. Stewie G - November 26, 2012

@16- “rape” is not a work that should be used lightly. Have a little tact.

Now if you didn’t like the last movie, fine. But if you’re trying to infer that Abrams did a disservice to the franchise you are wrong.

The movie cost $150 million to make, and brought in $385,494,555.
It brought the Star Trek franchise to a whole new generation.

147. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@138 “I’m saying casting efforts for the villain role may have simply reflected a desire to place an Hispanic actor in a big role, and all the big bridge roles were already taken–by supposed Anglo, alien, AA, Russian, and Asian.”

But a Hispanic actor playing “Gary” “Mitchell”?” I have a lot of Hispanic friends and associates here in SoCal, and none of them have names like that? Not saying it’s impossible, but it seems unlikely.

148. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

I agree with you Richard,

149. Jack - November 26, 2012

138. I’d thought that too. Why couldn’t a latino actor be someone other than Khan? Heck, it could be Commodore Menendez. Or a new guy.

It pissed me off too when everybody here said Noel Clark had to be playing one of the 3 or 4 TOS black characters with speaking roles. What, there are only a handful of black guys in the federation?

I can see these guys writing for a character to be played by Del Toro with the awareness that fans would go loopy thinking it was Khan.

150. MarkfromGermany - November 26, 2012

Q!!! Mastermind in that epic Game of Chess.

151. Jake S - November 26, 2012

“det·o·nate
[det-n-eyt] Show IPA verb, det·o·nat·ed, det·o·nat·ing.
verb (used without object)
1.
to explode with suddenness and violence.”

– dictionary.com

152. NCM - November 26, 2012

RDR; I didn’t say they might want an Hispanic for a bridge role, but for a BIG role. If you find the notion that Hollywood might be mindful of race in casting to be new or outlandish, I don’t even know what to say to that. Some might argue that Hollywood gave birth to political correctness.

Night all.

153. Richard - November 26, 2012

“I killed you.” – Kirk
“I led you to believe that to be true.” – Mitchell

“Why?” – Kirk
“So I could get my revenge upon you when you least expected it.” – Mitchell

“Revenge for what?” – Kirk
“You kept sleeping with all my girlfriends at the academy you jerk.” – Mitchell

154. Jack - November 26, 2012

131. Exactly. Was that Weller on the comm? Or Cumberbatch? Neither? Possibilities.

The Archons bit got me excited about the comics and the movie. And then the Tribbles one showed Starfleet Intelligence aparrently taking control, again, of situations it woudn’t have normally…

155. sidewall - November 26, 2012

Can already tell that it needs more lens flare.

156. Peter Loader - November 26, 2012

Maybe the Paxton family are at it again… with a little help from Klingon Augments.

157. Richard - November 26, 2012

#155: What if the villain is a lens flar?. A sentient lens flare ;)

158. Paulpaz - November 26, 2012

If only it were a story about how someone found the Guardian of Forever and went back to stop JarJar Abrams parents from ever meeting. Thus saving us from this movie and the last vile abomination he released pretending to be Star Trek. That would make me want to go see it,

159. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#152.

I misread “big” as “bridge”. Sorry.

But I still stand by what I wrote. Doesn’t make sense to recast Mitchell as an Hispanic, especially if the comics version had him looking like Gary Lockwood in “Where No Man Has Gone Before”.

160. Paulpaz - November 26, 2012

You think that idiot Abrams cares what makes sense?!? Did you SEE that piece of filth he put out in 2009? None of it made sense.

161. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

Whos to say that a del torro played Gary Mitchell’s family didnt adopt a more american surname, such as Mitchell. Happens all the time.

My boss( whose parents are from the Ukraine) you would never guess to look at him has the sur name Brady, but it is because his parents moved here wanted to have a more americanized sur name.
And I know plenty of Asian people here in so cal, who have adopted Americanized first names as well.

162. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#158.

If only there were a real Guardian Of Forever for someone to step into to go back in time to stop you from posting your asinine comments.

163. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

It makes even less sense to cast Khan as an Englishman 12 years younger than the character who went into cryonic freeze on a sleeper ship, as he and his followers escaped Earth

164. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#160.

We saw the movie. It made sense. And we loved it.

C’mon, man! Grow up!

165. Basement Blogger - November 26, 2012

Here’s my take. I’ve always said it’s Khan. But you Gary Mtchell supporters now have more evidence. Mitchell could be the “unstoppable force of terror within their own organization” that “detonates” the fleet. (Ugh, hate that word even if accurate. How about “destroy.” ) Anyway, that force could be Starfleet officer Gary Mitchell. And after Mitchell destroys the fleet, he escapes to the war zone planet and Kirk must this “one man weapon of mass destruction.” Okay, the Mitchell people could be saying that Mitchell could easily be a “one man weapon of mass destruction” because of his telekinesis.

What about the actual evidence for Gary Mitchell? Okay, going over the secret video, Cumberbatch had pointed sideburns and black hair. Gary Mitchell? Starfleet undershirt. Gary Mitchell?

Could it still be Khan? Yes. Will see if our Anthony Pascale retracts his stories that it’s Khan. I mean the case could be made that Peter Weller is the one who betrays the Federation and unleashes Khan. Yeah, how does one say Khan was one man weapon of mass destruction? He’s a ruler. He needed a WMD, the Genesis Device to threaten the Galaxy. And if it’s Gary Mitchell, I would find it clumsy to introduce him in the comics, along with his death and then try to explain his appearance in the movie. That will take time from the film to focus on the Star Trek crew.

Regardless, the film sounds interesting.

166. NCM - November 26, 2012

MJ, I never said the villain’s Gary Mitchell, though it wouldn’t surprise me. My only point is that you and others may have been misled by earlier casting efforts with respect to Del Toro and other Hispanic actors: Perhaps JJ was just casting a broader net for a broader audience. In any case, can’t we agree that BC would seem as unlikely a choice for Khan Noonien Singh as Del Toro would be for Gary Mitchell?

167. Paulpaz - November 26, 2012

Pretty much eveything in his 2009 abomination was stupid, wrong or a complete slap in the face to the original series. The shuttlecraft looked good and the guy who played McCoy didn’t suck. Everything else sucked. Completely. Go make something else, JJ. You don’t care about Star Trek and it shows.

168. Richard - November 26, 2012

Maybe the original plan was to have have Khan as the villain (hence the original casting choice of Del Toro) but then the Supreme Court and the studio got cold feet due to the fan reaction to the possibility of Khan and decided to go with Gary Mitchell instead. Just one possible theory. Of course this is all speculation.

169. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

Remember, the part was allegedly written with Benecio del Toro in mind. He turned them down, and with so little time left, the producers had to find the next best actor, and BC was, to them, the perfect substitute.

So yeah, they probably wanted a Hispanic actor to play Khan, but when that didn’t pan out, they had no other choice but to look outside of the race pool.

170. Richard - November 26, 2012

Or Del Toro turning the role down might have made them reconsider which villain to go with.

171. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@166 “In any case, can’t we agree that BC would seem as unlikely a choice for Khan Noonien Singh as Del Toro would be for Gary Mitchell?”

But you are missing the point here completely. As I mentioned above, Del Toro was the first choice, and when that surprising fell through, they had only three weeks to either get a big name or and up and coming actor, and BC nailed the audition.

If BC had been their first choice, I would agree with your point here. But him being a backup in a ultra-constrained time-period in which they had to find a replacement for Del Toro — that is completely different situation.

Do you see my point now on this?

172. Richard - November 26, 2012

If it was Khan, why wouldn’t you plant a seed for that in the prequel comic? Why go with Gary Mitchell in the comic if he’s not a big part of the film?

Plus the synopsis and the set photos make it clear that Cumberbatch is most likely playing a Starfleet officer as the “enemy within”.

173. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

Well, changing villains would have required significant alterations to the script. Otherwise, the Gary Mitchell character will obviously be a Khan clone.

174. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@170. So they re-wrote the screenplay with a completely different villain in three weeks time before filming began? That seems like a real stretch to me.

175. Captain Hackett - November 26, 2012

Holy smoke!!! It is gonna to be exciting!!!

176. Tom - November 26, 2012

170… Do you REALLY believe they rewrote the script in its entirety and altered all casting and preproduction just 2-4 weeks prior to filming simply because Del Toro turned down the role?

177. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

“If it was Khan, why wouldn’t you plant a seed for that in the prequel comic? Why go with Gary Mitchell in the comic if he’s not a big part of the film?”

But the Mitchell comic was not the Countdown comic series — that is starting now, and we may very well see Khan show or at least foreshadowed in the final installment before the movie.

178. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 26, 2012

No one mentioned love will be challenged yet. Spock and Uhura break up?

179. Jack - November 26, 2012

172. Why go with Tribbles? Or The Galileo? Because they were TOS episodes. They encountered them in the original timeline, so they might encounter them again — with differences… Mitchell was in Trek’s (2nd) pilot
so putting him in the comics too actually (potentially) closes possibilities. They could have kept Mitchell out entirely and Gary Mitchell could have remained as a possible future character.

You’re right, though — there could have been a story reason why they chose some of the episodes they did. I wonder if the whole Archons thing will get brought up again, either in the comics or in the film?

180. Paul - November 26, 2012

Sounds incredible I just hope Paramount did not go too cheap on the budget (like they did with some other Treks) this smells like a massive success already to me. There is going to be some massive epic battles & otherwordly planetary vistas. I am thinking Star Wars in the Trek universe & perhaps one of the crew gets badly injured or even killed to save the galaxy. Its obviously not Khan as the bad guy he is not from within could be the head of starfleet has a score to settle & detonates the fleet to level the playing field……….hmm whatever it is the trailer will reveal more & they must start to do some PR now too little can always backfire!!!

181. Red Dead Ryan - November 26, 2012

#172.

“If it was Khan, why wouldn’t you plant a seed for that in the prequel comic? Why go with Gary Mitchell in the comic if he’s not a big part of the film?”

Why would the writers risk spoiling the sequel by including the villain in the ongoing comics? And they have repeatedly said that none of the villains in the comics would be in the sequel anyway.

Add to that Bob saying multiple times here that Trek fans are smart, and we can figure out things pretty quick. So I don’t think they would risk any of us figuring out who the villain is by either including him in the comics, or by giving out obvious clues.

The comics seem to be giving us an idea as to where the sequel is going, the tone, the development of the main (and secondary) characters, as well as potential surprises, but definitely not who the villain is.

182. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

“Mitchell was in Trek’s (2nd) pilot, so putting him in the comics too actually (potentially) closes possibilities. They could have kept Mitchell out entirely and Gary Mitchell could have remained as a possible future character.”

Exactly!!!!!

183. Jack - November 26, 2012

Why the heck does everybody think it’s Gary Mitchell? I don’t get it.

And who’s Sam Mitchell? My Wikipedia is broken.

184. Richard - November 26, 2012

I’ll bet you all 10 bars of gold pressed latinum that the villain is Gary Mitchell.

185. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 26, 2012

GARTH… of Izar… It just sounds like it fits. Can’t wait for the tease with Hobbit. Night all it’s been fun reading your comments.

186. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 26, 2012

I dont remember ever hearing or reading that the part was specificly written with Del Torro in mind, I remember reading that he was OFFERED the part and then turned it down.

187. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

Gotta love the passion of you Mitchell proponents. Seriously, it would be kind of cool if you somehow, against all the evidence, were proven to be right here.

188. Buzz Cagney - November 26, 2012

#183 why do we think its Gary Mitchell? Because it is. ;)

189. Richard - November 26, 2012

#187: The evidence is roght there in the set photos and the just released synopsis. You’ll see… :P

On top of the 10 bars of gold-pressed latinum, I’ll throw in a horga’hn from RIsa.

190. Mikey1701 - November 26, 2012

Yep. Gary Mitchell. Definitely.

191. Buzz Cagney - November 26, 2012

#58 absolutely. Left to Roddenberry Trek would have died long ago.

192. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@186. And that changes this all how? That is like saying that Peter Jackson didn’t specifically have Ian McKellan in mind to play Gandalf in that vastly overrated LOTR series of movies. So?

193. FusionVok - November 26, 2012

Are we sure this is really an “official” synopsis of STID? Anthony, what was your source? The synopsis is so poorly written I have a hard time believing its real.

194. Basement Blogger - November 26, 2012

@ 156

I made the argument that Weller is John Paxton again. I was wrong. Weller is a new character. Link. But you indicate he could be part of the Paxton family. Fascinating. Maybe he’s Paxton’s son, mad at the plight of his father and supporting his anti-alien beliefs. He finds Khan and unleashes him.

This Trekmovie interview tells who’s canon and who’s new. Note Alice Eve is canon. Elizabeth Dehner? Carol Marcus? Christine Chapel? Yeoman Rand? Gorgan? (the bad “And the Children Shall Lead) I keeed. I keeeeed.

http://trekmovie.com/2012/07/14/exclusive-interview-roberto-orci-reveals-star-trek-sequel-character-details-talks-title-post-production/

195. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

@193. Agree that it is poorly written and confusing. It reminds me what would results if Georg Lucas tried to write the opening monologue for a SW movie in the middle of a night of heaving drinking.

196. StelArian - November 26, 2012

@135: I guess it is. “Back home” is Earth, “find” in Earth. So… Earth is the war zone world… possible!

197. MJ (The Original) - November 26, 2012

“I made the argument that Weller is John Paxton again. I was wrong. Weller is a new character. Link. But you indicate he could be part of the Paxton family. Fascinating. Maybe he’s Paxton’s son, mad at the plight of his father and supporting his anti-alien beliefs. He finds Khan and unleashes him.”

@194. Yes, BB, you and I, in parallel I believe, came up with scenarios related to this concept way last Winter. I think this is highly plausible. Khan is Weller’s WMD.

198. Al - November 26, 2012

Poor Starfleet. All that rebuilding after Nero (what, maybe two ships got finished) and they get “detonated.”

199. Anthony Pascale - November 27, 2012

Synopsis came from Paramount directly. It is official

200. Richard - November 27, 2012

#195:

Episode 0

Its a time of darkness and blackness.
The Jedi order is all up in arms.
The Sith have kills some people and stuff.
Onlly one persons can stop them.

201. FusionVok - November 27, 2012

Yep. I see this story all over the web but nobody is linking back to an official Paramount source. Maybe we’ve been hoaxed and the fake synopsis caught on like wildfire?

Didn’t something like this happen with an “official” STID Facebook page that didn’t seem quite right and ended up being fake?

202. Richard - November 27, 2012

#201:

“It’s a faaaaaaaake” – Senator Vreenak

203. Sebi - November 27, 2012

Wow, those 3 weeks until we see the trailer will be loooooooooong…

204. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@196. But the Volcano scene already released is most probably the war world.

205. JRT! - November 27, 2012

Where’s the evidence that it’ll be Khan though? Did I miss something here,lol! Could be anyone. Can’t see Khan as a one man weapon of mass destruction,or whatever the write up is.

J-R!

206. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@200 LOL

207. Ian B - November 27, 2012

“Detonated” the fleet? What?

208. Anthony Pascale - November 27, 2012

I said it came from Paramount press and i double checked. Im not a moron. I dont just find crap on the web and call it official

Note this site never reported that fake fb page or those fake posters except to note they were fakes on Twitter

209. Riker's Beard - November 27, 2012

Those three frames make much more sense now.

210. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 27, 2012

Even Harry over at ainticool, is leaning more towards Gary Mitchell.

“NOW – KHAN is many things, but a “one man weapon of mass destruction” isn’t a phrase that I could imagine describing him with.

We’re also told that Kirk as a personal score to settle with this character. NOW… Gary Mitchell, from the classic WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE… He had history with Kirk. AND he is most definitely a one man weapon of mass destruction, but more than that. Gary Mitchell could do all manners of awesome. He had God-like powers”

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/59779

211. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@208. I am not doubting you at all Anthony. I think several of us have pointed out that is comes across though as rather clumsily written though. It reads like a poor attempt at a Star Wars or Indiana Jones intro.

Another obvious interpretation of the way it is written though is to deliberately not give too much away while also providing some hidden clues.

212. RIchard - November 27, 2012

Even though I strongly believe its Gary Mitchell, I was kind of hoping it wouldn’t be. I’m not big on god-like powers. I prefer a more grounded approach to Star Trek. I always felt Star Trek was at its worst when it dipped its toe too deeply into fantasy. I don’t even like Vulcan mind melds and Katra for those reasons. They end up being too convenient for solving problems, like a fantasy version of technobabbly dues ex machina.

That said, its still totally Gary Mitchell. 10 bars of gold-pressed latinum, a horga’hn from Risa, and I’ll throw in an extra 1951 Willie Mays baseball card (screw you Jake SIsko!) that says its going to be Gary Mitchell.

213. Sebi - November 27, 2012

I also don’t think that they would use a bad guy from the comics in the movie. During the movie, they would have to explain what happend in the comics to that part of the audience who didn’t read the comics. Why would they go down that road.

I thought ST09 was awesome, but it bugged me that some of it only made sense after reading the comics. I read the comics but my girlfriend didn’t and kept asking my “I don’t get it, why is Nero doing this or that”.

I really don’t think that they will go down that road again – villian-wise… especially not with Gary Mitchell. Again, they would have to explain the whole comic story with him….

214. FusionVok - November 27, 2012

Are synopses typically written by a studio’s marketing dept? That would explain a great deal if so. It’s kind of a hot mess and not something I could see our “supreme court” churning out.

Anthony, I didn’t mean to imply that you were just throwing up crap on your site. My apologies if I offended. Perhaps Gary Mitchell released the synopsis using his god-like powers just to eff with us all.

215. Richard - November 27, 2012

#214: I’d suspect its usually the marketing department.

“Paramount Pictures presents a cross platform film project entitled Star Trek Into Darkness. We hope to maximize our effective earning potential by presenting a Multi-Media Extravaganza of sight and sound. By refocusing our synergistic assets we hope to bring you the client the best in ‘cutting edge’ entertainment.”

216. Richard - November 27, 2012

p.s. I made that up ;)

217. FreddyE - November 27, 2012

That synopsis sounds so….blah. To say it in Picards words “Does anybody remember the time we were explorers?” (or something similar). This doesn´t sound like “strange new worlds” at all. More like ANY generic action / thriller thing. I had high hopes for the new movie and was really looking forward to it. But this is really pushing my buttons in a negative way.

218. Kirk, James T. - November 27, 2012

The Dark Knight of Star Trek? VERY VERY VERY Excited :D :D although I hope this doesn’t mean the story is entirely Earth-based. I’d like to see our heroes visit strange new worlds at some point.

I’m not sure how or why people were confused with the last movie since when theydid reference the comic book series Countdown, it was all explained in Spock’s mind meld with new Kirk.

219. Tom - November 27, 2012

I actually like the manhunt idea. See, they get to visit different planets and stuff while finding the one man weapon of mass destruction.

220. Romulus - November 27, 2012

“detonated the fleet”……………..Why do the Trek film writers feel the need to get rid of the fleet and thereby setting up The Enterprise as the only ship available.

TMP…1701 only ship available
TWOK 1701 only ship in range
TSFS 1701 goes to a quarantined area and no Star Ships enforcing it
TVH HMS Bounty saves the day after all other ships have been neutralized
TFF 1701-A only ship available
TUC 1701-A The only ship to escort the Klingon Chancellor ! !

GEN 1701-B only ship available
FC The Borg spanks the fleet
INS Why was a Starfleet Admiral on a Sona ship?
NEM Starfleet is on their way but it’s the Romulans that help the 1701-E

ST09 Most of the fleet is in another system and the remainder gets spanked by Nero

221. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 27, 2012

So I believe that we will see the “terrorist attack” that cripples the fleet in the first 9 minutes of the IMAX-preview. Very similar to the IMAX-preview of the Dark Knight.

222. Will - November 27, 2012

An attack on earth? Didn’t that happen in 2153? Man, Earth can’t catch a break.

223. Gary Makin - November 27, 2012

I think this is going to be a great film, but the next movie needs to get away from threats to Earth. Unless it features a rebooted Borg (sans Queen) redesigned by HR Giger. I’d be up for that.

224. MikeT - November 27, 2012

Am I the only voice of reason? It’s Captain Garth!!!!

225. Richard - November 27, 2012

#220: That is an excellent point. Its become one of the biggest cliches in Star Trek. The same way that every captain not named Kirk or Picard ends up being incompetent in order to make the main hero look more heroic. All the new film needs to complete the cliche is for Cumberbatch to have a super powered ship that dwarfs the Enterprise (like the Narada or the Scimitar).

ITs definately one of trek’s most hoary set of cliches. Trek filmmakers since 1979 have struggled with them.

226. Malcolm Wood - November 27, 2012

Sorry for being the bearer or bad tidings but the synopsis is always more dramatic than the actual film. Read over the past Star Trek ones and you will see.

I cant wait till the film comes out though getting all excited :)

227. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

Jesus…does ANYONE read or even know about the IDW comics??

Gary Mitchell already died in the second issue (the “Where No Man Has Gone Before” adaptation of issues #1-2), and the comics are fully Roberto Orci/Abrams-supervised and vetted as canon within the new movie universe.

It ain’t gonna be Gary-freaking-Mitchell, people. Holy crap.

228. Richard - November 27, 2012

#226: As I stated earlier in this thread, how can we be sure that

a) That was really Gary Mitchell that was killed and not a decoy or psychic illusion of Gary Mitchell that Kirk ‘killed’.

b) That Gary Mitchell’s god-like powers don’t allow him to survive that sort of thing.

c) That Gary Mitchell’s god-like powers don’t allow him to resurrect himself (like Jean Grey when she ‘died’ and came back as the Phoenix).

d) That in science fiction and fatasy, nobody is really dead forever. They brought Spock back in the very next movie after TWOK.

229. Richard - November 27, 2012

Whoops that should have been directed @ 227.

230. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

In order to resurrect Gary Mitchell onscreen, they would more or less have to either have the entire storyline of “Where No Man…” as its precursor, for which you’d need at least an hour to do, or else stop the film dead in its tracks in order to recap a comic storyline which comparatively few members of the audience (compared to everyone who goes to the movies each year) would even be familiar with.

It’d be creatively deadly, which is why it likely ain’t gonna happen. How many people sitting in the audience would have even read the comic book story before sitting down in the theater, in other words?

231. Richard - November 27, 2012

#230: They did a neat recap of the comics in the 2009 film during Nimoy Spock’s mind meld with young Kirk. Quick, efficient, and rather elegant as far as exposition scenes go and it didn’t stop that film dead in its tracks.

232. Philip - November 27, 2012

I’m not going to jump to any conclusions about who the villain(s) might be, though to me the story does sound like a previous iteration of the franchise that Perer Weller was involved in. Uncannily so, in fact. Considering that Enterprise is both prime- and new alternate universe, is there a chance he’s reprising his Paxton character? Unlikely I’d say, but one never knows.

In saying all that, I’m not a big fan of where this synopsis is going. It just doesn’t say “Star Trek” to me. In fact, with a few minor changes in detail, we could have another Transformers sequel, or the second Prometheus movie just as easily. It’s all just a bit… Cookie-cutter. So the details in the fleshing out are going to be very important if its going to capture what made Star Trek different to every other science fiction franchise. Because at the moment it just sounds like a protagonists vs. antagonists romp much like the first movie.

I can already picture the scene where Kirk receives word from Earth of it’s impending doom, how he retreats within himself, and how a conversation between an empathetic Spock and himself serves to forever solidify their friendship and encourages Kirk to do what he must to save the planet. Everything is very predictable. And, lets face it… We might not have seen the destruction of Vulcan coming in ST09, but we pretty much know how this movie’s going to pan out. And I’m guessing everything’s gonna be alright once Kirk dispenses with the menace…

I’m hoping I’m wrong about the predictable nature of this film. If not, it won’t just be the die-hards who’ll be disappointed.

233. Vulcan Soul - November 27, 2012

The world in crisis, check. Personal family members killed, check. Something really big blown up, check. Yup, another Abramstrek action movie arrives.

I thank them for cutting the word “science fiction movie” from the synopsis, as science fiction this is not!

234. Devon - November 27, 2012

“I thank them for cutting the word “science fiction movie” from the synopsis, as science fiction this is not”

Thanks for taking absurd guesses. Guess we should look at all the other Star Trek movies’ synopsis.

235. Richard - November 27, 2012

#233: So in order to be considered Science Fiction the world can’t be in crisis, nothing can blow up, and no personal family members can be killed?

236. Devon - November 27, 2012

214: “Are synopses typically written by a studio’s marketing dept?” Yes, as it’s part of the marketing…

Honestly, I don’t see what’s wrong with this synopsis. It made perfect sense to me. It might be a little wordy with the “unstoppable force” but it’s correct in how its worded.

237. StelArian - November 27, 2012

@204: We have volcanoes on Earth too :)

238. Disectivore! - November 27, 2012

My guess is that this is a new villain and one that’s not only physically formidable, but also psychically formidable. Which may or may not tie in with both genetics and Gary Mitchel’s brush with supernatural god-like powers. Empaths, telepaths and other such empowered beings have been a part of Star Trek in all its incarnations, and is also something that’s not inappropriate for ‘proper’ science fiction either. Look at The Mule in Asimov’s Foundation and Empire. If this new villain were inspired by that then we have a very real reason to be excited.

239. Jannek - November 27, 2012

i still guess it’s khan. why else they’ve searched just for latin actors first?
gary mitchell is too much comic-like, not a type of modern terrorist.

the synopsis sounds epic, but i’m afraid it is a little too dark for ST.

240. Stewie G - November 27, 2012

Has this been posted already?

http://io9.com/5915240/check-out-the-new-starfleet-uniforms-from-star-trek-2

241. Nobilone - November 27, 2012

Mitchell: Resurrecting him with a different face from the comics would be too lame a move from the authors, though…

Garth: my best choice, he is a Starfleet officer, he is powerful, and the different timeline could have somehow given him the right vengeance attitude.

Trelane: he’s been widely hinted to be a baby-Q and the Starfleet uniform could be a homage to John deLancie’s style, or he could have been infiltrating Starfleet just because. He pretty rocks as a WoMD.

Or.

In any way, I’m pretty sure the last panel of Countdown comics will be a full page close-up of BC stating his name. :-)

242. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 27, 2012

Mr. Orci already said that the villain was known from TOS. So either it is Garry Mitchell and they ignore the comic he was in or they will somehow incorporate the comic into the movie which could be difficult as they would have to explain a lot to the movie audience that hasn’t read the comic.

Or maybe it is Khan. The Enterprise didn’t find the Botany Bay but some other ship and they brought him back to earth where he breaks out and destroys everything.

Ot it is Kirks brother George who has undergone some kind of experiment within Starfleet making him some kind of brainwashed supersoldier…

243. Trekzilla - November 27, 2012

Man, I’m really tired if all this dark, depessing crap. Isn’t the world today depressing and dark enough? I’d like to be uplifted in my movie going experience and have that include just some good old fashioned action adventure that is FUN to watch! anyone remember that word? how anout a Trek film with the tone of an Indiana Jones film? Well, i’m reserving judgment until I actually SEE the movie!

244. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

@Admiral_Bumblebee:

Exactly, re: Gary Mitchell.

What took place during the “Where No Man…” storyline from the comics would simply be way too big and important to relegate to a quick, offhanded, “Oh, by the way, THIS kinda also happened…” reference during the next film’s running-time.

Something of that scale needs to have adequate story-focus devoted to it, and that simply isn’t going to happen. It’d be a violation of Basic Screenwriting 101.

245. Mark Lynch - November 27, 2012

I agree with what others have said here that just because BDT auditioned/was offered a role it was not necessarily for Khan…

Let’s give the writers some originality!

So, the script may not have required a great deal of re-writing once BC came on board.

I have not read any of the recent comics based on 2009’s ST. Maybe I should, but there is no comic book store anywhere near me. And I am not a fan of downloaded comics. I like to have the pages in my hand.

Anyway, I am personally 100% certain we will not be seeing Khan, especially after reading the above synopsis. Which by the way must have been worded by someone whose first language is not English…

I am also fairly sure we will not see Gary Mitchell either. But this is way more likely than Khan. But given that he was (apparently) killed by Kirk in the comics. This is also very unlikely, if the comics are to be considered part of the movie Universe.

Perhaps there will be a really big surprise and it is an all new adversary for Kirk and crew to face?!?

Who knows? One thing is certain, I may get to know after I go to see the Hobbit at my London IMAX on the 17th…

246. Sebi - November 27, 2012

Also, Bob Orci said, Gary Mitchell is not in STID. This is from an trekmovie article published in June 2016:

Bob was asked if the following were in the sequel and he confirmed that all are not…

Janice Rand
Gary Mitchell (“Where No Man Has Gone Before”)
Charlie X (“Charlie X”)
Ruk the android (“What Are Little Girls Made Of”)
The Borg

247. Sebi - November 27, 2012

I meant June 2012, damn typos…

248. ToMaHaKeR - November 27, 2012

I can hardly wait the trailers. I still believe that the 3rd trailer of Star Trek 2009 was one of the best SF trailers ever.

249. Digginjim - November 27, 2012

Garth of Izar
Pike dies
the synopsis makes no grammatical sense!

250. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

The problem with all the films (including the sequel) is that they are all Earth – centric. TOS rarely mentioned Earth and the Enterprise only returned there twice(?).

251. Blue Jay - November 27, 2012

Garth of Izar, definitely:

The mention of the chess game is the hint:

Look here:

One paragraph is titled: “Queen to Queen’s level three”

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Garth_of_Izar

252. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

BTW, Anthony P., is the first trailer going to be shown with The Hobbit or not???

253. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

@Jack (132), Gary Seven is a perfect human specimen with incredibly advanced technology (e.g., the servo he carries in his pocket, which he uses as an all-purpose mechanical wonder that does all things at all times without fail), but he is not from the future. According to “Assignment: Earth” (TOS), he is expressly stated to be from the contemporary timeline of the 1960’s — 1968 to be exact. For those who haven’t seen the ep lately, his transporter beam is accidentally intercepted by the Enterprise (which is conducting historical study) from a thousand light-years away as he is en route to 1968-era Earth. He almost instantly realizes that Kirk and company are from the future and he demands to be permitted to beam to his destination on Earth because he is “of that era” and Kirk are not.

The organization that he’s with is never specified; it is mentioned only elliptically. (It’s named “Aegis” in Trek book fiction.) The fact, alone, that he was capable of being teleported over a distance of 1,000 LY means that Aegis’ technology is far greater than even 23d Century Earth’s.

Incidentally, “Assignment: Earth” aired in 1968. But the events described in the ep as occurring in 1968 were way out of whack from what was occurring at the time — e.g., there were orbital nuclear weapons that year in the Trekverse. This means that Kirk beamed back to a timeline on Earth different from the actual timeline in which you and I live. This also means that although we take it for granted that Star Trek’s future is our own future, it really isn’t, at least according to the episode.

254. Bart - November 27, 2012

Oh wow, Earth is being threatened AGAIN by another device of mass destruction. Boring. So much for exploring strange new worlds…

255. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

246. Sebi

But Bob added later that he had lied once. So no one is off the table.

256. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

@Jack (183), that’s my fault. There is no Sam Mitchell, only Samuel Kirk, Jim’s brother. I was kidding about Sam Mitchell. Sort of.

257. weerd1 - November 27, 2012

I’m kinda in the Garth school of thought on this one.

258. KHAN 2.0 - November 27, 2012

this is probably BS (said Pine Kirk style in th eice cave) but any truth to what someone has written here?:

“anybody else see those Twitter photos (v-quickly taken back-off the Interweb) of Old Spock & Bill Shatner, beside the other pictures – presumably on the set of Film 2 – of New Spock fighting Sherlock Holmes???????????? ”

http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3539617&mpage=1&key=&NID=35860#3539618

259. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

I have a mental picture of Bob Orci laughing it up as he’s reading this thread.

And no, you can’t borrow it. I’m saving it for posterity.

260. Corinthian7 - November 27, 2012

If taken literally the ‘detonated’ and ‘one man weapon of mass destruction’ would seem to indicate that Karl Urban really was tired when he got off that flight and he really did give away the name of the villain. this would tie into what has previously been said about the film in that there would be a link to the ongoing IDW series and it wouldn’t be a retelling of a TOS episode.

Another thought is that Paramount is just being a little more colourful with it’s phrasing. It’s certainly strange wording! ‘An epic chess game’ may indicate that Kirks nemesis may be a renowned starfleet captain like say Captain Garth as I’m not sure that Gary Mitchell would be the tactical type.

261. Willj1365 - November 27, 2012

Just a thought – in TWOK, Spock died. In ST09, Kirk’s father died – SACRIFICING his life for his crew, proving he was worthy of the captain’s chair. The synopsis says “sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew”…who makes the sacrifice? Kirk? just throwing it out there

262. Sebi - November 27, 2012

255. Anthony Thompson – November 27, 2012

Thanks! How could I miss that! Aaaaargh…. it’s driving my crazy…

263. Jeyl - November 27, 2012

Last words of the last film:
“To boldly go where no one has gone before”

Description of this film:
“When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

Bob, Alex, Damon, if this is indeed another “Save the Earth” storyline, I’m not interested. This is Star Trek, not Earth Defense Force. You set up the last film as though the crew were actually going to go places where “no one has gone before”. How the heck are you going to stand by that if you keep bringing our characters back to Earth? Is Earth being in danger the only thing you can think of in order to get the audience excited about something?

This is why I hated the destruction of Vulcan. You destroyed an alien world that we could have gotten to learn more about than we had in any previous Star Trek story, but instead you chose to save the Earth instead. I knew from that moment on that Star Trek didn’t really change because all you did was ensure that future writers could fall back on the same “Earth is in danger!” story line just as they have done in previous Star Trek movies. Earth is boring and uninteresting.

264. Zee - November 27, 2012

Gary Mitchell. ’nuff said.

265. Aurore - November 27, 2012

(Still) no details on the villain’s identity?

I see.

Keepin’ it secret as usual. How organic.

:)

It may come as a surprise to some, but, I never was convinced by the “Latino” actors -equals- Khan-argument. And, a little while ago, I discovered that at least one person on another website had, apparently, predicted ( in 2011 ) the nationality of my sequel’s villain, long before I ever heard of any actor being cast as the villain for the upcoming movie…Shocking!

(… I should rather say thrilling, since as far as I’m concerned, it means that Mr. Cumberbatch won’t be portraying Khan.)

…Ahem…anyways…Star Trek Into…Darkness…huh? So, It’s your last word, DamOn? It’s official,then. Really?

Reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreally???

Fine. I was just checking. You know ; to be sure….

:)

266. Al - November 27, 2012

It will not be some obscure character that only we fan boys know about

267. LOFC_Ed - November 27, 2012

Could be a completely new character? I know it’s unlikely, but you never know….

268. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

@Al (266) — Except that Khan was also an obscure character before TWOK. The episode “Space Seed” was not particularly well-known other than in the Trek fan community. It was no more well-known than, say, the “space hippie” or “interracial kiss” episodes of TOS in popular culture. Or “Gamesters of Triskelion,” featuring a scantily clad (for the day) starlet who had other production assets (er, credits) to her name, and a catchy musical theme to boot.

269. RenderedToast - November 27, 2012

Yeah, bit late on this but “detonated the fleet and everything it stands for” makes no sense, just sounds idiotic.

270. Ralph Pinheiro - November 27, 2012

“an unstoppable force has detonated the fleet and everything it stands,” it sounds metaphorical. What is the purpose of the Fleet? Pike describes Starfleet as a “peacekeeping and humanitarian armada”.

Cumberbatch (and perhaps with the section 31) has detonated the Fleet as armed peacekeeping, divided in two factions (pros and cons. war), discovered a powerful weapon and is trying to invade the Klingon Empire.

If it is right he could be Garth of Izar.

Garth od Izhar was an underexplored character in TOS and he can be modified to become someone with some superhuman abilities, not like Mitchell, but like Khan.

271. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

Just musing here, but how horrible is it be that Starfleet no longer has a fleet at some point? I’m familiar with the concept that “fleet” could just mean a large portion of the total, but still, that would introduce some interesting possibilties.

I could imagine that Kruge and his other Klingon pals would take notice of the presumed interstellar distress signals and possible decide on a side-trip to Earth on their way to destroying random space junk.

Of course, timeline manipulation could result in the Cosmic Reset (TM) that would make things all better by the end of the movie.

And it could also — finally — give us the Enterprise engine room that doesn’t look like a place from which you could secretly pop a valve and get a pint courtesy of a five-fingered discount.

All hail Emperor Kruge of Earth! And a better engine room.

272. Kev - November 27, 2012

Detonated the fleet? and everything it stands for? what will they be blowing up the new enterprise already?

Not that I’d be complaining if they blew the space hotrod up and replaced it with the real enterprise, or at the very least fixed the proportions to match the TOS standards.

and what the hell, what did they bring in a non joke version of Dr Evil? this sounds like the plot of a sci fi spy thriller not a star trek film.

on the other hand well he was the guy behind alias…………………

273. JamesDean - November 27, 2012

Y U NO NEW WORLDS!

274. Deflector Dish Guy - November 27, 2012

Terrorism?

Meh… played out.

:/

275. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

Note to self: Grammar: How does it work?

Miscellaneous corrections:

“how horrible is it be” should be “how horrible is it”

“”and possible decide” should be “and possibly decide”

And, @JamesDean (273), LOL! But we DO have a new world. (Although it’s a war zone world.) But I hear it has candy! (But the candy is poisoned.) But the candy is free! (But you have pay in quatloos.) Etc.

276. KingDaniel - November 27, 2012

My guess is that Benedict Cumberbatch is playing a Starfleet-bred Augment, hence AICN’s claims of it being Khan. And of course, just like the last time, it goes disasterously wrong…

277. NoKhanPlease - November 27, 2012

38–

Gary Mitchell is dead in the comics, but not unlike the prime universe, the guy was kind of god-like. It seems that a god-like being could probably survive that kind of “death.”

If they were using Mitchell, they would have to incorporate the comics version of the story into the movie, which is certainly doable if they don’t take too much time.

They incorporated Space Seed into TWOK in about 2 sentences.

Plus, with no Dehner in the comics, we certainly have a role for Alice Eve.

I hope it’s not Khan, but it’s sounding less and less like it would be.

Besides, that synopsis would be a lot different if it were Khan.

278. killamarshtrek - November 27, 2012

Kahn – NOT personal!
Gary Mitchell – VERY personal to KIrk (friends at the academy).

OBVIOUS!!

279. EJD1984 - November 27, 2012

” for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.” Does this imply that Kirk’s mother and brother are killed off in this movie?

280. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

Stop saying anyone is RAPING Star Trek, folks. It shows an appalling lack of understanding of what rape is, and makes you look like a complete jackass. This is just a movie, and if you’re equating its production with the violation of a woman’s body, then you need serious psychological help.

281. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

And why do so many of you say “shouldn’t of,” “couldn’t of” and “wouldn’t of?” Come on, folks. Everyone knows those aren’t phrases in English. That’s basic grammar. Take some pride in how you write.

282. chrisfawkes.com - November 27, 2012

This sounds great.

Can’t wait to see the trailer.

Thank you JJ and crew for finally getting the true spirit and tone of the original Star Trek.

283. Spock Jenkins - November 27, 2012

Here, here, BulletInTheFace. I too, dislike the term ‘shouldn’t of’ when it should be ‘shouldn’t have’.

I also dislike when people say ‘hence why’, when just ‘hence’ will suffice.

Apostrophe abusers also annoy.

284. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

#92: The names “Aegis” for Gary Seven’s employers is from an old comic book. I seriously doubt that they’d use that in the new film, even if it were about Gary Seven (which I’m positive it’s not).

285. Tiberius Subprime - November 27, 2012

Gary Mitchell?
It could be even if Bob Orci denies it. (He could be using mis-information). The comic did leave a thread of possibility that Gary was still alive.

However, Garth of Izar is a strong contender now.
So is a very determined Gary Seven, who could be out now to eliminate this timeline????

BC as a Talosion who uses illusion to inflitrate Starfleet and seduce some (such as Weller) to some devious cause???? Likely. I could buy it.

Or a new villan.

BC as a younger, cloned version of Khan who died in statis, brought back to Earth and cloned???? Possibly. But not likely. I don’t think we have Khan here.

286. porthoses bitch - November 27, 2012

I know hes an actor and can do accoents….but…. BC doesnt strike me as a Gary kind of guy.

Kidding aside.. Im betting Pike dies but that the frirndship torn apart is Kirrk – Mitchell..but where does this put Mr Wellar ?My guess is he the one who lulls the strings to Mr Cumberbatches character. Wwellar can be one serious badass as seen in 24 a few years back.

287. Frederick - November 27, 2012

When I read the synopsis, I thought “what if this was a synopsis given for a Trek movie with the original crew, like at the point where Star Trek 5 was about to me made. Would I be excited about it? ” The answer, if you see it in those terms, would be a definite YES. I would be crazy to see it! So, I am giving it a chance with the new folks.

288. Les - November 27, 2012

It’s Charlie.

289. Spock Jenkins - November 27, 2012

I’m really looking forward to STID, but a thought did cross my mind as to whether we’ll ever again see a STAR TREK film which involves actually exploring “strange new worlds”, or “seeking out new life, and new civilisations”…?

290. Frederick - November 27, 2012

As for it being Garth of Izar, there is NO WAY they would take a silly villain from one of the WORST third season episodes to be the big guy in the new movie.

291. Max - November 27, 2012

I must say Cumberbatch does have a passing resemblance to Garth of Izar. But no Hollywood Production company would agree to such an awful villian name. Also rules out Gary Mitchell. Khan is just waaaaay to obvious. I say it’s someone new and we’ve been thrown a bunch of red herrings.

292. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 27, 2012

Thank you, TrekMovie!!!

Thank you, Orci & Kurtzman!

This sounds like a REALLY original Trek adventure.

And, it looks like thay are not giving up on the previous movie’s new timline.
I am alright with that.

I still hope Kirk will see that the new timeline is going to tear itself apart and
will want to “restore” the timeline (as it should be).

293. Killamarshtrek - November 27, 2012

I think with ‘detonated’, someone misheard the dictation. Probably should have been ‘decimated’. Makes a lot more sense!

294. Aurore - November 27, 2012

Correction. 265.

…long before I ever heard of any actor being cast as the villain for the upcoming movie….

=

…long before I ever heard of any actor being *officially* cast as the villain for the upcoming movie…

I haven’t forgotten Benicio, Demián , Jordi, and, Édgar… of course…

:)

http://trekmovie.com/2012/05/03/nimoy-tweets-on-star-trek-sequel-reports-another-actor-from-villain-casting-search-identified/

295. CJS - November 27, 2012

This synopsis is clearly the work of a Paramount PR hack. You can destroy a fleet, or annihilate a fleet, or even decimate a fleet (if you destroy one in ten ships), but you cannot detonate a fleet. You can detonate a bomb or explosive that destroys a fleet. Someone needs to learn the meaning of the words they use.

I’m guessing Weller plays a Starfleet Officer gone bad (maybe Ron Tracey or Garth of Izar). Spock Prime may have provided information on potential threats to the Federation, which led to Weller’s character finding the location of the Botany Bay. He thaws out Khan and company, ultimately using one of these genetic supermen (Cumberbatch) in his attempt to take over Starfleet. Pike is killed during this coup, which is why the manhunt is personal for Kirk. Weller may end up a victim of his own creation, leaving Cumberbatch to emerge as the primary villain.

296. Planet Pandro - November 27, 2012

This was someone else’s idea in a thread a couple months back, but with this synopsis to consider, it made such sense that I think it bears repeating:
Somehow, possibly b/c of Spock Prime, Starfleet finds out about the Botany Bay and who’s aboard, and sends out a retrieval team. They wake Khan and secretly put him in charge of Starfleet (after all, he was “bred to lead”) in order to be strong in the wake of Vulcan’s destruction and ensure starfleet’s standing in the universe. At some point, operating behind the scenes becomes unfulfilling to Khan’s superior ambitions and he makes a massive power grab beyond Starfleet and eliminates the fleet, probably killing Adm. Pike. So it’s up to Kirk and co. to stop him.
Sounds reasonable to me.
Plus I don’t buy that they would makea huge movie sequel w/ a villain who died in comics that the mainstream isn’t reading anyway…

297. trekprincess - November 27, 2012

@167 if you really hate JJ’s Trek so much don’t go and see the sequel, Simple as that

298. falcon - November 27, 2012

Okay, my take…….

Charles Evans is a brilliant Starfleet scientist, who hides a nasty little secret – he’s an Augment (along the lines of a Julian Bashir, not necessarily our favorite Ricardo Montalban villain) who has been secretly working for Section 31, under the direction of …..

… wait for it …

Admiral Khan Noonien Singh, played by Peter Weller.

Admiral Singh (okay, so Weller’s not Indian, go with it here) has seen the destruction of Vulcan and the starship task force sent to battle Nero reduced to scrap, and decided it’s time for the Fleet to go nuclear. Evans is his ace-in-the-hole, a human with powers that verge on the god-like, but he’s been kept under wraps until now. The Fleet engages an enemy (the Klingons?) that they sorely underestimate, and now Earth has to contend with the aftermath of a bloody attack on the mid-section of North America (which results in the death of Kirk’s mother). Starfleet’s retaliation attempt is a destructive battle that sees half the fleet destroyed, but the Klingon fleet is all but obliterated, thanks to Evans. As it turns out, Evans was also behind the attack on Earth – a “false flag” attack – designed to stir up sentiment against the Klingons and give Starfleet and the Federation an enemy again. Kirk, discovering this, pursues Khan and Evans to a planet where the three have it out. With help from Spock (and the Klingons?) Kirk and the Enterprise are able to defeat Evans and Khan is killed.

Why not? Anything’s possible.

299. Jerry - November 27, 2012

It’s clearly Garth of Izar.

300. Granite Trek - November 27, 2012

If “Avatar” could re-interpret “Dances With Wolves” and make a hit of it, there’s no reason the new Trek movie can’t do the same re-interpreting “Apocalypse Now”.

I just hope that when all is said and done there’s enough of the Federation left to withstand the Klingon, Romulans, Cardassians (they’re out there, Uhura ordered a Cardassian Sunset at the bar in the 2009 movie), Orions (implied by the fact Archer, who encountered the Orions, was mentioned in the 2009 movie) and all the other races eager to wipe the Federation out. Or is this the true way the Mirror Universe’s Klingon/Cardassian Empire begins?

301. VOODOO - November 27, 2012

Whoever the Villian is the film sounds like its going to be huge and loud which isnt necessarily a bad thing as long as it has some heart to go along with it.

302. Fik-of-borg - November 27, 2012

It’s just me, or someone else also sees little science in this science fiction franchise? To me it sounds like “Star Trek: Bourne Supremacy” or some spies / politics plot

303. SirBroiler - November 27, 2012

They’ve said it time and time again – the new comics are canon.

So…

1. Gary Mitchell is dead already
2. Sam Kirk is alive and lives off-world

304. ManicTribble. - November 27, 2012

If you guys had been reading the comic ” Star Trek : Ongoing”, they already covered Gary Mitchell, in this version Spock kills him. So Gary is already dead.

305. RaveOnEd - November 27, 2012

My thinking is still it will be a Sci-Fi adaptation of “Heart of Darkness”, with Cumberbatch as Mitchell, serving on a ship commanded by Peter Weller’s character, who possibly could be Captain Garth.

Just spitballing, but that’s my thinking.

And the part about “love being challenged”, if the cover of the second issue of the next “Countdown” series is correct, it will have to do with two main characters…

306. Granite Trek - November 27, 2012

Lets not forget that the movie is being made so that those not steeped in Trek lore can still get into the movie. So, its plot can’t rely on knowledge of who the villain is and his/her history. The names Garth, Gary Mitchell, Gary Seven etc mean nothing to the average non-fan, and that fan won’t know their history or understand their motivations unless the movie can make them clear without a lot of boring exposition or, conversely, turning them into a stock bad guy just like a thousand others we’ve seen in the movies.

To use the 2009 movie as an example, the story of Nero’s past was easily told by Spock part way through the movie, but before that, he was a raging stock bad guy. By making the bad guy a new character they avoided the wrath of the fans taking a known character and radically changing him/her or dumbing the character down, and were free to write a new character history. Imagine if instead of Nero, they used Worf, and make Kronos the destroyed world. Fans would have had strokes! Meanwhile, non-fans would be like, “Who’s Worf?”

What I’m getting at is that you can expect that even if they use a character as a bad guy we’ve seen before, all bets are off that his story will in any way resemble the one we know. He/she could well be a stock bad guy with a Trek name slapped on him/her to make the fans happy. But given past history, its more likely they’ll use a new character, so they can write their own story. Not a terrible idea.

307. Bamasi - November 27, 2012

Well I don’t know about the rest of you guys, but I refused to be satisfied until Mr. Orci posts a Haiku that teases the synopsis a bit further. :)

308. Sebi - November 27, 2012

Hmmmm. A “war-zone world”…. did anyone think of Cestus III?

There’s this Star Trek console game coming in 2013, with the Gorns as bad guys, which also is intended as bridge between the two movies…

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…..

309. The Professor - November 27, 2012

I am getting excited! I cannot wait to see the trailer and first 9 min on line (even though we are not supposed to see the latter).

310. Cervantes - November 27, 2012

Despite their insistance it’s an ‘alternate timeline’ to the ‘existing’ TREK universe, J.J. & co’s 2009 movie STARTS off in a totally DIFFERENT universe to the original TOS universe, say I.

And it’s merely that DIFFERENT universe that Nero’s character ended up ‘altering’ in the first place…and the ‘old Spock’ featured in it was NOT the one from the original TOS series universe either! (and yes, my ‘multi-verse’ scenario allows for the likes of the NEXT GEN series to be set in a SEPERATE universe to the original TOS one too…so the ‘old crew’ seen in the GENERATIONS movie and the ‘old Kirk’ seen dying in it, are NOT those from the actual original TOS series/and pre-GENERATIONS movies. But even if you prefer include the NEXT GEN too, it can still be looked on as being a set in a totally DIFFERENT universe to the J.J.-verse, if you wish)

…and I’m not so sure J.J. is worthy of the ‘pioneering’ moniker where his ‘Trek’ reboot is concerned either…unless the studio thinks convoluted plot points, ugly production designs, elationships, ridiculous midget sidekicks, and giant balloon hand jokes are a ‘pioneerind’ step in the right direction for the franchise. Hell, he’s not even shooting in ‘proper’ 3D. I’ll stick to my ‘multi-verse’ theory for these instalments I think.

311. Justin Olson - November 27, 2012

@ 94. Richard:

Premise plundering. Last movie it was the early-90s Winter/Bennett/Loughery “Starfleet Academy” idea… now it’s the late-90s Berman/Piller (i.e. Conrad/Coppola) “Heart of Darkness” premise.

Maybe for the third movie they’ll do Philip Kaufman’s late-70s “Planet of the Titans” idea. Actually, wait… Ron Moore sort of already used that for his “Battlestar Galactica” finale. Nevermind. :)

312. NCM - November 27, 2012

@171: Yes. I do see your point.

313. gov - November 27, 2012

this synopsis feels like it was written by the same people who write blog spam and chinese ebay auction details. It’s ALMOST correct english…but not quite. The wording/phrasing feels a little strange to me.

I can’t really specify exactly where or how it feels wrong. But the word pairings or the tense or the syntax…or SOMETHING is off.

Anyone else feel that?

314. Craiger - November 27, 2012

What if its his best friend Mitchell who turns against Starfleet and the Federation but he doesn’t get those God like powers. He just a normal Gary Mitchell.

Or what if Cumberbatch is Kirk’s brother waging a war against Starfleet and the Federation?

315. NCM - November 27, 2012

178. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) – November 26, 2012

“No one mentioned love will be challenged yet. Spock and Uhura break up?”

That seed was definitely planted in the comic and yes, it’s pretty obvious the challenged love speaks to that relationship, but break-up or make-up, who knows…? As a plot line, I think it’s just having trouble competing with the excitement and exasperation of blowing up the fleet and figuring out who done it before we see the movie.

316. Craiger - November 27, 2012

I read that against so I guess Harry, could be right maybe Kirk’s Mom, Brother and Uncle gets killed in an attack on Earth and Kirk seeks revenge on the man who did it?

317. dscott - November 27, 2012

Cool!
Sorry to interrupt all your bickering and non-cenacle ravings… just curious, is that Starfleet image up there an official representative splash icon of the sequel, or just AP’s photoshop skillz?

318. Craiger - November 27, 2012

I meant read that again.

319. spiked canon - November 27, 2012

Landru…fits the comic canon

320. kjseek - November 27, 2012

wasnt starfleet decimated in the last movie? it seems to be taking quite a beating lately.

321. spiked canon - November 27, 2012

And maybe the statements quinto has been saying means he dies in the movie

322. spiked canon - November 27, 2012

Detonated means exploded as in torn apart….picks sides

323. Jack - November 27, 2012

Its not Grary Mitchell. Mitchell has been given the Comicbook treatment which is overseen by Bob Orci. Why in the hell would he use Gary Mitchell when he has already used him in the comic series you morons.
I really hate this because you little nit picking fans are getting crazy over the word “detonated”. It was probably thrown together to appease you moronic Star Trek nerds.

The person who wrote this may be getting fired. They more than likely meant decimated. The writers did not want to be held up by continuity which is why they made it an alternate reality. The IDW comic series was created fill in the gaps between the films. This is an original story and the main villian is canon accoring to Orci. It could be Khan,Garth of Izar, or Flint who knows. Obviously its someone with a lot of power or maybe someone who gains power.

You cant tell crap from a synopsis people. I get sooo annoyed with this. Read the synopsis and shut the hell up. if you are a fan cool if you hated the last movie then go watch star trek 6 and shut the hell up. The same guys who come on here and are critics will be the same ones kissing ass when this thing is successful.

With as much at stake as Paramount has, do you really think they have time to make a film that kills the franchise? Star Trek fans, hell sci fi genre fans in general need to get lives. Its entertainment. I trust that JJ and those boys will turn out a great film and an awesome story.

324. spiked canon - November 27, 2012

Detonated can also mean ignited

325. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Does this sound similar to the Xindi storyline on Enterprise? They attacked Earth and Enterprise crew members lost families and Archer wanted to get revenge.

326. Driver - November 27, 2012

Spock Prime is the villain! Didn’t see that coming.

327. Picard's Fish - November 27, 2012

so what current themes is this meant to echo?

unrest in the Middle East? Arab spring?

“an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

I’m picturing an uprising on Earth.. maybe Kirk needs to lead this and hep overthrow the current, misguided regime, fronted by the delusion Benedict Cumberbatch..

328. Jason - November 27, 2012

@12 Could still be Mitchell; as he was given god-like powers in the original episode.

329. Tom - November 27, 2012

@Picards Fish
Man, come to think of it manhunt seems to be like the chase over Bin Laden. ZERO TREK THIRTY! Cumberbatch is Bin Laden.

330. PunkSpocker - November 27, 2012

Benny Batch is certainly a weapon of mass destruction. I told people last weekend that he will soon take over the world!

331. Craiger - November 27, 2012

What if the Khan storyline is also different in the new Universe, instead of Kirk and crew finding the Botany Bay, the Klingon’s find the Botany Bay first and revive Khan and Crew. Then Khan and crew kill the Klingons escape and Khan and his crew decide to go after Earth for revenge?

332. TLL - November 27, 2012

Wonder if that’s simply a typo, or a writer picking one word when they meant another. “fleet detonated” might actually supposed to be “fleet DECIMATED.” It’s close, but a lot clearer, if that’s what they actually meant.

333. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

Ummm…are we sure this is legit?

This synopsis/release is not on Paramount’s website as either a news item or a press release.

If so, it sure seems to me Cumberbatch is Mitchell, and the testing of friendships will be in Kirk’s effort to kill him a la TOS “Where No Man Has Gone Before.” (Remember where Kirk was reluctant to kill Mitchell, but Spock was aggressive about it? Flip sides this time).

Big difference this time? One of the Big Three is going to bite the big one. And I think its Kirk, in some Han Soloesque way, and it forces Spock to make a decision on how to doubletalk him back to life for the next, and final, Abrams-Trek installment.

We’ll see. Just looking to verify this is, in fact, a true Paramount treatment. I agree with some sentiments here the phrasing of some parts are, well, a little odd for a full, formal studio release. Maybe nothing.

Just have to wait and see.Sounds like a good popcorn movie.

334. Dr. Image - November 27, 2012

Col. Green? Roger Korby?? Just grasping at straws…

335. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

GARY MITCHELL IS ALREADY DEAD, PEOPLE. FOR, LIKE, THE EIGHTY-GAZILLIONTH TIME.

He’s not gonna be showing up in this movie, in any form.

336. n1701ncc - November 27, 2012

I said it over 2 years ago… Gary Mitchell… and Bob you tried to fake us out but I think you should come clean. Next movie will you please use a nasty Harry Mudd.

337. TrekTech - November 27, 2012

I certainly hope the movie itself is more well thought out and better written than this poorly worded grammatically awkward amateurish synopsis. Sounds like it was written by a teenager for their fan film. ‘Detonated the fleet’? ‘War zone world’? Normally I would read something like that and immediately think ‘fake’ …

338. Jack - November 27, 2012

323. That was a different Jack. That is, not me.

339. Shannon Nutt - November 27, 2012

I’ve been saying it’s Sam Kirk every since they left him alive in the comics. Given JJ’s obsession with telling family stories, it makes sense that Kirk’s enemy in this movie might be his own brother.

340. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

333. SoonerDave

“Are we sure this is legit?”. Good point. That would explain the poor grammar and the feeling that it was written by an intern (at best). AP, can you verify this is indeed legit? Where is it on the Paramount website?

And, once again, will the trailer be shown w/ The Hobbit?

341. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

…Yeah, like Bob’s gonna put his entire fandom-reputation on the line, and state that the comic books are canon, when they really aren’t, or something. Part of the entire reason for reading the IDW series is the promise made by the producers that everything seen in them is authentic and will be later backed up onscreen by the next movie.

They aren’t gonna ruin that.

It ain’t Gary Mitchell. What happened in the comics has already happened. He’s dead, Jim.

342. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

339. Nut (0r is it Nutt?)

Sam Kirk is a “one man weapon of mass destruction”? Really?

343. The Bandsaw Vigilante - November 27, 2012

BTW, meant to put “@n1701ncc:” at the very beginning of that last post, but forgot to.

344. JimmySaville - November 27, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch is BRITISH.
Gary Mitchell is AMERICAN.

345. yarram - November 27, 2012

Fail!

346. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

This HAS to be a hoax. How could Paramount put out such a poorly worded, typo-filled release? I’m crying “fake” on this. Whoever wrote that release completely lacks any writing ability.

347. Frederick - November 27, 2012

I’m going to laugh if it turns out to be a totally original character and all the name dropping before was just fan-bait. It would be for the best, though.

348. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

346. BulletinThe Face

It looks as though TrekMovie may have gotten scammed. Big time!

349. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

Yeah, this is definitely a scam. There’s no way Paramount would let such a badly worded release go out.

350. msn1701 - November 27, 2012

It sounds like this time Kirk faces an even bigger challenge and one where he could grow into the captain we know who isn’t selfish but has only one true love…The Enterprise and her crew.

Riiiiiiiight. The ship. *headdesk*

Great synopsis though! I’m really hoping they will show it in conjunction with the Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

351. Jack - November 27, 2012

And, jeepers — it’s a synopsis. They’re usually vague and refer to epic challenges, big choices and ‘nothing will ever be the same’ drama. They’re the equivalent of those ‘in a world where…’ trailer voiceover scripts.

And I agree with the other Jack: detonated isn’t usually used like this. But I kind of like it — it’s like someone ignited something (attitudes, who knows?) that had long been building up/ being planned…

Gary Seven was in Trek so Roddenberry would have another series if Trek ended after season two. Seven lived in 1968. So either he would have lived really long (a Trek possibility) or be using time travel. Heck, it’s not unlike the observers on Fringe. So it’s possible.

Again, it seems a little convoluted. It would be nice if the threat from within starfleet was actually starfleet and not engineered by Augments/Q/Paxton/Gary Seven’s advanced alien benefactors/the illuminati/the Koch brothers….

352. Cygnus-X1 - November 27, 2012

Eh, what’s so “dark” about this story?

They might just as well have titled it “Star Trek Through An Idyllic Meadow With Your Loved One Hand-in-Hand After Saving The World From The Evil Genius Bent On Destroying It.”

353. Robman007 - November 27, 2012

Sounds awesome! Can’t wait to see the 9 minute preview. I’m glad that someone is making killer Star Trek movies instead of slow, dull films that you could see in any of the 5 TV series. The movies are meant to be EPIC.

Just hold up before complaining about the film and jumping off a bridge until you actually SEE the movie. You might find that that you *gasp* actually enjoy it.

354. porthoses bitch - November 27, 2012

My only issues wiith Mitchel are a. He was used in the comic and b. Both him and charlie were used (ok misused ) in Of Gods and Men. Side note Im surrpised if its Kahn that paramount didnt fight that Trek xxxparody a little harder..

355. Ran - November 27, 2012

Looks like the synopsis from the first movie. Lame and terrible. I cannot wait for the franchise to be in better hands.

356. truth_hits_everybody - November 27, 2012

J J Abrams is a Luciferian, Masonic, Templar, Alpha-Draconian, Shape-Shifting, Reptilian. This crap is Beverly Hills 90210 in space. So is Khan Brandon or Brenda Walsh?

357. Jack - November 27, 2012

Canon isn’t limited to TOS. It could be Section 31, or something similar.

That whole Paxton bit on Enterprise was about undermining what Starfleet/the nascent Federation stood for…

358. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

#354: Of Gods and Men? That’s just a fan film, nothing more, so it’s irrelevant to what should or shouldn’t be in Star Trek Into Darkness. It’s not part of the Trek universe.

359. Forrest Leeson - November 27, 2012

So…after dialing ST:2009 as far over to mainstream blow-it-up as possible and getting in return essentially the same grosses (adjusted for inflation) as the no-concessions-to-anybody ST:1979, they’re trying the same tactic over again, but without the brand-new-faces factor.

Here’s an ad campaign for you, Paramount:

Star Trek: In Name Only
Tagline: “All Hands Abandon Premise!”

360. Trekzilla - November 27, 2012

Wasnt Sam Kirk killed by a flying alien pancake in the prime universe?

361. Aurore - November 27, 2012

…….Well…..On another website, I read this:

“(FYI: The synopsis was found on Paramount’s official press website, lest anyone doubt its validity.)”

… However, as far as I can tell, there was no direct link to that press release. Just a link to another site….

At any rate, it won’t be khan.
And, storywise I expect the unexpected. Not something I would have read online….

“No remakes. No rehashes”….

362. no_abrams_no_cry - November 27, 2012

I want Tori Spelling in with the silicone implants, a new race, implants having their own conscioussness

363. Mark Lynch - November 27, 2012

If Kirk is going to lose the remainder of his family on Earth, then I would like to have a scene, flashback or whatever, that shows him having reconciled his differences with all of his family members. Yep, his Uncle/Step-dad? too. I can’t remember which he is supposed to be.

Which would make the loss of them that much more striking and powerful.

We can finally get Greg Grunberg on-screen rather than just a voice… :)

I for one will be somewhat thankful if this movie breaks Spock and Uhura up. Spock is supposed to stand apart, it is one of the things that makes his character one of the most interesting. Perhaps he undergoes a traumatic event that pushes him toward being more Vulcan in his manner and outlook.

Although I don’t think the writers can top anything they have already done to the poor guy. Blowing up his planet and killing his Mother in virtually the same breath! Yep, hard to top that guys.

364. NuWisdom - November 27, 2012

What if the villian is Kodos the Executioner?

365. Mark Lynch - November 27, 2012

Oh yeah,

I agree with what someone previously mentioned….

detonated = decimated

Makes much more sense. The people who write this stuff are professionals, you wouldn’t think it though from that text.

366. Mark Lynch - November 27, 2012

Correction, imploded his planet. My mistake! ;)

367. NuWisdom - November 27, 2012

@357 and therein we have who Weller is playing in the film: he’s reprising his role as Paxton. For those concerned about age, there was the mention about Admiral Archer. Meaning Jonathan Archer is still alive. I just hope T’Pol wasn’t on Vulcan when it blew in ST:2009

368. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@361

I just checked Paramount’s site again not one minute ago (10:32AM CST, 27 Nov 2012), and this “synopsis” was not present on either their “Latest News” page nor their “Press Releases” page. The latest Trek story on either was about the special IMAX preview on Dec 14.

So…again…not meaning to disparage Anthony’s sources, but I sure think we need some third-party confirmation on this.

369. Randall - November 27, 2012

Most horribly written bit of crap I’ve seen in ages. And yes, this is the consensus on other sites, even if it isn’t here. It’s high school freshman level bad, hitting the absolute bottom with the bizarre and hugely incorrect use of the word “detonate.” The synopsis sounds like it was written by a 14 year old.

Which of course means nothing in regards to the quality of the actual film… I hope.

370. Mark Lynch - November 27, 2012

Having re-read that synopsis again, I find myself thinking about this line;

“to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction”

To me, this does not necessarily mean, a man that is capable of mass destruction. It could be a weapon that is capable of mass destruction that can be wielded by one man.

Apologies if that has already been mentioned, but I did not want to trawl back through 369 posts to check!

371. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 27, 2012

If this is a dark movie and we will trek into darkness, does this mean that there will be no lens flares this time? ;)

372. BeauxBougher - November 27, 2012

Maybe it is Fleet Captain Garth of Izar. He was an iconic starfleet captain that went mad. Below is an excerpt from “http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Garth_of_Izar” :

“As a tactician, (Garth) was a pivotal figure in the Federation victory at the crucial Battle of Axanar(the Axanar battle apparently had something to do with holding the Federation together). His exploits were immortalized in his own time, becoming required reading at the Academy and inspiring members of a new wave of young officers (like Kirk).

His legacy was tarnished following the accident that left him badly maimed. The gentle beings of Antos IV nursed him in his darkest hour, and gifted him with their technique of cellular metamorphosis to repair his mangled body. In gratitude, he “OFFERED THEM THE GALAXY” – an offer refused. By this point, he was no longer the honored Captain of the history books, and his diseased mind found such offense in Antos’ rejection that he ordered his FORCES to annihilate the ENTIRE SPECIES. Whatever loyalty he once inspired in his crews vanished, and they refused his order. Federation authorities deemed it appropriate that Garth be sent to an asylum for the criminally insane. By 2269, he was a ward of Elba II.

Garth’s sanity may have abandoned him, but his cleverness remained… He manufactured a chemical explosive of substantial strength from available materials (and claimed it was the most potent weapon in history).”

The Enterprise comes along and Kirk and Spock beam down and find that Garth had taken control of the asylum.

“Garth revealed himself and declared his ambitions for galactic domination, backed by his new cadre of followers, ‘the future masters of the universe’.

The form of Kirk suited his long awaited moment of escape, and Garth contacted the Enterprise, asking to be beamed aboard. Chief engineer Scott, at the conn, answered the request with a chess-code phrase, ‘Queen to Queen’s level three’, dashing Garth’s hope for a prompt escape. Garth raged that his great escape had been so easily countered. Garth insisted he would ‘shatter every bone in Captain Kirk’s body’ to gain control of the Enterprise.”

So there you have it. Star Trek Canon facts to match the synopsis released.
1. An insane and clever historic Starfleet ‘fleet’ captain.
2. Kirk was inspired by this guy and could be test and compared to this fleet captain’s once greatness. Making him more experienced than Kirk and a very formable foe for Kirk and making him work for his captain’s chair.
3. Kirk’s fame of saving earth from Nero challenges Garth’s illustrious reputation.
4. The Battle of Axanar or Antos IV could be were Kirk goes after Garth.
5. Garth’s shapeshifting abilities could make him a weapon of mass destruction or the deadliest chemical he created could be.
6. The “password” Kirk and Scotty used to keep Garth from gaining control of the Enterprise was a 3D chess move “Queen to Queen’s level three”, indicating the possible “epic chess game” reference.
7. If Garth attempts to gain control of the Enterprise somehow, Kirk’s new love could possibly be in danger of having to be sacrificed.

Of course since this is all in an alternate reality, the events from the Original Series doesn’t have to match up or fall into place the same way.

373. Aurore - November 27, 2012

@ 368

I just checked Paramount’s site again not one minute ago (17:39 PM, 27 November 2012), and, indeed, this “synopsis” was not present on either their “Latest News” page nor their “Press Releases” page.

If I may ask….what have you decided regarding The Hobbit ?

:)

374. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@372

Just don’t think Garth has the kind of notoriety even within the Trek world to make a good movie villain. Maybe wrong, but just don’t think its so.

And I still think we need confirmation on the “synopsis.” Not a breath of it on startrek.com, either. Other sites are sucking this thing up as 100% legit, just strange it isn’t on Paramount’s site at all.

375. Kevin - November 27, 2012

With how dark this film sounds, will the 3rd one be a light-hearted affair?

So the bad guy is either Gary Mitchell or Garth of Izar then?

376. Aurore - November 27, 2012

Sorry, I meant 5: 39 PM.

:))

377. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@373

Well, we know the IMAX preview is obviously legit – right there on the site for the world to read – but for Paramount to attach it to a non-Paramount (WB) offering…makes me scratch my head a little. Also realize previews can also be assembled at the studio level, so in that vein, who knows :)

Don’t think I’m primed to plunk down $20 to find out. Hobbit just isn’t my thing.

378. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

377 Correction – argh – meant “assembled at the THEATER level”, not “studio.” And, obviously, Hobbit is the big release on that date, so its hard not to put those pieces together….just have to wait and see I guess.

379. Rico - November 27, 2012

I’m guessing it’s a version of Khan who is in Starfleet in this alternate universe. Gary Mitchell has been used in recent IDW JJ-Trek comics already. While they could change that and use him in the movies, I don’t think it’s him. Truthfully, I’d love it more if it was Mitchell – an old friend of Kirk’s. But I still think it’s Khan.

380. Rico - November 27, 2012

Oh, and maybe the word “detonate” is a literal thing in the movie in that the ships are somehow triggered to blow up via the warp core or some other device rather than just destroying the ships in some type of space battle.

381. Nony - November 27, 2012

Innnteresting. Though the synopsis rather sounds like someone was picking phrases out of The Big Book of Suspense Cliches (I am thoroughly sick of the phrase ‘weapon of mass destruction’), and ‘detonated’ brings to mind the image of Cumberbatch with a villainous mustache, sneaking into every ship’s cargo hold with a crate of Acme TNT and then cackling as he explodes them all simultaneously with a big red button marked ‘do not press’. I will assume that doesn’t actually happen in the film, because Cumberbatch didn’t have a villainous mustache in the leaked photos (though perhaps by that point he didn’t need it anymore).
The ‘friendships being torn apart’ bit does worry me. The closest friendship from the previous film (and my favourite relationship in the whole thing) was Kirk and Bones, which would make it the most obvious candidate for tearing poor Nony’s fragile heart out. Also, if Pike died, as people are suggesting, it would not only be upsetting and a waste of Bruce Greenwood’s awesomeness (why kill him off if you could have more Greenwood in another movie?!), it would also be seriously cliched writing. So I will sit here and hope these things don’t happen.

382. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

Anthony P.: What is your source for this ‘synopsis’? Did you get it directly from Paramount? Why haven’t you responded to questions about it?

383. scottevill - November 27, 2012

First time commenter here.

The heavy is described as being “from within their own organization,” presumably meaning Starfleet. We’ve seen set pics of Cumberbatch in uniform, so that seems like a safe conclusion at this point. The heavy is a rogue Starfleet officer, a counterpart for Kirk. Is he another wunderkind officer who shot up through the ranks, perhaps too fast, ending up decorated at first, but increasingly caught up in situations even seasoned officers might not be able to handle? Eventually, his luck ran out. He was in over his head on some mission and he snapped. What happened? A genocide?

Now he goes bad, epically bad, and Kirk is sent to terminate his command, paralleling the Conrad (and Apocalypse Now) and nicely illustrating the stakes for Kirk should he fail in the job, a job he was so sure–so cocksure–he was ready for despite his youth and inexperience.

Chris Pine recently said that if the first one was about “getting the chair,” this one is about “earning it.” To me, this sounds like that sort of plot, where he confronts and ultimately prevails against a heavy who — there but for the grace of god — could be Kirk himself.

And perhaps that will be an element of the heavy’s MO? An attempt to turn Kirk. (Incidentally, this was the Joker’s MO in Nolan’s Dark Knight, a movie the producers have expressed admiration for and intent to emulate on some level. This would be a good level!)

Interesting that this heavy is said to wreak havoc not just on the fleet but on “what it stands for.” So this rogue officer seriously damages the Federation militarily, but also morally. Does that suggest a Prime Directive violation on the order of what we see, again, in the Conrad (and Apocalypse Now)? A rogue officer setting himself up as the god king of a lesser developed people?

Everyone seems to be speculating now that this is Mitchell, but it does actually sound a lot more like the Garth of Izar backstory, doesn’t it? And interesting, that detail about it being a chess game. Queen to Queen’s level 3, anyone?

Garth would be a curveball, and an excellent one. Color me impressed if this is the movie. Impressed with their misdirection, too. I was so sure it was Khan a few months ago. Well-played, y’all.

384. Mario - November 27, 2012

Cumberbatch remind me Charlie X….

385. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

Was there not a *very* good, but fake, “synopsis” of Prometheus that circulated the ‘Net for a whlie before being debunked as some pretty darned good fanfic stuff?? Convincing, but fake.

Very hard for me not to be skeptical of this synopsis.

386. Jemini - November 27, 2012

363
I for one will be somewhat disappointed if this movie breaks Spock and Uhura up, for –ironically– pretty much the same reason: I do find him more interesting b/c the writers did, finally, TRY to develop a layer of his character that had never been explored/developed before. After all, even Roddenberry had wanted to do that but it wasn’t possible at the time. Spock is interesting to me because he’s half human AND half vulcan. I do understand that people don’t want him to be too human but I don’t think that making him too “vulcan” makes sense either or makes him more interesting. Just my opinion anyway ;)
I’m all for their relationship having to pass some test but a break up is stupid now ( why introduce it in the first movie then?) and tbh, after all the things that the writers had said about them it would look like fan (or in this case haters) pandering, to me. I’d never give up my ideas just because some people didn’t like them (even less when even more people actually liked them). I’d try to prove people wrong and change their mind, instead of letting them change mine ;)

387. ncx1701e - November 27, 2012

Really stating to think that Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Ben Finney

388. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

Ben Finney?? LOL

389. Nony - November 27, 2012

@ 386 Jemini
I agree! This new layer to Spock’s identity makes him fascinating to me in a way Nimoy’s Spock wasn’t (not that he was not fascinating – rather that I liked him for different reasons). Quinto’s Spock is very different, but he is, in a way, a braver Spock than we’ve seen before – one who isn’t afraid to embrace the other half of who he is, and who is apparently confident enough to balance the logic with the emotion and open himself up rather than just going ‘silly humans with your feelings, humph.’

390. Dave Schilling - November 27, 2012

What if the villain is…Kirk’s brother?

391. Bird of Prey - November 27, 2012

One thing is for sure, Khan is out of the race.
And Finney? No, I think, Cumberbatch will play Finnegan from “Shore Leave” ;-)

392. sean - November 27, 2012

After reading that synopsis, I don’t see how it could possibly be Khan. He’s a frozen guy from 1990, how would he be in Starfleet? If anything, this should now cast serious doubts on those Khan rumors.

393. Anonymous Coward - November 27, 2012

Lordy, I’ve never seen so many people fall for such blatant and terrible ad-speak.

This is how movies like Transformers get made and endlessly sequelized.

394. Eric Cheung - November 27, 2012

“Can anyone remember when we used to be explorers?”
–Jean-Luc Picard

Do they even make science fiction movies anymore? I’m not just talking about Star Trek, but do they make them anywhere else?

It doesn’t have to be overlong like The Motion Picture, and it doesn’t have to be as silly as The Voyage Home, but why not make the third film something like The Abyss or Master and Commander. Both films do a good job of integrating the military and science worlds in a way that isn’t simply another cat-and-mouse game between heroes and villains. Even District 9 and Children of Men are examples of gripping stories that don’t involve villains as the main plot line.

I was optimistic when the ideas floated around that the antagonist might not be a living thing this time around, but am fairly disappointed that this is the route taken for the tenth of twelve times, obviously a much higher percentage than seen in the shows.

I’m skeptical at best right now.

395. The Great Bird lives - November 27, 2012

References to this new movie that may be found in the comic books are simply Easter eggs that hint of what one may expect. The movie has to made for the general audience- not trek fans. Therefore the movie cannot reference the comic books because the general audience has not read them. If Gary Mitchell is the bad guy then the movie will have to proceed with this story line as if the comic book thing never happened. This makes me believe the villain is in fact Khan.

396. Planet Pandro - November 27, 2012

Still think it’s Khan, awakened early and secretly put in charge of Starfleet to utilize his superior leadership capability in the wake of Vulcan’s destruction. His ‘superior ambition” gets the better of him and he destroys the fleet in a gambit to rule and conquer all in his path.
This would at least make it a different enough variant of the character and his situations to not be a re-hash, and supports what we’ve seen so far (cumberbatch in starfleet uni, etc) Also would fit the terrorism allegory, Starfleet arms and trains someone who eventually turns on them and their ideology…

397. Aurore - November 27, 2012

“Was there not a *very* good, but fake, “synopsis” of Prometheus that circulated the ‘Net for a whlie before being debunked as some pretty darned good fanfic stuff?? Convincing, but fake.”

_______

I heard about it.
(I assume it was a rhetorical question….but; yes, there was.)

Regarding the synopsis, what bothers me now, is the fact that there seems to be no direct link to it.

Earlier, I believe one poster mentioned that something about that press release was off, to him/her.

But, I must admit that it is only when you stated that the synopsis/release was not on Paramount’s website as either a news item or a press release, that I started to actually pay attention…

We’ll see what happens next…

398. Stnh - November 27, 2012

What about charle?

399. Stnh - November 27, 2012

What about Charlie x???

400. MORN SPEAKS - November 27, 2012

The villian is Khan, plain and simple.

Reasons:
1 Anthony confirmed with inside sources
2 Many Latin actors were consulted for the role (ultimately Cumberbatch must’ve blown everyone away)
3 We’ve seen spy photos of Cumberbatch fending off a Vulcan nerve pitch
4 When making a sequel, you probably don’t want another alien villain again or something mystical
5 As a writer, producer, director, you don’t bring back Star Trek and not revive it’s most famous villian
6 2nd new movie = Wrath of Khan

What’s with all the crazy theorizing. It’s definitely Khan.

401. n1701ncc - November 27, 2012

maybe Cumberbatch is a Metron , Balok or Dr.Daystrom … I still think its Mitchell… Or could it be Cupcakes father…lol…having a little fun here…

402. Eminiar7 - November 27, 2012

394 @Eric Cheung: “Do they even make science fiction movies anymore?”

Have you seen “Cloud Atlas”? You might like it.

Neil Blokamp of “District Nine” fame also has a new movie on the way called “Elysium” about a space station where the 1% lives while the 99% slog it out on a decaying Earth.

Alfonso Cauron of “Children of Men” and “Y Tu Mama Tambien” fame has a movie about a falling satellite coming out, but unclear if that is more of a survival drama than science fiction.

403. VulcanFilmCritic - November 27, 2012

As others have said above the specific title “Star Trek Into Darkness” is probably a play on “Heart of Darkness,” or “Apocalypse Now.”
The thing that always fascinated me about these stories was how Col. Kurtz was a STELLAR officer before he went off the deep end. The mystery was alway what made him go bonkers and become so dangerous.
Of course, Kurtz had to be killed in those two stories, but James T. Kirk is no assassin. Every time he has been faced with killing someone in cold blood, as in “Specter of the Gun,” he has refused. Even after being urged by Spock to preemptively kill Gary Mitchell in “Where No Man has Gone Before,” he hesitated. Mitchell was his friend. For if Kirk kills, even for logical reasons, he’s no better than Kodos the Executioner in “Conscience of the King,” is he? Of course this part of Kirk’s formative years does not occur in this timeline.
I just finished re-watching Spielberg’s “Munich.” Being an assassin is not an easy thing, even if you are perfectly justified in killing. Even if it will save lives.
But maybe we will be thrown a curveball. Maybe the target of the assassination is not Kirk’s friend. Maybe it’s Kirk’s mortal “enemy,” Finnigan. There would be much more guilt associated with killing someone you already really hate for personal reasons, wouldn’t it?
I do hope we get into these human factors rather than just blowing things up in space. And please don’t give us “Revolution” in space either.

404. boborci - November 27, 2012

whats new?

405. Well Of Souls - November 27, 2012

@ 251. Blue Jay & @ 372. BeauxBougher
After going to the link Blue Jay provided & looking through Beaux’s comments I personally think Garth’s character would make for an exceptional addition. However still not sure that it would be Cumberbatch’s role. Maybe Peter Weller’s character? Not sure what gets more mind boggling, 2nd guessing new characters in the movie or the last comic’s take on the alternate of the alternate universe with possibly an additional alternate added.

406. BiggestTOSfanever - November 27, 2012

I think that since Admiral Pike is sort of Kirk’s father figure he will die too.

407. Oz - November 27, 2012

I was hoping for a “strange new worlds” type of story, but so be it. Gotta say Garth as the antagonist always made sense to me. (#372 nailed it in detail-well done.) I can imagine Mr. Orci and company re-watching the original episodes when thinking about potential stories….just like Harve Bennet did before Wrath of Khan. Garth of Izar would have a lot of potential….even if that episode was not great, his back story offers a lot to work with.

408. Planet Pandro - November 27, 2012

404.)

Not much, sir. Kinda quiet. ;-)

409. Reginald Barclay - November 27, 2012

When people applaud Star Trek for being “topical”, I don’t think they usually mean for retreading superficial, pop-culture-regurgitated terrorism allegories that have been completely exhausted by other films in the last 10 years.

Any chance the “one man weapon of mass destruction” is Khan, banished to a “war zone world” over which he rules in isolation, and they are on a hunt for him in order to coerce his assistance in taking down another internal threat?

410. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

Hey, 404, if you are the one and only true boborci, can you comment on whether this is a fake release or if Paramount only hires high school dropouts to write their PR? Either way, it’s pretty embarrassing.

411. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@404

hey boborci! Good to see you!

Hope you’re really you. Is the release authentic?

412. gov - November 27, 2012

Mr. Orci, I think many of us are a little dumbfounded and confused by the style of writing offered in the synopsis. Frankly, it seems as if it was written by an average high school student.

Some are even wondering still if it is a fake.

Any details?

413. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

Still not one sign of this “official” synopsis on Paramount.com….

414. Well Of Souls - November 27, 2012

Hello Bob, hope you had a great Thanksgiving. Any new tidbits of info to toss into the mix?

415. Aurore - November 27, 2012

404. boborci – November 27, 2012
“whats new?”
______

Yeah, yeah….

Is this synopsis the real deal or what?

As a reliable source, answer the question.

:)

416. Al - November 27, 2012

EW is carrying it for real http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness/

And Empire and IGN. All say “Paramount has released…”

It’s real

417. Nony - November 27, 2012

@404 boborci

Hello, Bob. Figured you’d show up! A question, if you’re in a mood to answer – ‘detonation': slightly mis-used dramatic word choice, or all of Starfleet literally exploding? I’m sort of hoping it’s the former. :)

418. Nony - November 27, 2012

(‘detonated’, rather.)

419. Ralph Pinheiro - November 27, 2012

Mr. Bob Orci,

Is the trailer ready? When will it be released? December is knocking at the door

420. Craiger - November 27, 2012

What if the villain is Sam Kirk? He was in the comics and looked like a bad ass.

421. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 27, 2012

Yes! More details!!!

DETAILS!!!

DETAILS!!!

DETAILS!!!

422. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

IMHO, the first 9 minutes + the trailer won’t show anything about Cumby. It will all focus on Wolf 359 shots of blowing up starships. There’s a beer bet that at the end of both we still won’t know who the villain is.

423. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@416

Everyone is carrying it as a retread of someone *else’s* having run it. I have yet to see anyone or anything that authenticates it *first hand*. Nothing on Paramount’s web site still, not on StarTrek.com.

Not saying its fake, but the absence of any actual authentication combined with the rather teen-beatish writing style sure leaves room for continued skepticism.

boborci, could you settle this once and for all?

424. boborci - November 27, 2012

259 hatrick

i dont laugh at fellow fans.

425. Jamziz - November 27, 2012

Who ever wrote that press release / synopsis has made some serious grammatical errors.

426. Emperor Mike of the Empire - November 27, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. if that is really you. Was the release your idea. or was it J.Js.

427. RaveOnEd - November 27, 2012

Hey, Bob! There are quite a few fans who have pointed out that it looks to be a Sci-Fi version of “Heart of Darkness”, and the synopsis looks to point that way.

Without asking (it would spoil it if you answered anyway), I think it would be a fantastic opportunity to do that! This would be a way to show this universe’s reaction to how they would stop someone who violates the Prime Directive (or is that General Order different in this universe?)

Looking forward to the movie!

428. Smike - November 27, 2012

It’s GARY MITCHELL. They presumably “killed” him off in that comic book, in a way not unlike the TOS episode in the old timeline. So most fans know what happened to him and he will now be brought back to life to go berserk and destroy the very Starfleet that deserted him. Well, it sounds like Gary Mitchell will play Khan in this one :-)

429. Starfleet Sideburns - November 27, 2012

@386 Jemini & @389 Nony
I, too, welcome the change in tone in Spock’s character. It’s not that I don’t like Nimoy’s Spock, because I do, but he was a pretty tortured soul. He didn’t know how to balance his two halves and chose the rather extreme route of trying to be more Vulcan than the Vulcans, viewing his human part as a weakness. People who insist that the should stay that way come across as a bit… mean to me. I know we are talking about fictional people here, but when I like certain characters I’m rooting for good things to happen to them, rather than them having to spend their whole lives in a perpetual state of angst because they try to suppress their emotions. If you want to see that Spock, go see TOS (I do that myself regularly).

I’m all for doing things differently in the nuTrek universe – what would be the point of a reboot if all the writers could do was to rehash old themes? I think they are trying to give Spock a better balance, which in my opinion is just as interesting and valid character arc as old Spock’s struggle to keep his human side in check. Those who feel that “humanizing” Spock takes something away from the character are entitled to their opinion of course, but, like Nony said, I think it’s a new and fascinating layer to his identity.

430. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

@426: A studio’s PR dept doesn’t get its marching orders from writers or directors. This comes from the suits upstairs.

431. Drunk Garak - November 27, 2012

Forget Heart of Darkness, I think STID is clearly just a remake of Zero Dark Thirty.

432. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

@427: The villain is Jor-El brought back through SingerEffects and fatter than ever in a (Delta Vega?) cave mumbling “the horror, the horror…” :)

433. Platitude - November 27, 2012

So excited for this movie! Can’t wait! Total faith in J.J. and the new cast, the last one more than earned it.

434. Clinton - November 27, 2012

” Only family he has left.” Are we losing the rest of the Kirk family? Pike? I wonder.

435. gov - November 27, 2012

the more (and more) I read over it….the more (and more) I believe that it is fake.

436. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 27, 2012

Really think its Gary Mitchell, but i would 100 percent be ok with Garth, or Gary seven. I like that idea of Sam Kirk but its unlikely in any case, I will be happy with whoever the villian just really crossing my fingers its not khan, or anything to do with SS Botany Bay.

437. Dominic - November 27, 2012

If it IS Mitchell (and I’m hoping it is for nostalgic reasons and iconic potential) I was thinking the nine-minute IMAX trailer may “explain away” his death in the comics. A lot can be said in nine movie minutes. Just that much more time for Nero’s backstory would’ve been pretty cool.

438. Optimistic Doodle - November 27, 2012

Still wondering what Spock is doing in that ‘volcano suit’ and how that ties into this synopsis…

439. Not Concerned - November 27, 2012

Well, pretty sure it’s not Khan. \\

Maybe for the 3rd one.

440. BRF - November 27, 2012

Khan is still a possibility, or some variation on the character. I can easily imagine him being “reimagined” as the product of genetic engineering (more relevant than ever) started by well-meaning/misguided/whatever scientists within Starfleet. I mean, they were never, surely, going to stick with the ’90s Eugenics Wars origin story. And no stretch to imagine K with abilities beyond or at least different from what we got the first time around.

441. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

OK, this will make sense only to people who did a little too much LDS at Berkeley:

On the comic cover Kirk has what sure looks like an imprint of the Planet Killer on his uniform. So after Matt Decker is killed by running into the maw of the beast, Willard (Cumby) shows up. Unlike the pseudo-likable hunk he was in the V-Ger runin, he is driven by a mad desire for revenge against the Federation he works out a way to commandeer the Killer… and pulls a Wolf 359 against the fleet.

Yeah… I know… not likely! ;)

442. JRT! - November 27, 2012

Hey Bob! Hope you had a great Thanksgiving! How was London? Did you show any footage while there? Hope TASM 2 script is going well,look forward to it. Still loving the ST ongoing comic and hope what you said when I asked about it being tied to the movie is still true. Looking forward to a trailer.
And so what if Cumberbatch is British and Mitchell is American!? Cavill is British,Superman is an American icon. Not the first,or last,time a Brit will play an American character,if that’s the case.
Have fun y’all!
J-R!

443. PaulB - November 27, 2012

#382 – Anthony Pascale already repeatedly commented on this, so instead of ordering him around, why don’t you go back through the earlier comments and read what he said? Just because you’re too lazy and petulant to read the frakkin’ comments doesn’t mean Anthony hasn’t answered.

Same for your repeated orders to Anthony P. that he answer your question about the trailer playing with The Hobbit. That’s been well established repeatedly, and Mr. Pascale isn’t your personal Siri to order around.

(sigh) I used to like my fellow Trekkies a lot more, back before the Internet brought the numbskulls out of hiding…

444. Richard - November 27, 2012

Based on name alone, I can’t see it being Garth of Izar. Too cheesy of a name. Can you imagine announcing in the year 2012 that your 150 million dollar movie’s villain is named Garth of Izar? People already think Star Trek is cheesy as is without any extra help.

Not that ‘Gary Mitchell’ is any great shakes either as a villain name, though maybe they’ll give him a new moniker once he goes god-like.

Those going on about how Gary Mitchell ‘died’ in the comics. That can easily be explained away as I’ve mentioned earlier. His god-like powers could have caused Kirk to imagine he killed Mitchell, ot his powers could allow him to survive or be resurrected. That’s the thing about super god-like powers, you can use them to create whatever plot twists you like.

And you can explain what happened in the comics using a similar device as the first film did with Nimoy Spock’s mind meld with young Kirk. SImple as that.

445. Dr. Cheis - November 27, 2012

“detonated?” WTF?

Sounds like something I might have written in middle school while searching for big-sounding words that don’t really fit with the intended meaning.

I’m going to just ignore that and chalk it up to poor writing. I mean, they can’t really mean to say that the entire fleet was destroyed via explosives…

446. CaptainRickover - November 27, 2012

I say the enemy is Kirk’s brother George, not Khan and not Mitchell.

447. Superman - November 27, 2012

Folks, it’s going to be Gary Mitchell as the villain, no matter what ANYONE is seeing about the “canonicity” of the comics.

Remember “The Lost Experience?” Was supposed to be canon…and was ignored.

The same will happen with the comics.

It’s Gary Mitchell, he’s the only man who could A) withstand a Vulcan nerve pinch and hold his own in a fight with a Vulcan and B) could be considered a “one man weapon of mass destruction.”

Unless they’re going to make Trelane dark and edgy, there’s no other logical choice here.

\S/

448. Hat Rick - November 27, 2012

That’s good, Mr. Orci. Nice to know.

Thanks for the response.

449. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

Well, there is the usual meaning of detonate and then there is this:

http://detonatefestival.co.nz/?page_id=261

At the risk of being labelled simple and one dimensional, why so much attention given to the villain? Whoever the villain(s) are, what matters is the apparent effect their actions have on the main character, Captain Kirk.

Unfortunately, the synopsis leaves me rather sad because once again, you have this bollocks of Kirk basically being a *selfish person who ends up only seeing the Enterprise and crew as his only real family. Perhaps his mother, brother, grandparent(s), cousins, uncle… may die as the result of the villain’s actions, but an avenging manhunt and where I am assuming he will never be able to love another (in terms of an intimate relationship) blah, blah, blah. This seems to be replacing (sensual/sexual) love, ie love requiring intimacy, letting go of fears, being trusting and trustworthy on a deep level, putting up with highs and lows etc with a kind of objectaphilia and celibacy. Kirk does seem to have taken several steps backwards, or so it seems to me on the face of it.

Why should the Enterprise (an inanimate object) and crew, most of whom Kirk will never really come to know in any real and personal way, be more “family”, be more important than any genuine attachments he may form with another person? As important, perhaps, but not more important!

I thought you, the writers, were better than that and certainly Kirk needs to grow beyond that state.

*Kirk was not selfish in Star Trek 09. Why should he be so in STID, until his need to go on some sort of personal avenging manhunt etc somehow presumably makes him less selfish? I would have thought that becoming an avenger on a personal mission was the ultimate form of selfishness.

450. R. Banks - November 27, 2012

I think “detonated” in this context is meant to be taken figuratively, rather than literally. Kind of an odd choice of words. Still, the synopsis definitley has added to my anticipation of the film, it sounds great!

I’m still leaning towards Gary Mitchell as the baddie of the film. If it’s true, I think Cumberbatch could really put a devious new edge on the character that could really make for an updated, iconic, and unforgettable villain.

Can’t Wait!

451. PEB - November 27, 2012

Section 31. There have been hints in a few of the comics and they could have ties to Gary. I’m still betting on Gary Mitchell but Section 31 would make for a good plot point in a modern Trek film. There, that’s my 2 cents.

452. Pensive's Wetness - November 27, 2012

*munches on Popcorn* Well, if this isnt adding a 6-pack of beer cans to the stew, i dunno what is. 450+ b*tching, rabid, hopelly happy and eager Trekkers…

my 2 cents is Gary Mitchel, somehow…

453. Lt. Bailey - November 27, 2012

Actually this makes it more confusing…which could be OK. Afterall, we will not be sure of anything until sit in the darkness of the theater to watch it unfold before us.

454. JR - November 27, 2012

Let’s hope it does not involve time travel or parallel universes…. Just to the the timeline you have established. Perhaps one day, they will get back to ‘exploring strange new worlds’?

455. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

#449.

Take it easy, this is only a very brief, (albeit, not the most well-written) plot synopsis.

456. wesley w - November 27, 2012

“sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew”

Does this mean they will kill kirk’s brother is the movie

457. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 27, 2012

“they were never, surely, going to stick with the ’90s Eugenics Wars origin story. And no stretch to imagine K with abilities beyond or at least different from what we got the first time around.”

What makes you so sure of this? They did a pretty good job keeping the original series/movies continuity as having still exsisted by having Nimoy back as Prime Spock.
And lets not forget, The timeline prior to the Kelvins destruction is still the same as it was durring the TOS era.
That means that Khan left fleeing earth in cryogenic sleep aboard the SS Botany Bay in the 1990s. Now if they just have some story element like because of the destruction of Vulcan and the shift in Gravitational pull that resulted the flight path of the Botany Bay changed and resulted in it being discovered much earlier and by someone else instead thats another thing all togeather,

And again I still dont think the villian is Khan.

458. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

@454, with literally millions of inhabitable planets in the galaxy, this storyline does seem a little “narrow” in scope… but we’ll see! Remember that making a $150 million + movie has little to do with the higher aspirations of the science fiction genre and everything to do with putting butts in seats for a two hour thrill ride. Yeah, that’s not the Star Trek I grew up with, but it’s the new reality of this century.

459. wesley w - November 27, 2012

“sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew”

Does this mean they will kill kirk’s brother in this movie ?

460. Captain Numbskull - November 27, 2012

I’m so glad Anthony P is back working on his site again. He is, after all, my personal Trek Siri! HAHAHA!!

Anywhoo, methinks the villain is Gary Mitchell or a knockoff of him. It doesn’t matter if Mitchell is British or American. It doesn’t matter if his character died in the comic. All that matters is what is up in that movie screen.

I’m hoping this will be a great film. I have some concerns, but an open mind. I don’t think Trek should be dark all the time. Wish it would lighten up a d get back to being about exploring space and running into a challenge “out there, that away!”.

Star Trek should not be about defending Earth or saving the universe all the time. The best episodes of Trek were the ones where the threat was to our crew and seeing how they resolve it with a big dose of action adventure! Having something to say is good…but personally, my favorite Treks were not the preachy ones.

461. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

I’m also not sure we can take the synopsis with anything more than a very big grain of salt. We obviously don’t fully know, nor understand, the context of everything described, and how it all fits in the grand scheme of things.

I do think it is the official synopsis, though not necessarily an absolute accurate description of the events of the sequel.

There is still a LOT we DON’T know.

462. JimmySaville - November 27, 2012

Exploring strange new worlds? What for a 2 hour movie? I can’t think of anything more boring. Give us explosions and huge events like the synopsis and not a snorefest like some of the Trekkers on here are suggesting is the magic of Star Trek. It simply isn’t the magic of Star Trek. Even Roddenberry understood that it didn’t sell to the masses. That’s why The Cage did not work and did not sell the show. Instead we got an episode where man takes on God and it ends in a fist fight involving a giant laser. That was 1965! Nothing has changed!

463. VulcanFilmCritic - November 27, 2012

@404boborci
I hope “Star Trek Into Darkness” will be “new.” I hope it will NOT be simply a re-imagining of “Where No Man Has Gone Before.”
I hope I will see “Star Trek” in a completely different light.
I hope I will question what kind of men the new Kirk and Spock are.
I hope that I will find my mouth dry an hour into the film because my mouth is agape.

464. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

I do wonder if the producers (JJ Abrams…) were not after Benedict Cumberbatch all along, however, Cumberbatch’s own work schedules seemed to conflict with the tight that Paramount/Bad Robot were/are working to in order to get STID released on due date, 17 May 2013.

And then a small window opened… maybe a chat to a *Warners Bros executive who then has a chat to another Warners executive responsible for bringing the Hobbit to the big screen and somehow, not only does Peter Jackson have Benedict Cumberbatch to voice his bad boy dragon and then later to appear as necromancer, but JJ Abrams has the same actor to play another bad boy. In the Hobbit, he plays personalities from the distant fabled past and in Star Trek from a fabled future.

I don’t know what the preview has, or what the trailer has, but it would make sense to even just hear something of that amazing and unique Cumberbatch somewhere in the preview/trailer, if not see him as well. Later, when STID comes to screens, perhaps what will precede it will be a trailer to the second Hobbit movie…

*Warner Bros (television) is responsible for bringing to the small screen the JJ Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman creation, FRINGE.

465. gov - November 27, 2012

ORIGINALLY …”When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

OR

“When the crew of the Enterprise is called home, they find THAT an unstoppable force of terror <OMIT from" within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving THEIR world in a state of crisis.”

And let’s go ahead and replace the word “detonated” with DECIMATED. Something tells me that’s what they meant to say anyway.

466. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

#404:

I’m curious, Bob: Did you all do a massive forehead smack when you read the poorly written, typo-ridden “press release” that was clearly written by someone without any writing background?

467. Mad Man - November 27, 2012

Meh. I so can’t wait to not watch this. I’m not a troll, I just have zero anticipation for this movie. And that sucks. I love Star Trek and I want to look forward to this movie. But I can’t. Maybe a trailer would help? But, as of now, I’m just meh about it.

That plot synopsis sounds like a cheesey low budget movie on Syfy Saturday night.

468. Every_Day_New - November 27, 2012

Please, please, please, J.J., no Gary Mitchell, no Khan, no Lord Garth, no going back to the original canon period! We’ve gone back to that well way too many times already. With Star Trek you’ve opened up endless possibilities for new stories, new villains, new heroes, etc. Give us something fresh!

Here’s one fan that’s looking forward to something NEW!

469. Joseph F. Berenato - November 27, 2012

My money’s on Garth of Izar.

470. D.V. - November 27, 2012

I’m so tired of explosions and “dark, gritty” action movies. I miss crazy, weird science fiction.

I miss the whales.

471. JimmySaville - November 27, 2012

#467 for Mad Man:

In Summer 2013 director J.J. Abrams will deliver a low budget cheesefest!

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find someone has forgotten to water the plants, leaving Scotty’s garden in a state of crisis.

Captain Kirk leads a landing party to a commercial garden center to purchase a one man watering can and some much needed decking furniture.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic weekend of gardening, weeds will be strimmed, plants will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: Boothby, a five year old groundskeeper at Starfleet Academy.

472. racaca - November 27, 2012

@468

“Please, please, please, J.J., no Gary Mitchell, no Khan, no Lord Garth,”

I don’t get it. The movie is already done. You’re two years late.

473. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

The synopsis points to one world caught in a war and the main perpetrator is there. When I read “detonated” in the context of the synopsis, it is more to do with the understanding, the beliefs, the ethics held dear within the minds and hearts of loyal, trusting members of Starfleet being crumpled, set alight, destroyed by what is taking place within Starfleet, rather any literal explosions, although such explosions could also take place. Trust, love and loyalty are questioned, nobody is sure of anything anymore, imposters are everywhere, people are pitted against one another – a real divide and rule scenario. Notions of right and wrong become skewered and often times it ends up with people not doing what is right but what is easy/easier… (Dumbledore from Harry Potter)

Of course, arms manufacturers and dealers make a fortune from such situations, as they have always done and unfortunately, it seems, always will.

474. drumvan - November 27, 2012

416 – EW is carrying it for real

that link leads to an error page. as does a blog title regarding the synopsis on ew’s own site. “i’ve smelt that perfume before and both times i’ve smelt a rat”.

475. aligee - November 27, 2012

my money is on spocks brain!

476. Every_Day_New - November 27, 2012

@472

Yeah…story of my life. Just some wishful (albeit non-sensical <–is that even a word??) thinking.

477. Shado - November 27, 2012

sounds like the doomsday machine part II –

478. CJS - November 27, 2012

Here, I rewrote this synopsis. Not as much as I wanted, because I tried to preserve as much of the original language as possible:

In the Spring* 2013, pioneering director J.J. Abrams will deliver an explosive action thriller that takes Star Trek Into Darkness.

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find that an unstoppable force of terror within their own organization has destroyed Starfleet and now threatens everything it stands for, leaving Earth and the Federation in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads the manhunt to a war torn world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

As our heroes become engaged in an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships torn apart, and sacrifices made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

*May 17th is in the Spring.

479. Garth Vader - November 27, 2012

Garth Mitchell Khan of Tribble!!!! It’s just gotta be!!!

480. Richard - November 27, 2012

#470: I share your angst. I miss weird and out there sci fi too (God I miss Farscape!). But that sort of stuff just isn’t commercially viable at the box office right now. But hang tight, these things are cyclical, it’ll come around again.

481. Greg H. - November 27, 2012

The only thing wrong with this synopsis is that it uses jj abrams and “pioneer” in the same sentence.

pioneer: 1.inventor or innovator: a person or group that is the first to do something or that leads in developing something new

In regards to star trek I’ve seen nothing from jar jar and his cadre of fools that even come close to new or innovative. They continue to reconstitute characters, plots and villains from already-told-tales…. all the while destroying the essence of star trek.

Not only is this lazy and an insult to a time-honored franchise, but it should be considered as highly embarrassing to anyone who would hope to call themselves a creative artist.

Shame on you jar jar. When it comes to trek, YOU are the one-man weapon of mass destruction.

482. DSquires1119 - November 27, 2012

My guess is that in this context “detonated” does not refer to the destruction of ships but something more internal, like loyalties. I am thinking there is some kind of an anti-alien movement within star feet. This may be because lots of Vulcans are settling on Earth. So something akin to a civil war. I still think Peter Weller’s character is related in some way to his Paxton character in “Enterprise”, who was trying to purge Earth from any alien influences.

483. Michael Hall - November 27, 2012

This actually sounds intriguing, sort of. I may actually pay to see this film after all. :-)

484. Captain Peabody - November 27, 2012

That is incredibly awkward prose. “Detonated the fleet and everything it stands for”? “Unstoppable force of terror”? “man hunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction”? It’s like they tried to cram every filmic cliche they could into two paragraphs.

In other news, the content of the synopsis sounds very interesting and potentially great. I just hope the modern-day parallels aren’t *too* obvious.

Section 31? Gary Mitchell? Charles Evans? Some random guy augmented with alien technology? The possibilities are limitless, but interesting. Godspeed, gentlemen!

485. somethoughts - November 27, 2012

Epic

486. PEB - November 27, 2012

They’re going into a war zone? Time to meet the Klingons!

487. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

The site link to the EW release of this “synopsis” now returns an “Error Page.” The story is no longer among their 27 Nov posts in their insidemovies listings.

I’ve tweeted the author of that article and asked for info he has on confirmation, but not heard back yet. It could be a legitimate technical problem, or perhaps the story has been pulled for other reasons.

488. Optimistic Doodle - November 27, 2012

I imagine the events from the 1st movie must’ve had a major impact on the workings of Starfleet. Perhaps creating divisions within… (e.g. peacekeeping armada vs. more offensive)

Maybe the trailer will shed more light upon this synopsis.

489. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

At least one other site is starting to hold out the notion that this synopsis is fake, because apparently it has not come to other media outlets through conventional Paramount sources *such as a press release*:

http://comicbook.com/blog/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness-official-synopsis-appears-online/

490. Jack - November 27, 2012

465. ‘They find that’ is the wrong one. Every editor I’ve ever had eliminates the thats in those situations.

Anthony, any chance of a lis/review of disproven rumours?

491. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

Maybe this “synopsis” was just made up at the last minute by the writers to distract us from the recent trailer release controversy?

492. Richard - November 27, 2012

$489: The original statement came directly from Paramount’s press site. What might have happened is maybe it ended up on Paramount’s press site early in error before anybody had a chance to proofread it or get an official press release ready.

493. Jack - November 27, 2012

“The only thing wrong with this synopsis is that it uses jj abrams and ‘pioneer’ in the same sentence.”

Maybe the guy can drive a wagon and churn his own butter.

494. FusionVok - November 27, 2012

I’m still holding firm that it’s fake. Bless Anthony’s heart for double checking his sources and declaring it legit, but it just doesn’t feel right. Aside from the way it’s written, it lacks some of the typical fanfare of “PARAMOUNT PICTURES PRESENTS, A BAD ROBOT PRODUCTION, for immediate release” <—that sort of thing

495. Sebastian S. - November 27, 2012

Terror from within it’s own organization does NOT sound at all like Khan to me; and it also explains Cumberbatch wearing a Starfleet uniform with pointy sideburns. He’s a starfleet officer, and NOT Khan Noonian Singh.
Thank goodness!

I don’t care if he is playing Gary Mitchell (IDW comics be damned; Cumberbatch would be awesome in the role), or Garth of Izar, as long as it’s not Khan. That mistake (both in concept and in casting) would’ve made the movie a laughing stock. Having just seen “Life Of Pi” this past weekend, I can only imagine how silly it would’ve been if the older version of Pi Patel had been played by a pale, blue-eyed Englishman.

And is it too much to hold out hope that we might still have an original villain in this movie?

But at any rate, I’m officially both relieved and excited.
Can’t wait…. :-D

496. Jack - November 27, 2012

491. What trailer release controversy?

497. Richard - November 27, 2012

#493: Well played :)

498. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

#496.

The recent Disney acquistion of Lucasfilm (“Star Wars”) apparently forced the hand of J.J Abrams to release a nine-minute preview in front of “The Hobbit”. Everybody’s been trying to deny it all.

499. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@492 When was it on Paramount’s press site?

No disrespect, but I’ve not heard *one* source indicate they’ve seen this *first-hand* to have appeared *direct from an authenticated Paramount source*. Every post I’ve read over the course of the day is a “XYZ is reporting that Paramount has released an official synopsis of Trek” with formatting in the vein of what @494 states. That’s what press releases look and sound like, not this.

Again, maybe it truly is 100% authentic, but its very, very weird, and (without regard to its Trek ties) just doesn’t read like a professionally written press release. That’s all. As meticulous as Abrams and company have been about not releasing *anything* about this movie, I can’t believe they’d suddenly become careless about something as big as an “official plot synopsis.”

That’s why I have been and continue to be skeptical. If I see it on Paramount’s website, that will end the uncertainty.

500. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

Argh. Correction: Meant to say that “I’m looking for a press release with formatting in the vein of what @494 states.”

My kingdom for an editable forum :)

501. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

Two things are patently obvious, people:

1) The press release is a fake.
2) Khan is not in the movie.

502. SolitaryJustice - November 27, 2012

I’d put money on Gary Mitchell. Starfleet officer. Special powers. Kirk’s friend, one to be sacrificed for his family (crew)’s protection. Gary Mitchell. Who wants to bet?

503. Sebastian S. - November 27, 2012

# 501

Agreed.

If he were, he’d be a side-plot or shoehorned in VERY awkwardly. My guess is that he was probably the villain in early versions of the script but was dropped during the final drafts.

A ‘one-man weapon of mass destruction’ sounds a hell of a lot more like Gary Mitchell (IDW comic version aside). And Cumberbatch would be wonderfully cast as well (if that were the case). Personally? I’m still holding out for a new character, but I’d be totally OK with Mitchell or even Garth of Izar (excuse me, Loooord Garth! ;-D ).

504. gov - November 27, 2012

fake fake fake

505. Perplex - November 27, 2012

This is now what…the third weapon of mass destruction in a row? Jesus…

506. FusionVok - November 27, 2012

505: maybe fourth?

The Son’a ship in INS
The Scimitar in NEM
The Narada in ST09
The whatever this is in STID

To join the Genesis Device and the humpback whale probe from II and IV?

507. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

Everywhere you read, the synopsis reads the same:

https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=official+paramount+picture+star+trek+into+darkness+synopsis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

I couldn’t give a damn who the villain is…most villains, ie people bent on wanton, needless and preventable destruction in order to achieve domination, whether it be personal or for some higher power or ideology, are weak in mind and soul – lost in delusion, anger and/or greed. These motives can be manifest in different ways and it often means that the protagonists need to be able to see through the deceit…

How dealing with such people impacts on the mental and physical well being of those whose hearts and minds have/had the capacity to know and exercise wisdom and compassion is of greater concern to me and that is where the really good and telling story is told. Movies have a finite amount of time to tell a story…

508. olly - November 27, 2012

had to laugh reading on twitter than Cumberbatch fans were giving JJ Abrams letters for Benedict at JJ’s speech today.

509. Richard - November 27, 2012

#506: The Borg Cube in FC. The energy ribbon in Gen.

510. gov - November 27, 2012

entertainment weekly seems to have been the most “mainstream” outlet to publish the synopsis. And they have removed it from their site.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness/

it’s not on any other site’s entertainment sections. (usatoday, yahoo entertainment, cnn showbiz etc)

511. Greg H. - November 27, 2012

#493 to #481

Good one. I had overlooked that possibility.

Unfortunately it doesn’t alter the thrust of my message or offer course correction on jar jar’s frontier.

512. Anthony Pascale - November 27, 2012

Guys

I’m not sure what is up with all the conspiracy theories lately. Firstly, bear in mind that Paramount dont put everything on their public site that they make available to news outlets. So once again let me state clearly. This is an official release from Paramount Pictures marketing. I got it from the same press site that other news sites got it. Just to double check (which is why we posted it an hour after some others) I checked with Paramount to make sure it was legit and it was confirmed. If you must know the synopsis was posted as a downloadable MSWord document titled “star-trek-into-darkness—synopsis-approved” and the topline in the document is “STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS – Approved Synopsis 11/26/12″ with the rest of the document containing the synopsis above.

All that being said, I would not be surprised to see a different version or versions of a summary or synopsis used for various different media purposes in the future. But this is what there is for now.

513. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

The Paramount Pictures website has NOTHING about Star Trek Into Darkness in its news, press releases or any other section. Obviously there is nothing in the trailer section, because STID’s trailer has not been released yet, but there is nothing anywhere else, it seems, so where are these “news” websites getting their information?

Anthony Pascale – please help here. Bob Orci – what’s new?

514. Jason Tchir - November 27, 2012

498. Oh that again. I don’t buy it. They had to market the damned movie eventually.

And even if it was the case, what difference does it make? I guess it allows critics of JJ’s secrecy to feel like they can gloat…

515. Clinton - November 27, 2012

Over 500 comments?!? I think this shows how starved we are for news on the new film. That footage/trailer can’t get here soon enough!

516. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

OK, Anthony, you just answered my question just as I was posting it…Thank you.

517. gov - November 27, 2012

Anthony, I think we’re all willing to take your word for it. But I would think that you WOULD understand what is up with the conspiracy theories.

You must admit that it seems VERY poorly written. At least enough to spark doubt from the masses.

518. Pat Payne - November 27, 2012

I called it! They’re doing “Heart of Darkness!” Star Trek literary homages FTW!

519. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

@512, Anthony, I think that the main reason why it’s smelling fishy is that it’s obviously written by a grade schooler and EW has pulled the page. Is there any chance whatsoever that some devious SOB has snuck this into the press site along the same lines as the Google Buys ICOA for $400M hoax?

520. Curious Cadet - November 27, 2012

135. MJ
“I just hope that this movie isn’t some big metaphor on George Bush and 9-11. If so, its too late — 90% of us all all know we overacted to 9-11 and their were no WMD, yada, yada, yada…don’t need to no Star Trek lesson to help dumb ole me figure this out for myself.”

MJ, with all due respect, the US just narrowly dodged electing a candidate who wanted to increase military spending, and campaigned on doing whatever it took to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons, claiming that eventuality was only months away … so I seriously don’t think that particular lesson has been learned by at least 48% of the population.

Besides, this threat in the movie is real. Now the question remains whether it’s a faction of Starfleet taking matters into its own hands, but aside from the civil liberties violations, the Bush administration did not destroy its own country.

Whatever the bigger message, the most dissapointing thing they are doing with this new movie is going back to the same tired old formula of “evil villain is bent on destroying the Federation.”

521. SoonerDave - November 27, 2012

@512

Anthony, I don’t think there’s anything afoot about “conspiracy theories,” just that the release seemed very amateurish for an outfit like Paramount. It sure didn’t read like a press release, and we’ve all learned to be careful about such things when elements don’t seem quite right. And we’ve already had one bogus promotion on STID come to pass, so (as I noted in another post) given how careful Abrams has been, couldn’t see why they’d be any less so with something this important.

If its legit, its legit, that’s fine. Just seemed rather thrown together and roughly written, that’s all.

522. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

496. Jack

The controversy is over the fact that the trailer was originally announced to be shown with non-Imax Hobbit. That has since been debunked (maybe), with no further clarification from Anthony P.

523. BRF - November 27, 2012

@457:

I wrote: “they were never, surely, going to stick with the ’90s Eugenics Wars origin story. And no stretch to imagine K with abilities beyond or at least different from what we got the first time around.”

You wrote: “What makes you so sure of this? They did a pretty good job keeping the original series/movies continuity as having still exsisted by having Nimoy back as Prime Spock.”

I just don’t see it. A major studio is not going to ask a mainstream audience (and that’s the goal here) to suspend/upend their memories of the 1990s in order to sustain the Khan origin story as laid out in the ’60s. It would be audaciously fantastic if they did, but.

In fact, I suspect if the subject had ever needed to come up again in the original timeline someone would be there with an explanation of how the turbulence of those years had screwed up all the records so badly that we can’t really be sure when Khan left Earth, etc., etc. (Or has this already been done in a novelization or some such?)

524. Aurore - November 27, 2012

“Firstly, bear in mind that Paramount dont put everything on their public site that they make available to news outlets.”
_________

So unfair….tantrum-inducing even…

” If you must know the synopsis was posted as a downloadable MSWord document titled “star-trek-into-darkness—synopsis-approved” and the topline in the document is “STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS – Approved Synopsis 11/26/12″ with the rest of the document containing the synopsis above.”

__________

I want to know everything.

525. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

#512:

Anthony, thanks very much for explaining that. That said, this isn’t a case of conspiracy theories. It’s a case of the press release being very poorly written. It reads like a middle-schooler with a C grade in English composed it, given the awkward and amateurish phrasing (How does one “detonate” a fleet? What the hell is a “war-zone world?”), the typos and the fact that May is not in the summer. As such, it’s difficult for people to comprehend Paramount approving and releasing it. That they apparently did is kind of embarrassing, really.

526. cd - November 27, 2012

Sounds like Gary Mitchell.
Sounds like Garth of Izar.
Sounds like Gary Seven.
Sounds like Ben Finney.
Sounds like Finnegan.
Sounds like Khan.
Sounds like crap.

527. T'Cal - November 27, 2012

Cautiously optimistic. “One man threatening the safety of the Federation by attacking Earth,” sounds anything but fresh. I doubt that this will be some liberal slant analogy of recent times as the recent election was way too close and JJA & Co. would be alienating about half the population (read: movie goers). Still, I smell a good conspiracy and perhaps this will be the chance for the too-fast-rising Jim Kirk to prove himself. I’m hoping for a well-defined, sympathetic character in Cumberbatch’s role; he’s fully capable of playing such as long as the writers do the good job they are capable of. We’ll see.

528. Trekzilla - November 27, 2012

#525 — It’s not surprising at all that the press release was so poorly written. You should see some of the college papers these days! We’re becoming a nation of illiterates!

529. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Jeez, now all the secrecy is coming back to bite us in the A##. Now a lot of us aren’t even believing the official stuff.

530. Thorny - November 27, 2012

“called back home”

I wonder if they’re going the Indiana Jones route, with the opening scene being unrelated to the rest of the movie. It would be great if they recreated the final minutes of a classic episode like “Immunity Syndrome” or “Doomsday Machine” and then have the Enterprise called back to Earth for some emergency which is the main plot of the movie.

That also means the first nine minutes shown with “The Hobbit” wouldn’t spoil anything.

531. Craiger - November 27, 2012

What if they officially confirm the bad guys name. Will no one believe that until we see Cumberbatch saying the bad guy’s name?

532. Richard - November 27, 2012

#530: Even then people will be like, “He’s just saying that so Kirk THINKS he’s Gary Mitchell.” :)

533. NuFan - November 27, 2012

Spock and Uhura break up! Spock becomes an alcoholic and falls into darkness!

534. Aurore - November 27, 2012

“What if they officially confirm the bad guys name. Will no one believe that until we see Cumberbatch saying the bad guy’s name?”
_________

If they officially confirm it is Khan…I’ll believe it when I see it.

In June 2013. ‘Simple as that.

:)

P.S : Kidding. It won’t be Khan, anyway…

535. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 27, 2012

Well that puts the Khan rumor to bed! Khan wasn’t in Starfleet… not in this timeline nor the prime. So… Cumberbatch is playing someone known to the Star Trek universe and isn’t Khan.

I have to admire the conviction you Khan supporters have… even after this official news. But hey, if you want to keep believing…. be my guest.

Oh, and those that are going by the whole “the part was written with Del Toro in mind and Del Toro is a Latino actor therefore he MUST be playing Khan” thing. Well, did you guys ever think it was written with Del Toro in mind because he is a good actor with good screen presence and NOT because he is a Latino actor? And the other two Latino actors weren’t even auditioning. It was all hearsay. Otherwise they wouldn’t have gone with Cumberbatch if they were initially looking for a Latino actor. It doesn’t make any sense anyway.

So, now that the Khan rumor is dead (except for you few diehards), who do you think it will be?

536. scottevill - November 27, 2012

“Poorly written press release” is a redundancy. Press releases are not actually known for their lilting and mellifluous prose… Nor are they written by the people who made the film.

Incidentally, though EW does seem to have taken it down, the LA Times still has it up. http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness-plot-involves-unstoppable-force-of-terror/

537. Anthony Pascale - November 27, 2012

You can debate the quality of the release, that is fair. You can question who actually wrote it, I suspect marketing people. But no, Paramount’s site wasn’t hacked. This is real. As I said I confirmed it even after downloading it.

And yes it is ironic that with so much secrecy, even official releases are now questioned.

This is just a small early blip. The marketing of this movie really begins in December. I would not be surprised to see different versions of this synopsis then. But if that happens, that will not mean that this isn’t real.

And that’s all I will say on the realness issue.

538. Richard - November 27, 2012

#537: But how do we know you’re really Anthony Pascale? Just kidding :)

539. Firelight - November 27, 2012

So we excuse the poor wording, fine. But what about the “Summer 2013″ release part? You are telling me that Paramount doesn’t know when the seasons are, or that the film is delayed? I mean Paramount should know STID’s release date… and it isn’t in Summer 2013.

Sad.

540. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 27, 2012

“This is just a small early blip. The marketing of this movie really begins in December. I would not be surprised to see different versions of this synopsis then. But if that happens, that will not mean that this isn’t real.”

Now that’s the kind of details I like!

More please!

541. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 27, 2012

539. Firelight

FYI – May IS the start of the summer season in terms of movie releases.

542. scottevill - November 27, 2012

I expect the first 9 minutes they’re previewing for The Hobbit’s IMAX venues will be a cold open/teaser similar to the last movie’s terrific Kelvin sequence.

I mean, maybe it picks up the action in media res, with Enterprise at the tail end of some caper–similar to Indiana Jones and Bond film teasers–but I think it more likely that the opening would detail this 9/11-Pearl Harbor type event on Earth that is hinted at in the synopsis… and as such, we may not see Kirk, et al. (At least not until the very end of it.) We might see Cumberbatch, though, and learn who he’s playing, since he’s the perp.

If that is the moment I learn categorically who he’s playing, by the way — in a darkened movie theater rather than wasting time on some fanboy website in my cube at work — then my hat’s off to Abrams. The secrecy may be frustrating, but the payoff will be sweeter for it.

That said, for those convinced it’s Mitchell — it’s a good guess, but didn’t our own Bob Orci categorically deny same last July?

I don’t mind a fib here and there for our own good, to enhance our moviegoing experience in a time when it’s all but impossible to avoid spoilers months, even years before, but if it’s Mitchell, the denial was an outright and elaborate deception that included the production of a decoy 2 part comic book.

I don’t know Bob Orci, but I doubt he wants to bring that much fanboy bile down on his head. Could generate some unfavorable media coverage, too. I don’t think he did that. I think it’s Kirk’s hero, Captain Garth — He, not Mitchell, is the Col. Kurtz of the Star Trek universe.

543. RIchard - November 27, 2012

Yeah May is considered the beginning of the summer movie season by the industry.

544. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 27, 2012

542. scottevill

Orci also said he lied… once. But never said what the lie was. You should also take that in account. He had commented in a thread when he said that.

545. JR - November 27, 2012

Wait for the DVD.

546. Firelight - November 27, 2012

@541 & 543

Thanks for that, guess I learned something new. I still think the synopsis was poorly written. Mind you we have no idea what info they were given. They could have been told, bad guy, explosions, chase, drama, death- now write a synopsis. Given how secretive things are, the synopsis writer may have been left in as much ‘darkness’ as we are. Guess we will have to wait for the trailer or the information/marketing that Anthony P. said was coming next month.

547. Carbon Units Write Carbon Copy Script - November 27, 2012

Sounds pretty basic.

Threat from within/attack at the heart of the organization. Good guys in a race to stop bad guys. Some good guys most likely get killed (Pike maybe). Long chase ensues. Battle scenes. Then bad guys most likely die at end in a big explosion and/or falling from a great height. Roll credits.

So…. roughly the same plot to The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall. Paramount should make a lot of money.

548. THX-1138 - November 27, 2012

Best part of this article is Anthony coming in and kicking a little a$$.

Seriously, welcome back.

549. THX-1138 - November 27, 2012

#547

Except the bad guy didn’t die at the end of Avengers.

550. Carbon Units Write Carbon Copy Script - November 27, 2012

#549

Or captured. Doubtful with these guys though.

551. Carbon Units Write Carbon Copy Script - November 27, 2012

Then again, the script from TMP was pretty much a copy of an old episode. Originality in these flicks is as rare as red matter.

552. scottevill - November 27, 2012

544 (the real) Montreal_Paul –Thank you. I missed that.

Well, poop.

553. Picard's Fish - November 27, 2012

they’re a little late to the party, but Startrek.com has it..

http://www.startrek.com/article/star-trek-into-darkness-synopsis-released

554. John Kirk - November 27, 2012

Dear God. How could anyone be “less excited” to see the movie. Get a life, people.

555. Aurore - November 27, 2012

“Now that’s the kind of details I like!
More please!”
_______

If you insist.

Roberto Orci wrote the press release.

He tried to act all innocent with his “What’s new?”, earlier. However his guilt was obvious…

Keep in mind that Mr. Orci once stated that Mr. Cumberbatch would make them seem like brilliant writers. Almost everything he says sounds like poetry.

Alas, he was not around when Mr. Orci needed him most as a source of inspiration….And, the man is “lost” without Benedict Cumberbatch…

556. T'Cal - November 27, 2012

I has planned to see The Hobbit but not in IMAX 3D but now I will so that I can see this preview. It’s been a long road getting from there to here. It’s been a long time, but my time is finally near.

557. Travis - November 27, 2012

@ 43.. Red Dead Ryan: Yes sir finally someone thinks like me lol. This movie isnt about GARY MITCHELL because he is DEAD… Read the comic fools! I do believe that Peter Weller’s character ( JOHN FREDRICK PAXTON JR. ) is the one who operates inside the Federation… However to take out this plan i do believe that Paxton hears a rumor in the history of the 20th century… that the Botany Bay is floating in space with a weapon more stronger than any human and that is Khan! Why bring back Peter Weller’s charcter because his character can blend in into working inside the Ferderation but at the same time he wants to bring ” Terror ” to the Federation for humans making the alliance to give up Earth to aliens! I see what JJ, Bob and Alex are thinking here!

558. Bucky - November 27, 2012

making it personal = dead pike. Reading the comic there was somebody getting Pike heck for Kirk screwing with a starfleet experiment with the Archons. (I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume it was Peter Weller’s character. Section 51 or another shadowy Federation conspiracy thingie.)

Baddie = really don’t think it’s Gary. I doubt Orci would sign off on the IDW comic that killed off Gary in the first arc & then have Gary pop up already God-superpowered in the movie.

Maybe Garth. Federation person type thing.

Botany Bay survivor? Also possible. Heck, does Anthony still stand by his report months ago that Khan is the bad guy? Official retraction?

559. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 27, 2012

557. Travis

Maybe YOU should read the comic… you obviously don’t know how it ended. Here’s a hint… it wasn’t like the TOS episode where Mitchell was crushed by tons of rocks and burying him. Perhaps you should pick up the comic and take that into consideration. And by the way… thanks for calling us fools. What should I call you?

560. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home…

— should read —

When the crew of the Enterprise are called back home…

Just sayin’ :)

561. Dunsel Report - November 27, 2012

I don’t think this press release was badly written at all. It sounds like a professional Hollywood logline.

By the way, I recently experienced a parallel version of TrekMovie.com comments when I encountered the website “DanielCraigIsNotBond.com.” The vigor with which people refuse to accept that Bond is no longer Timothy Dalton reminded me of the fury hurled by “Voyager” fans at lens flares.

562. Ameraka - November 27, 2012

The first thing I thought when it said “a one man weapon of mass destruction” was Gary Mitchell. I’d personally like that better than Khan–I’d rather see a revisioning of a TOS episode than one of the movies. These movies are set with a younger Kirk during the series, and, though he could meet Khan during this movie, it would have to be entirely different outcome, or have a ‘revenge’ movie as a sequel, in order to work. In the Wrath of Khan, there was also the theme of a Kirk struggling with issues of becoming older, and that of course wouldn’t work with this movie, so the themes would have to be different. I like the idea of going a direction we’ve never seen before, with perhaps some familiar characters and stories from TOS but with twists to keep us guessing– what must happen since this is, after all, a different timeline.
BTW, I also like the ‘enemy within’ idea. This sounds exciting!

563. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

I’m also about 3 years late… but when Captain Pike talked about the Federation as a peacekeeping armada, he was mixing up his definitions with that of Starfleet. The Federation is an alliance of worlds. The description of that being an armada was as clunky as this synopsis.

Constructive criticism here, with no hidden agenda to bash the Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman take on Star Trek.

564. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

563. or should that be “The Federation ARE an alliance of worlds”?

Hee-hee.

:)

565. Gov - November 27, 2012

@560. Crew is a collective noun. It is generally regarded as singular. So the press release is correct. At least in this instance.

566. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

561. Dunsel Report – “I don’t think this press release was badly written at all. It sounds like a professional Hollywood logline.”

Quite right too.

Who needs to learn English anyway? It’s not like you’ll ever need go to that England place.

Get Benedict Cumberbatch to read out the synopsis and watch his head explode!

567. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 27, 2012

Oh Good God … AP is back, but the paranoia remains around here!

;-) :-)

568. Romulus - November 27, 2012

I remember when the trailer of THE PHANTOM MENACE was exclusive to the Wing Commander movie and people went there, watched the trailer and then walked out.

14 years later …Paramount tags an exclusive TREK trailer to a movie, The Hobbit.

At least the hobbit will be worth watching

569. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

565. “Crew is a collective noun. It is generally regarded as singular. So the press release is correct. At least in this instance.”

It’s really not you know. The focus on the sentence puts an emphasis on the Enterprise being called back home.

570. section9 - November 27, 2012

Okay, they had to match “The Dark Knight” in seriousness of intensity.

So here’s what they are doing: Star Trek meets Apocalypse Now, with Cumberbatch as “Colonel Kurtz” (a renegade Gary Mitchell).

Bet on it. There will be a renegade world trying to break away from the Federation with an insurgency funded by the Klingon Empire. All sorts of good stuff.

“The Horror. The Horror”.

Who plays Colonel Kilgore when they do the 23rd Century version of the Helicopter Assault by the Federation Air Cavalry on the Hulkan Village…

571. Richard - November 27, 2012

#570: Pike shouting, “If I say its safe to surf, its safe to surf!”

572. Flaming Nacelles Forever - November 27, 2012

I’m toying with an idea… lets throw caution to the wind.

Khan never left earth, never rules in his own country, and the augments are essential assimilated by the federation after they lose the war.

Gary Mitchell is Khan, quietly working behind the scenes in starfleet. He gains some of the abilities from the TOS series, and works from within Starfleet at first to gain control, but realizes he cannot do it alone.

His plot evolves – using starfleet from within he pulls off a massive ‘event’ killing many and redefines Starfleet as an Armada to the outside universe (not a peacekeeping force). Using the Klingons as pawns, he sets into motion a galactic ‘False Flag’ operation.

Gary’s plans don’t end there, and he’s about to force Starfleet into being the fleet he desires by triggering a much larger event which will turn the rest of the galaxy against the federation. If he succeeds – he effectively positions himself as the saviour – and the only man capable of leading the federation against a now hostile galaxy..

It’s up to Kirk to track and stop this ultimate villain in time to restore balance before the galaxy plunges into Darkness.

573. Chris Roberts - November 27, 2012

The Enterprise is called back home. ☑

The Crew are called back home. ☑

The Crew is called back home. x

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home. x

574. Richard - November 27, 2012

You know, the one thing that always bothered me about that scene in Apocalypse Now is that those were NOT 6 foot swells. The surfer in me was always perturbed by that :)

575. Gov - November 27, 2012

The workers are hungry.

The crew of workers is hungry.

576. wi-kiry-lan - November 27, 2012

Well if the whole fleet detonates it is probably this sort of logic….

James Kirk is always Captain Kirk. Therefore improbable movie promotion, the audience won’t care. Star Trek is about CAPTAIN Kirk afterall.

The Enterprise is always the ONLY ship in range. Therefore the rest of the fleet can go boom and the audience won’t care. Star Trek is about the Enterprise afterall.

:-)

@564 The United States was referred to in a plural sense prior to the Civil War – after that it tended to be referred as a single entity.

577. CJS - November 27, 2012

Saying it’s not Khan because Khan isn’t in Starfleet is stupid. Khan could’ve been defrosted by a rogue Starfleet officer played by Weller (Tracey or Garth) who then uses Khan as a one man weapon of mass destruction in his plot to take over Starfleet.

578. Will - November 27, 2012

People keep saying that it can’t be Gary Mitchell because they killed him in the official comic…

To rebut this(not that I think it’s GM in this movie): Did you not actually read the Countdown comic? The ones that were supposed to tie directly with the first JJ Trek? Yeah, they contradicted that comic in their own movie.

So, as you see, since they’re in charge of the franchise canon at present, they have the ability to do whatever they want and negate the comic book in part or in whole.

Just food for thought.

But I agree, it’s probably not Gary Mitchell.

579. dlee - November 27, 2012

The part I like is the honesty they show when they describe it as “an explosive action thriller” because it definitely doesn’t sound like science fiction.

580. Spiked Canon - November 27, 2012

@572 nice try…we will see

581. FusionVok - November 27, 2012

@573:

Neither use of “crew” (plural vs. singular) is incorrect. Context matters.

If one is considering the crew as a team and the team actions to be coordinated, then “is” would be correct. “The crew is called back home.” Correct.

If, on the other hand, one focuses on the individual tasks of the crew members and considers them as individuals, then “are” would be correct. “The crew are turning against each other from that pesky alien mind control.”

582. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Enterprise being called back home because of an attack on Earth sounds like the Xindi plot.

583. Spiked Canon - November 27, 2012

@563 nice catch

584. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Could the unstoppable force of terror be the Doomsday Machine and Kirk and Enterprise pursing that? Maybe people inside Starfleet find that weapon?

585. Landru - November 27, 2012

It’s Me!

586. Richard - November 27, 2012

“What did they tell you?” – Gary Mitchell

“The told me that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.” – Kirk

“Are my methods unsound?” – Gary Mitchell

“I don’t see any method at all sir.” – Kirk

587. PEB - November 27, 2012

@582 The Xindi plot couldve been SO much cooler than it was. Actually, it would’ve been much better for it to have been a Romulan plot but that was part of the problem with that storyline I guess.

588. dlee - November 27, 2012

“our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death” – didn’t they hire a chess expert for one scene? This quote might be something we should take literally….

589. Sebastian S. - November 27, 2012

# 557 Travis

That is probably the most ridiculous thing I’ve read. You really think Khan is a human weapon of mass destruction?!? Captain Kirk kicked his ass in “Space Seed” using a pipe wrench (which actually looked more like a kitchen paper towel dispenser, but oh well…). Not exactly a human weapon really; about as strong as a steroid-taking Vulcan. No big deal. You Khan lovers just won’t surrender that bone, will you? Oh well…

And Gary Mitchell is still a viable candidate IMO. Yes, I read the IDW book, and even it can be interpreted as an open ending (as Montreal Paul suggested). Kirk shot Mitchell with a phaser rifle in TOS and he didn’t die. Maybe Mitchell wasn’t dead in the IDW comic, but merely regenerating. Personally, I think Cumberbatch would be a terrific Mitchell; although if it has to be a canon character (and I don’t necessarily think it does)? I’d say Garth of Izar is also a possibility…
_______________________________________

# 535 Montreal Paul

Took the words right out of my keyboard, mon ami…. ;-)

590. Lostrod - November 27, 2012

It may just be poor wording in the release, but the plot (as described) just doesn’t excite me.

I’m hoping to be surprised by the final product, but what I see here has me concerned.

I should have a better idea after watching the nine minute preview and trailer next month.

Regards.

591. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

aSpockalypse Now? :-)

If you are going to borrow an idea or theme, then borrow from the best, and that movie is a masterpiece, and one of my all time favorites, so this sounds like great news to me.

So who could the villain be? I’m not feeling Gary Mitchell at all from this. Garth would be a good choice, or Captain Tracy.

A minor character from canon developed into something much more dramatic for the movie would be a good way to go, so I’m hoping that might be what we get.

All in all, it’s sounding good!!!

592. The Last Vulcan - November 27, 2012

AHA! I have it! Cumby is Degra, the Xindi-Primate Scientist. :)

593. Craiger - November 27, 2012

PEB I was thinking the same about the Romulan’s instead of the Xindi.

594. Scott Gammans - November 27, 2012

Count me in the “less excited” group. It’s STAR Trek, not PLANET Trek. Whenever a Star Trek movie has centered around action on a planet, the movie has wound up with feet of clay.

I’ll still be in line on opening day, but the question was whether this made me more, less or the same amount of excited, and the answer is less.

595. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

I’m guessing that the first 9 minutes of the movie are going to be so face-melting that people are going to be stunned, and that’s why they’re releasing it ahead of The Hobbit. I’m guessing they expect to generate such positive word of mouth by the 9 minute opening that general audiences — not fans — will want to pack the theater when STID comes out.

So I’m REALLY looking forward to this. By the time the 9 minutes is over, I’m probably going to feel incredibly let down that I’m going to have to sit through The Hobbit afterward.

596. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

While people go on about JJ, Orci and co. doing (another) Star Warsy type movie, I think it much more likely that they are doing a Star Trek that is more akin to something like the Fringe series, what with a mirror universe within the alternate universe (the comic series) and how I suspect/fear that the iconic Star Trek characters have been written in STID.

I just hope that Bob Orci and co. have realized that when writing this Star Trek movie, that they are not doing another version of the Fringe series. The macabre, the really gruesome aspects that get shown and expounded on in the Fringe series is fine for Fringe, but it is not Star Trek and nor should Star Trek become a series of movies more akin to series like Fringe than to the original mission and “innocence” (some may call it naivety) that is part of TOS.

I really like the Fringe TV series because it is Fringe, not Star Trek. I also love Star Trek because it is Star Trek, not Fringe (not SW).

What say you, Bob Orci?

597. Classy M - November 27, 2012

#588 – What was the means of propulsion? And did they find all the pieces after our heroes landed on the board? I do hate playing 3D chess without the requisite number of pawns.

598. Nony - November 27, 2012

I’m not sure which name would be more hilarious for an unstoppable, all-powerful one-man weapon of mass destruction. Gary, or Garth.

599. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

Why get UNexcited by the synopsis? It’s a MOVIE. You have to SEE what they have in store. The synopsis can’t give away too much and it can’t give away the details that matter, i.e., the things that will make us laugh, gape in awe, and cry. It CAN suggest story potential, and they picked a theme capable of great potential, and it sounds like they know what they are doing with it.

And these guys are way too smart to release a 9 minute opening that plays like a slow motion talk-a-thon. That would kill the movie among general audiences. If they are releasing 9 minutes, those minutes are going to be a body slam.

Have some faith, guys.

600. NuFan - November 27, 2012

What’s done is done. What’s filmed is filmed. Convincing people that it’s Gary Mitchell won’t change what’s on the film stock.

601. Johnnyb807 - November 27, 2012

First people criticize the lack of information, now everyone is bitching about the new information. Wow.

602. Steve Johnson - November 27, 2012

People keep repeating this mantra that it can’t be Mitchell because they’d have to “explain” that to new comers.

Well, no, you make that sound like exposition is out. If it were a new villain, you’d still have to explain things to the audience. So that’s ridiculous. How long would it take?

Just pretend the comic didn’t exist, and they were using Mitchell. Somebody the crew new, who had gone to grief sometime before.

You could have Kirk reflecting on something Gary said. Or have their be a conversation between two characters about who might be responsible. You could even frame the story around the friendship. Have Kirk be shell-shocked when he discovers who’s responsible for the chaos he’s seeing, kick the audience, and Kirk, where it hurts.

Comic or no, you still have to explain who people are to the audience.

Here’s a better example.

WRATH. OF. KHAN.

Ya know, arguably the best movie in the franchise? Based on an episode of the original show? What about all the people who went into that movie not having seen the original episode? The movie was able to convey the history between Kirk and Khan just fine, without stalling out for any length of time to do it. It was all tied to the themes of the movie, and it worked brilliantly.

I’m not saying that it IS Gary Mitchell, but that one counter-argument makes so very little sense.

603. Bucky - November 27, 2012

On the flipside, if it is Gary Mitchell which contradicts the opening story of the series IDW is putting out a FOUR ISSUE “Countdown to Darkness” mini before the flick so it could be four issues of continuity back-flipping and backpedaling the ending of the first IDW arc?

604. Aurore - November 27, 2012

I”ve been excited about the… mere possibility of watching the sequel… eversince I saw the last Star Trek.

Knowing that the villain would be scary, “nuanced”…and dressed in head to toe leather was excellent news, too.

:)

605. I'm Dead Jim! - November 27, 2012

Party on, Garth of Izar!

606. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Could the unstoppable force be the Klingons? Maybe they are more ruthless in the new timeline? Their ships managed to capture Nero but only after the Narada was damaged after the Kelvin rammed into it.

607. EM - November 27, 2012

This movie is going to be AWESOME!

608. captain spock - November 27, 2012

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

sounds to me that some one/or some ones from starfleet/ or a scientest or both has gone bad & had leased maybe something threating on earth or something in space threating apond the earth ,some how made starfleet /star flee comand inopreable from stoping them.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

may be some one kirk new as a child His brother sam.may trying to get even with his brother jim for not helping him when his dad threw him out of the house. or some one he went to starfleet with . or it could be some one conected to nero come back for revenge of kirk killing nero & his crew in the last film.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

ask me which member of the crew i thinks is going to die in this movie then brought back in the next one. question whos the most expendable crew member to die in this movie? (if anyone)who do you think it will be , will it be kirk & mccoy will be torn apart as friends.or spock & uhura.

609. Tom - November 27, 2012

Would be nice to see Kirk Prime help Pine on his personal journey.

Star Trek.com has just released the results of their recent poll asking “which TOS cast member would you most want to see make a cameo in “Star Trek Into Darkness”, and actor/director William Shatner, the original James T Kirk, was the top vote getter.

Shatner received 48% of the vote, followed by George Takei with 28%, Nichelle Nichols at 14% and Walter Koenig at 11%.

With WIlliam Shatner expressing his desire to appear in the newly rebooted “Star Trek” films, here’s hoping “the power’s that be” are listening, and the fans get their wish in the upcoming “Star Trek Into Darkness”.

Come on Bob. Sounds like the Shattner scene you wrote is in demand!!!

610. Disinvited - November 27, 2012

I’ve got no pony in this race, but FWIW the only original canon Trek character I recall being a MAN that was singularly considered a weapon of mass destruction was Lazarus:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Lazarus

What the Memory Alpha entry leaves out is that Anti-Lazarus reveals to Kirk that the apparently unsettled planets on which the timeships reside are actually the home-worlds of himself and his opposite, both civilizations laid waste by Lazarus in mad pursuit.

Also, Anti-Lazarus was only known to try to escape Lazarus by traveling forward through the centuries.

Also since Orci’s canon now includes his movie and the comics, his reference to actors playing canon characters could be referring to any character appearing in those efforts as well.

611. Neil24 - November 27, 2012

Cumberbatch is playing Gary Mitchell. Here’s my proof:

1. Karl Urban let that fact slip out while doing press for Judge Dredd and he seemed more apologetic than being cleverly misleading.

2. In the ongoing mission comic, Mitchell is wearing a black starfleet shirt under his gold uniform. Kirk shoots him with a phaser rifle in his torso, killing him, presumably.

3. In the leaked set pics of Spock fighting Cumberbatch’s character, he is wearing a black starfleet shirt with a hole in the torso area.

4. In the comic, Mitchell’s body is not destroyed but is set adrift in space in a photon torpedo capsule.

5. Scenes depicted in the 2009 Countdown comics were repeated as back story in the 2009 film.

I think Into Darkness will show that Gary survived and that the leaked photos shows the crew’s first re-contact with Mitchell. Parts of the comic will be repeated as back story in the new movie.

612. Phil - November 27, 2012

I’m not smelling Khan or Mitchell here….

613. Punkspocker - November 27, 2012

I think kirk and benny batch have a bro-ner for each other, then love triangle with alice eve. She dies. Kirk bums. I cant freakin wait.

614. This is going to be a long year - November 27, 2012

Considering the Gary Mitchel rumors could someone spoil on how he was killed in the comics, where he ended up and the likelihood this is reversible?

(With spoiler warnings for those who don’t want to know.) Thanks.

615. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Would the general audience have to know about Gary Mitchell character and the new Universe Comics?

616. This is going to be a long year - November 27, 2012

Oops #611 answered my question as I was typing.

617. jamesingeneva - November 27, 2012

and just like that, life is back to normal. good to have you back AP

618. Richard - November 27, 2012

#611 for the win! Its going to be Gary Mitchell. All signs point in that direction.

619. Max - November 27, 2012

@598 I agree 100%. There is no way that they are going to have a villain named Gary or Garth. It’s just not going to happen. I mean do you think if the villain in Space Seed was called Dave that we would have had Star Trek II: Wrath of Dave? DAAAAAAVE!

620. Craiger - November 27, 2012

What if Gary Mitchell is part of a Starfleet experiment to enhance Humans to take on the Klingon threat? Then Gary Mitchell kills the Scientists and escapes?

621. Craiger - November 27, 2012

Starfleet decides to start up the Eugenics Experiments again.

622. PEB - November 27, 2012

Keep Shatner away from this. Not because I dont like him or anything crazy like that, it just makes no sense. But oh that’s right, things are so far along that couldnt happen anyway.

623. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

I did not read the countdown comics. If Mitchell was “killed” and launched into space in a torpedo, then that recalls a theme where another character was “dead” and launched away in a torpedo — and we know what happened in that case.

Based on that I wouldn’t say Mitchell is out of the running, because what happens to the torpedo casket may be as relevant in this case as it was for the one that had carried Spock to HIS resting place.

That’s a kind of “death” from which it is possible to recover.

624. TREKWEBMASTER - November 27, 2012

Could mean:

verb (used with object)
2.
to cause (something explosive) to explode.

-OR-

verb (used without object)
1.
to explode with suddenness and violence.

-OR-

verb (used with object)
2. to cause (something explosive) to explode.
Latin dētonātus thundered forth (past participle of dētonāre ), equivalent to dē- de- + ton ( āre ) to thunder + -ātus -ate.

Seems like it’s used with the fleet as an object of the verb as in the first example given.

Interesting… none-the-less.

625. Jack - November 27, 2012

609. But that poll didn’t have a ‘none of them’ option, did it?

626. Desstruxion - November 27, 2012

Charlie X

627. Omega - November 27, 2012

Seems to me everyone forgot about Captain Ronald Tracy from “The Omega Glory”. Dude seemed pretty unhinged.

628. Pensive's Wetness - November 27, 2012

Ive read elsewhere that maybe the Detonation and Crisis event is a political coup occuring in either Star Fleet or the Federation… or both?

629. Jack - November 27, 2012

‘We’re living in a power keg and giving off sparks…” -– Bonnie Tyler

I still don’t think it’s Mitchell, Seven or Khan… but I’m wrong several times a day.

I still wonder if Menendez will be in there somewhere…

630. BulletInTheFace - November 27, 2012

#627:

No one forgot about him. There’s simply no chance anyone would make a movie out of such a crappy episode.

631. Jack - November 27, 2012

630. Thank you, I thought I was alone in hating that episode. I thought it was dumb when I was 9, even.

632. Matt Sahlgren - November 27, 2012

It’s Kirks hated upper classmate from “Shoreleave”, Finnegan (I think). A minor canon character who Kirk loaths. Ends up on the Shoreleave planet, yaddayaddayadda. JJ can thankfully do whatever he wants with this character.

633. NCM - November 27, 2012

Writer backs speculation with an interesting point…Here’s one for you, MJ:

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness-plot-involves-unstoppable-force-of-terror/

“So who is this “one-man weapon of mass destruction?” Though no one has confirmed it, signs point to Cumberbatch’s character being Khan Noonien Singh, the genetically engineered superman who battled Kirk in the original series episode “Space Seed” and the second feature film, “Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan.”

Notice the description of the crew’s battle as an “epic chess game of life and death?” Recall that Khan (as famously depicted in his previous incarnation by actor Ricardo Montalban) was a master strategist, whose undoing came about because he thought of the battlefield as a two-dimensional plane. (Kirk and Spock played a lot of three-dimensional chess, which helped them get the jump on Khan while in the Mutara Nebula.)”

634. NCM - November 27, 2012

Has Anthony shared his best guess?

635. Rick Johnson - November 27, 2012

@611 That sounds convincing. I don’t see the hole in Mitchell’s shirt, though. If they fired him out a photon torpedo tube, that was probably intentional. Photon torpedoes can go a long way (plus it’s a “dark” callback to “Search for Spock”‘s Spock “rebirth.”)

Kirk vs. Mitchell was my favorite scene from classic Trek growing up, and it’s also one of the headiest. It’s about the darkness and corruption within man’s nature–if you give him unlimited power, he will become a monster. “Into Darkness.”

636. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

The “crappy” episodes are excellent ones to tap for content because there’s so much opportunity for improvement over the original material, and you don’t offend as many fans by reinterpreting favorites that they want left alone.

This is an alternate universe, remember? The characters may be the same while the original stories will not be. So the quality of the original is irrelevant.

637. Captain Karl - November 27, 2012

So in each movie, they’ll destroy the fleet?
Good thing they don’t use money in the 23rd Century.

Synopsis: They trek…into space…it is very dark in space.

638. Jack - November 27, 2012

Why are we sure it’s a TOS character, again?

639. Jack - November 27, 2012

I hope it’s well done. The traitor/defector/rogue is the villain in about 91.6% of movies.

640. Richard - November 27, 2012

#639: Get your facts straight. It’s 91.7%

:P

641. Steve Johnson - November 27, 2012

@638 Jack

Because it’s been confirmed as such. The various actors were in a list of who was playing a “new” character and who was playing a “canon” character.

And what we know of BC’s character is that it’s an old TOS character, and that it’s a villain.

642. Harry Ballz - November 27, 2012

Here’s the interesting part…….

a couple of years ago, a hardcore group of us here were in heavy discussions about the imagined plotline for the sequel.

We kept hammering away about how we all loved The Doomsday Machine and how that would be great to have depicted in the next movie.

Orci was interacting at the time with the occasional comment.

A couple of months later, when the script was being finished, I remember Orci posting on this site that he sincerely wanted to thank us for our “input” and that our discussions definitely played a part in influencing their deliberations for the plotline.

That just released synopsis almost reads like The Doomsday Machine plays a factor in the movie.

Just sayin’………

643. L. Roberts - November 27, 2012

I believe the villain is new and not a rehash of Gary Mitchell or Khan. First, Gary Mitchell is dead in the comics and those are considered canon. Second, redoing Khan just doesn’t sound like Abrams to me and I think he’s aware it would be a huge mistake.

Also, war-zone world, sounds like the Klingons are going to enter into the scene.

Looking forward to the 9-minute trailer.

644. Neil24 - November 27, 2012

Regarding comments directed to my prior post @611

@633: Whoever wrote the article you cited did not read the comic (which Orci says is canon): Star Trek Ongoing Issue 1- That first issue starts with Mitchell and Kirk playing 3-D Chess with Mitchell winning. The synopsis is making a reference to that circumstance, not Khan. The comic has Mitchell (as he did in TOS) complaining about how Kirk beat him to the captain’s chair. It makes Mitchell a good villain to test Kirk’s uber-fast rise to captain. A good choice for the writers of Into Darkness.

@635: here’s the link showing the hole in Mitchell’s shirt that’s consistent with the injury Mitchell sustained in the first comic:

http://cdn.eurweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Zoe-Saldana-Zachary-Quinto-Star-Trek-2-Pictures.jpeg

I’m guessing that the preview footage that will screen in front of The Hobbit will be a quick re-hash of the events of the comic as a prologue to Mitchell being discovered to be alive.

645. Jack - November 27, 2012

#638. Right. And in the same interview he said, sort of, that it wasn’t Mitchell.

“TrekMovie.com: OK, I want to try and get something out of you that is actually new about the movie. Kind of like you did on the radio show but I will name a guest actor in the sequel and you will say if they are playing a new character you created or one from the original Star Trek canon.

Roberto Orci: OK, I’ll play.

TrekMovie.com: OK let’s start with Alice Eve. Canon or new?

Roberto Orci: Canon

TrekMovie.com: Noel Clarke?

Roberto Orci: New

TrekMovie.com: I assume that also goes for Nanzeen Contractor, who plays his wife?

Roberto Orci: Yes, new.

TrekMovie.com: Peter Weller

Roberto Orci: New.

TrekMovie.com: Joseph Gatt

Roberto Orci: New.

TrekMovie.com: OK and the big one, Benedict Cumberbatch.

Roberto Orci: Canon.
–30–

Does original Star Trek canon mean just the series?

646. Sewanee - November 27, 2012

I can’t believe that 645 people actually replied to this. My question is why?

647. Jack - November 27, 2012

Ben Finney, Matt Decker, Roger Corby, Jose Menendez, Finnegan, Garrovick (maybe he wasn’t on the farragut yet when it was destroyed ) etc. – there are loads of TOS possibilities. Unlikely, but.

Does one-man force of… mean genetically/alien/barrier-enhanced powers? Could it mean a weapon, a ship or just terrific planning/string-pulling?

Family = Sarek, Kirk’s family and maybe folks we haven’t met yet

648. Neil24 - November 27, 2012

@645: I’m confused. Why do you think that interview means it isn’t Mitchell? Mitchell was in the first-filmed Captain Kirk episode- Where No Man Has Gone Before…that’s a “canon” big enough to blow out both ear drums.

@646: Because we love the world of Star Trek and the hopeful future it represents!

649. Jack - November 27, 2012

Or any number of Klingons.

650. Jack - November 27, 2012

Because Anthony asked Bob whether he meant it when he (Bob) said it wasn’t Mitchell. Bob said he doesn’t lie. Which could be lying ;).

I got the family bit wrong — I’d forgotten that the synopsis specified that the crew was the only family *Kirk* had left…

651. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

Bob Orci did say that the villain would be from season one of TOS.

652. red shirt 1393 - November 27, 2012

I’m tried of every movie having to “save” earth. The best Trek episodes are the ones not about war and battle. The new movie sounds like more of the same….. no original ideas.

653. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

With Kirk having a “personal score to settle” and the Enterprise crew being the “only family Kirk has left,” it sure does sound like his mother and brother are going to die in the sequel.

654. Rick Johnson - November 27, 2012

@644 I didn’t read the “Gary Mitchell” “Where No Man…” retelling-comic but all the stills of Spock fighting Cumberbach now look like the dramatization of the comic’s ending. It’s obvious Spock’s nerve-pinching him…that just makes him angry…the “alternate ending” where they shoot him out on a photon torpedo for a Spock-like “rebirth” makes it pretty obvious.

I mean they did a comic about Gary Mitchell, retelling an altered version of “Where No Man has Gone Before” where Mitchell’s not buried, nor was he weakened by the other “god”…maybe we shouldn’t pat ourselves on the back too hard for figuring it out. Ever since I saw the stills of Cumberbach in a Starfleet uniform I figured it was Mitchell, though.

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Gary_Mitchell_(alternate_reality)

655. gingerly - November 27, 2012

@636

I agree! It would blow my mind if Cumberbatch turned out to be a canon character that NO ONE here has mentioned.

That said…

Could he be Gary Seven? (I haven’t been around enough to know if he’s been mentioned before, but I’m sure he has)

656. Phil - November 27, 2012

Maybe Kirk is still pissed at Spock for that hearing at Starfleet Academy, and he kills him. That would tie in nicely with ZQ’s comments about playing Spock again….

Nah….

657. Red Dead Ryan - November 27, 2012

Pretty sure it isn’t Gary Seven. Seven wasn’t a villain. He was seeking global disarmament.

658. Commodore Adams - November 27, 2012

I am already excited to see the movie. I am neither more or less excited to see the movie after reading this. This synopsis means nothing to me, cant make heads or tails of it. It makes me think, but nothing short of a trailer will get me more excited to see the movie. So getting a double dose with The Hobbit in 3D as well as an online trailer…. XD

659. gingerly - November 27, 2012

…In the prime universe, yes, but this one?

Also, the means to the end could very easily prove very destructive.

660. Mark - November 27, 2012

Gary Mitchell is great villain especially with Cumberbatch playing him. BUT that name must be the worst villain name in history.

661. Rick Johnson - November 27, 2012

I’m calling it, Alice Eve (British) plays Dr. Elizabeth Dehner from “Where No Man has Gone Before.” This will allow her to figure prominently in the plot, bang Kirk, and die all in the same movie.

Carol Marcus would require too much “will they have a lame blonde son nobody liked??” baggage.

662. VorlonKosh - November 27, 2012

It’s Garth.

663. Jack - November 27, 2012

657. Well, that’s what he told us/our heroes…

I don’t think it’s 7 either, but it’s not impossible… heck, Fringe shows seemingly shifting loyalties all the time…

664. Jack - November 27, 2012

661. I like it. Although she and McCoy apparently had, er, something…

665. Rick Johnson - November 27, 2012

Check the hairstyle of Alice Eve in character against “Elizabeth Dehner.”

http://bit.ly/Tt1XSv

http://bit.ly/QKF4M5

No doubt whatsoever it’s Gary Mitchell.

666. gingerly - November 27, 2012

@665

Wow. That is compelling evidence, Rick.

The actress already resembled her without the hairstyle. I tell you what, I’m convinced!

667. Jack - November 27, 2012

Dehner, sure. Mitchell? Still not sure. They’re no longer linked in any way.

668. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

In other words, when Karl Urban said Cumberbatch would make a fine Gary Mitchell…he wasn’t teasing fans. He actually let the secret slip.

I’d say the evidence that it’s NOT KHAN is rather overwhelming at this point. ;-)

669. Jack - November 27, 2012

I’ll bet $16 that it’s not Gary Mitchell.

670. David C. Roberson - November 27, 2012

Sounds like Garth of Izar to me. Especially since they seemingly took great pains to mention chess in the synopsis. Reading the article on Garth of Izar, it really seems like it could be…

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Garth_of_Izar

671. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

If I had read the IDW comic and knew that Mitchell got a torpedo casket just like Spock, that would have sent up a flag to me. I didn’t know about the parallels between the comic and the spy photos either. Veddy inderezteeng.

672. dmduncan - November 27, 2012

Well I don’t think Karl Urban ever said he was joking about that Gary Mitchell remark. He implied JJ gave him a lecture about it, but he never said he was messing with the fans. It sure sounded like a joke, but he never claimed it was to my knowledge. Maybe I missed it.

673. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 27, 2012

I think that the story may be about the fact that either someone works on making something akin to the doomsday machine (a mini supernova of sorts?) or one of these doomsday machines (from TOS episode) are discovered, along with a way of controlling it.

The effects of this weapon are soon felt. However, who is wielding this destructive force is not known at first or who is behind the “Nazi” style takeover of Starfleet and earth. Earth is not a war-zone – yet…

As the Enterprise is called back because of the ongoing political upheaval, Kirk hears about one of his loved ones (friend, family member) being killed or having their lives threatened. Perhaps it might be Noel Clarke’s character (Kirk was best man at Clarke’s character wedding?) or Nazneen’s character…or his mother or brother… Kirk is aggrieved and makes a very emotional decision to seek out the perpetrator. Unfortunately, all is not as it at first seems and Kirk soon realizes that his actions may have seriously compromised his own position of safety and his ability to help those he loves who are in need…hence Chris Pine’s comment:

“Kirk is fun because he is a brash, cocky, bull-headed kind of guy. I think the journey he goes on in this new film is a lot about – the first one was about getting the chair and the second one is about earning it. And I think that is a big part of his journey.”

Where and how the main villain blowhard, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, is revealed – I don’t know. I have not given it much thought.

Anyway, I am just looking at the synopsis and possible clues given in various ways, from a different perspective…

674. Smike - November 27, 2012

It’s Gary Mitchell. Ful stop. The 9-minute-preview will be the teaser of the film, giving us a retelling of “Where No Man Has Gone Before” / summary of the comic book. Almost everybody is familiar with the TOS episode and those who aren’t will see The Hobbit…

STID is going to be nearyl the same to WNMHGB as TWOK was to Space Seed…just in the new timeline. Mitchell is going to go all Khan on Kirk for leaving him dying on an alien world…

I wonder how they will get Dr Dehner into this. She was in WNMHGB but NOT In the comic book. She might still have a backstory with him anyway. And that TORPEDO is a nice hint at TWOK/TSFS…

675. High Hopes - November 27, 2012

Did anyone contemplate this?

The spacesuited Spock — maybe he’s been put in a position of saving planet Earth. He’s lost one world (Vulcan). The half-Vulcan, half-human Spock struggles to save his other ancestral homeworld…

Peter Weller was interviewed earlier this year (May 12, 2012 – with quotes here on Trekmovie), stating he was playing a CEO and has his own ship. Sounds like the “Captains of Industry” are making a play for Federation with a hostile takeover. Given the liberal affiliations of JJ Abrams (outspoken Obama supporter), I’d wager this is the big plot device. With a member of Khan’s crew as his tool (that ultimately backfires).

I think Benecio Del Toro was going to be Khan. When he quit, the script was rewritten for a different Eugenics War superman survivor. Joachim or another of Khan’s associates. Cumberbach is that character, NOT Khan.

And Nimoy probably contributed a voiceover.

Bob Orci stated for the record who is (and isn’t) in the new film. NO Gary Mitchell.

What bugs me… why aren’t we exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new civilizations, going on that five year mission… Unless it’s to find a new Earth to colonize.

676. High Hopes - November 27, 2012

From the May 12, 2012 Trekmovie article… Spot-on, if you ask me:

4. MJ – May 12, 2012

OK, consider this. Think of a interstellar corporation with an overly ambitious leader, stumbling across the Botany Bay. They revive the crew and find out they are genetic superman. Weller’s character and Khan team up to take down Starfleet in some fashion (plot line here TBD), but to keep the identifies of Khan and his crew secret (so that they can infiltrate the Federation), their faces and looks are changed through Gene Therapy (thus, the “face melting” clue from Orci, which also explain how different Khan will look at played by BC). Then the Enterprise gets caught up in it and Enterprise versus Khan redux begins.

Perhaps look for Pike to be killed early on, which will make it really personal for Kirk.

677. boborci - November 27, 2012

596 rose

Agreed.

678. Harry Ballz - November 27, 2012

Bob

Oh, great! 676 posts and THIS is the one you answer!! C’mon!

679. boborci - November 27, 2012

555 aurore

I did not write the press release.

680. boborci - November 27, 2012

544. M paul

Looking forward to revealing my lie. Hope you will be amused.

681. Anthony Thompson - November 27, 2012

It’s GOT to be Khan! Because MJ made it as a “major prediction” and he’s never wrong!!! ; D

682. Khan was Framed! - November 27, 2012

Here’s my best guess:

Space Seed has already happened. Khan has already been stranded by Kirk.

Starfleet are at war with the Klingons & have lost the Ceti Alpha system to them.

A corrupt member of Starfleet brass makes a move to cripple the Federation at it’s very core, so the Klingons can conquer Earth.

Kirk in desperation turns to Khan & his super soldiers to help him liberate Earth, but must get in & out of Klingon territory to get him.

683. boborci - November 27, 2012

Harry B

Lol! Sorry. What can i answer for you?

684. gingerly - November 27, 2012

@683

YEA! boborci is a nightowl!

I’ll just say this. I truly hope the trek’s team aspect works as well as The Avengers’ did.

Every character was actually who they should be.

Every character got to shine.

The film had levity and action.

…and Black Widow? Got to be incredibly great at her job without being “the girl” on the team.

Nobody leered at her or white knighted for her.

If the new Trek has the same “win” when it comes to the justice done to the characters I and the world will love it.

As for a question, (yeah, I know you’re not talking to me, but I’m taking the opportunity dammit!)

Can you give us a number for how many female characters with lines are in this film?

Are there any planets with characteristics we haven’t seen before?

Will our crew (aside from Spock) get to change up their uniforms for functional reasons?

Any new aliens in the crew?

685. Richard - November 27, 2012

boborci: Completely side question: Is Jolene Kay appearing again as one of the background extras? For those taht don’t know, she the super good looking Lt. in the background of a few of the bridge scenes in the 09 movie.

686. gingerly - November 27, 2012

…and like that, he’s gone.

Understandable, really. If I knew all the spoilers from the new Trek, maaan, everyone would know.

People could ask me what color the ship is and I’d tell the entire plot.

It’s difficult to think up benign, non-spoilery, questions.

Maybe I should ask him about the Kennedy Assassination. Why are you so sure it wasn’t a long gunman, Bob?

Oh! And I checked the imdb cast list, very pleased with the diversity I saw!

Lot’s of Desi folk.

687. Harry Ballz - November 27, 2012

683.

Bob, I know you can’t reveal ANYTHING about the movie, but……

…can you comment, even in a subtle fashion, as to how interacting with us here MAY have influenced where you went with the storyline to the sequel?

Mucho appreciated!

688. Dadio - November 27, 2012

Unstoppable Force of Terror

We assume its a person who is the unstoppable force.

What if the Unstoppable force is Train :)

689. Harry Ballz - November 27, 2012

686. “long gunman”

Hey, gingerly, no one ever said that Oswald was well hung!

690. Harry Ballz - November 27, 2012

Bob

I’m worried about being taken in by impostors. Call me paranoid.

Did you actually give me advice by private emails about a certain issue?

691. Anthony Pascale - November 27, 2012

boborci is Bob Orci.

692. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@633 NCM, glad to have you on board the “its Khan” express finally.

@634 “Has Anthony shared his best guess?”

Huh? He broke the groundbreaking story with multiple inside sources last Spring that Khan is the villain — you know, the one story that Anthony wrote on this website the past for years that many, many people here are trying to pretend never happened.

Anthony and I know its Khan — no guessing needed.

693. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@684 “I’ll just say this. I truly hope the trek’s team aspect works as well as The Avengers’ did.”

I’d be much more happier with a Dark Night Rises approach — a multilayered film with gravitas, serious themes, as well as the necessary action and plot. The Avengers was a fun popcorn movie — but we can do a lot better than that shallow approach here I think folks.

694. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@690 You mean you never saw, “Debbie Does the Dallas Schoolbook Depository.” ???

695. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@690 “Bob Orci, did you actually give me advice by private emails about a certain issue?”

Harry, I don’t think Bob is a qualified MD. Priapism is a serious issue that you should discuss with a qualified medical professional. Sorry if I embarrassed you by bringing it up here.

696. MJ (The Original) - November 27, 2012

@676 / High Hopes: “From the May 12, 2012 Trekmovie article… Spot-on, if you ask me: ‘4. MJ – May 12, 2012 –OK, consider this. Think of a interstellar corporation with an overly ambitious leader, stumbling across the Botany Bay. They revive the crew and find out they are genetic superman. Weller’s character and Khan team up to take down Starfleet in some fashion (plot line here TBD), but to keep the identifies of Khan and his crew secret (so that they can infiltrate the Federation), their faces and looks are changed through Gene Therapy (thus, the “face melting” clue from Orci, which also explain how different Khan will look at played by BC). Then the Enterprise gets caught up in it and Enterprise versus Khan redux begins. Perhaps look for Pike to be killed early on, which will make it really personal for Kirk.’ ”

Thanks High Hopes. Yea, my theorizing back then certainly could fit very neatly in with this new plot summary just released. Did I nail another prediction here???

697. Anthony Thompson - November 28, 2012

AP, since you’re here…WHAT movie will the trailer be attached to?

698. gingerly - November 28, 2012

@689

Haha, yeah stepped into that one, not so gingerly.

Would’ve been a very different assassination…

Yeah, can’t finish that thought.

@693

The Dark Knight Rises was some old garbage.

It was full of plotholes and came off overly-ponderous and try-hard “dark”, IMO.

But then, I didn’t much care for the other Batman movies either.

Aside from the big-name actors (Freeman, Oldman, and Caine), there really wasn’t much there beyond a caged-faced, Sean Connery-sounding villain and a very long set-up for a new franchise, that probably won’t happen.

I think the new Batman owes more to hype and a culture of people wanting to love it then the films themselves being of any particular superior quality.

Watchable and mildly entertaining, but not face-meltingly good, like say…

Hulk tossing Loki like a ragdoll.

699. Ashley - November 28, 2012

When everyone was pitching ideas to Bob for the sequel, I thought about maybe having a renegade starfleet officer as a villain. One that had his own values and motives which happened to go against everyone else but weren’t necessarily wrong. Looks like maybe I got at least half of what I wanted. :)

And echoing everyone else… ‘detonated’ the fleet? wtf? o.O

700. DJT - November 28, 2012

So in this universe, does Gary Mitchell’s tube hit the ‘great barrier’ from WNMHGB and return as a superhuman?

Is the chess game mention a reference to the beginning of WNMHGB?

701. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@698. The Dark Knight Rises was the most realistic and best superhero movie of all time, and basically had Batman fighting terrorists in a movie defined by our times.. By comparison, The Avengers looks like Sponge Bob Square Points — noisy, funny and enjoyable, but not to be taken at all seriously.

702. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

“Pants”

703. JRT! - November 28, 2012

Hey Bob! Did you have fun in London? Any footage shown? lol! Any updates on TASM 2 script? Yeah,yeah,it’s a Trek site but I’m a Spidey fan too,lol!
J-R!

704. Richard - November 28, 2012

Just thinking out loud, I’d like to see a Trek film that is a cross between the TNG episode ‘Disaster’ and the film ‘Das Boot’ mixed with the falling crane scene from the film ‘The Abyss’.

Just my little fantasy.

705. gingerly - November 28, 2012

@701

I hope you’re being sarcastic. If not…well, to each his own.

706. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

I just dont get how alot of you look at Khan as being a one man WMD.
Khan was never about causing destruction, or chaos, or killing.
His whole schtick was using his superior intellect and Geneticly enhanced body, to rule. As its even stated in Space Seed”,Considered “the best of tyrants”, he severely curtailed the freedoms of his subjects, but his reign was an exception to similar circumstances in Earth history – lacking massacres or internal war”

. Under his rule he didnt massacre people or commit Genocide. And his goals after being thawed out in space seed isnt destruction, its to once again regain his status as a ruler, not a destroyer and this time the unvierse not just a world. jump forward to TWOK, he still is not a weapon of mass destruction he is just a man with a personal vendetta because of how he feels he was wronged. in the end The only reason he set off the genesis torpedo was cause he knew he wasabout to die and wanted to take kirk with him.

So again I will state Khan was never about creating destruction and death, he as he put it in space seed “We offered the world order!” “

707. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

644, unfortunately Hero Complex is no longer written by the much respected Geoff Buchard who has moved on to EW,
the new writer is nowhere near as knowledgeable or in the loop of the entertainment industry as Geoff is.
So i will totally ignore Patrick Kevin Days thoughts over at hero complex

708. boborci - November 28, 2012

686 Congtessional inquiry in 70s concluded a “probable conspiracy.” so U.S. govs last word on the subject cocluded multiple gunmen. if you want more, I got it.

709. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

FYI to any L.A. area readers the L.A. times will be hosting a advanced screening of the Hobbit 3D at the AMC Burbank 16 LIEMAX theatre, not sure if this screening will include the Star Trek opening, but tickets are free and become availbble on tues morning at 10am

http://herocomplexthehobbit2012.eventbrite.com/#

(just cause i dont like the new direction of the L.A. Times hero complex, doesnt mean I wont pass along info about a free screening from them)

710. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@706 Dude, you sound like Neville Chamberlain in 1937. “Hitler just needs some breathing room.”

711. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

MJ I agree with you, Dark Knight Rises was the superior movie over the Avengers. Cant wait to own it on Tuesday.

712. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

MJ not at all, just restating what Kirk and Scotty say in Space Seed.

713. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 28, 2012

Remember they mention a sort of respect for him, when they are discussing that period of Earths history

714. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@708 Is that the same Congress that kept rubber stamping Vietnam for over a decade and ramped up the military industrial complex time and time again under Kennedy’s great visionary, MacNamara and Nixon’s great genius Kissinger?

715. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@711. Cool dude, we agree on something, finally “See, we’re starting to get along” :-)

716. Richard - November 28, 2012

#715: You guys aren’t supposed to get along. How am I supposed to write my MJ vs MJ fan fiction now?

717. Adam E - November 28, 2012

@boborci: Do you know what nine minutes they are going to show at the IMAX “The Hobbit” showings? How much of the plot will be revealed? On a scale of 1-10, 1 being we don’t learn any more than we know now, 10 being we know everything. Will the identity of Cumberbatch’s character be revealed?

718. Tom - November 28, 2012

boborci, I just hope the name of the villain is more awesome than *Benedict Cumberbatch*.

719. Aurore - November 28, 2012

679. boborci – November 27, 2012
555 aurore

I did not write the press release.

_________

No….REALLY???

:))

So, you ignored a real question (@ 415 ) to reply to a post written in jest and, directed at another fan ????

Typical!

I feel SoOo victimized….

:)

720. Smegger56 - November 28, 2012

To all those who say JJ has ‘raped’ the franchise, I didn’t know that dull, boring and forced character interaction is what makes good Trek. Damn, we sure need that DS9, VOY, ENT and last two TNG films back, don’t we.

Anyway, this sounds very exciting. Loved the 2009 film. Can’t wait for this one :)

721. csmisi - November 28, 2012

I’m going with Garth of Izar theory too. But let’s wait and see, only about two and a half weeks until the big preview :)

722. VulcanFilmCritic - November 28, 2012

@655 gingerly

I believe Gary Seven has been mentioned before and on other web sites as a possible villain. “Assignment: Earth” was also a pilot for a possible series featuring Gary Seven. Too bad it never flew. The Gary Seven character always seemed more like an American Dr. Who than anything else. (Transporter in a closet rather than the Tardis, ditzy female companion, etc.) Robert Lansing was too stiff and grumpy to make it interesting. But I can totally see Cumberbach as a time-traveling time lord. Still, I have some difficulty imagining him as Jim Kirk’s friend from Starfleet, that is, unless he’s a rather eccentric British friend from Starfleet.

723. Bob Mack - November 28, 2012

I’m looking forward to seeing a nine minute preview that probably creates more questions than it answers. I wonder if we will even know who the villain is after seeing it?

724. Mikey C - November 28, 2012

I thought that the new IDW comics are part of the new Trek continuity. If so, Gary Mitchell has already met his fate in the new timeline. But George Samuel Kirk Jr. is still alive in this new universe. Maybe Cumberbatch is playing Kirk’s brother. Also, in the comics where Sam has appeared, is mention how their mother is dead. Looking forward to the film regardless of who the villain is. Will definitely be seeing it day 1 as soon as humanly possible.

725. BulletInTheFace - November 28, 2012

Why do people keep saying Gary Seven? He is NOT a villain, nor would he become one just because the Kelvin was destroyed.

726. Max - November 28, 2012

It should be clear by now that Bob enjoys messing with everyones head! And I say good on him for keeping you guessing and misdirecting you all into thinking Khan/Mitchell/Canon villian. I’m absolutely certain it’s not a Canon villain. BUT, maaaybe someone from Canon who wasn’t originally a villain but now is. Aaaaargh BOB! stop messing with my head! :-)

727. BulletInTheFace - November 28, 2012

#641:

Actually, it wasn’t confirmed. The list of canon characters you mention came form Devon Faraci, not Paramount. And Devon Faraci has a horrible track record for getting facts straight. He used to make up crap all the time at CHUD, and is widely considered a non-reliable source of information.

728. JRT! - November 28, 2012

Well I guess Mr.Orci can’t answer EVRYTHING he’s aksed here,lol! He ignored my questions too,but then again,they weren’t entirely new movie related,only one of’em were.

Anyways,it’s been fun reading all this madness,lol,but I’m done for now. No answers are forthcoming so time to move on. Look forward to the trailer and such,and I guess this madness begins again soon as it’s released,LOL!

Have fun y’all!

J-R!

729. Flake - November 28, 2012

I think Mitchell.

One man weapon of mass destruction. Maybe he has god-like powers that enable him to blow things up with a thought? Sort of like Magneto but much worse… like Q but really bad ;)

OR

Khan has got his hands on a superweapon, but the ome man WMD still seems odd…

So I think Mitchell, though TBH it doesn’t have to be Mitchell, it could be anyone, it depends on whomever touches a certain energy field first or something. Maybe its someone new.

730. Aurore - November 28, 2012

“Well I guess Mr.Orci can’t answer EVRYTHING he’s aksed here,lol! He ignored my questions too…”
______

He should always take the time to answer MY questions.

Otherwise, I agree; he can’t answer everything he’s asked here.

I’m reasonable enough to understand that. I am. Definitely.

:)

731. JRT! - November 28, 2012

LOL Aurore! Well then he should DEFO take the time to answer MINE as well,lol!

And I KNOW I spelt everything wrong,before anyone jumps all over me about it,was just in a rush,lol!

Keep Trekkin’!

John-Robin!

732. Jonboc - November 28, 2012

#611 you make a compelling argument. All signs seem to point to Mitchell. I hope you’re right. I’d love to see ol’ silver eyes go postal on the Federation!

733. Travis - November 28, 2012

@ 559: Ok fool… you show me WHERE Gary Mitchell survived??? Because the last time i checked Mitchell was SHOT by Kirk! This happened when Gary came to his old self asking Jim to kill him before the God-like powers returned to Gary on Delta Vega… hence Gary is dead! You also cant tell me that this Alternate Trek isnt following the same line as the Prime Trek because it is! Now maybe YOU should go look back at the hints that JJ Abrams, Bob Orci and Alex Krutzman have been tossing out as the next villian… Lets see shall we! First they wanted to put the Botany Bay floating in space after the credits in Star Trek 2009. 2nd: JJ Abrams gave a interview to MTV in 2010 stating that Kirk and Khan can NOT ignore eachother that they are destined to meet! 3rd: JJ Abrams wants Star Trek: Into Darkness to look like The Dark Knight or follow the same path… To do that you have to find a Iconic Character in the Star Trek Series like The Joker is to The Dark Knight… KHAN is to Star Trek…. Not Gary Mitchell!!… Why he was killed off in the first Ongoing comic!

734. Spock Jr. - November 28, 2012

— The intrepid crew of the USS Enterprise are set to be tested like never before in Star Trek Into Darkness. Captain Kirk must risk all that he has come to hold dear, during an epic and deadly game against an implacable, unstoppable enemy – a one-man weapon of mass destruction – across a strange and war-ravaged world…

Much better. ;D

735. Hugh Hoyland - November 28, 2012

Cant wait to see “The Hobbit”…so I can see the first 9 minutes of STID to!
And how much do u want to bet the villain isnt revealed until 10 minutes AFTER. ;)

736. j - November 28, 2012

Jesus, that synopsis sound utterly boring.

737. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

#675. High Hopes

I remeber when first watching TWoK that this would be an equally engrossing movie if Khan got killed in the next scene because Joachim was making all the right calls.

If GENERATIONS’ writers could rewrite Spock and McCoy, I don’t see why a rewrite of Khan is out of the question?

738. Maltz - November 28, 2012

Tired of terrorism. I miss aliens. And discovery. You can say this is Star Trek for a new generation. Fine. But Star Trek was born out of the wonder of space exploration that sprang from the Space Age. Would like to see more of that.

739. Basement Blogger - November 28, 2012

@ 733

Travis,

You make excellent points. But try to avoid the name calling. Yes, I know Montreal Paul can drive you crazy. :-) Trust me. He and I fought over this over and over.

I still believe the villain is Khan. But with that press release, it looks like t he threat comes from within the Federation. So, Gary Mitchell supporters have something to talk about.

On the other hand, why search for a Hispanic actor ala Ricardo Montalban? And if it is Mitchell why does the leaked video show BC beating the tar out of Spock if he could use telekinesis? The other points you make can be cited too. And why would Anthony Pascale’s sources lie to him if it’s not Khan? By the way TrekMovie still stands by its stories that BC is Khan.

740. Gary S. - November 28, 2012

Well Maltz ,most of the movie will be set in Space.
It is a start.
and without intimate knowledge of the script ,
We cannot rule out exploration just yet .
At least, I dont .

741. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 28, 2012

Some of the ideas above seem forced and illogical. If Khan is working with Kirk on any level, it’s going to be a stretch of the imagination.
Isn’t there so much more we could be exploring with these characters?

Can’t wait to see how this all plays out.

My Phaser’s safety is still ON.

742. John from Cincinnati - November 28, 2012

My Star Trek’s heroes were explorers and scientitsts first, soldiers second. This new incarnation they are only soldiers.

743. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

Some of the questions and answers are repeated above, so maybe a FAQ is in order.

Frequently Asked Questions In This Thread: Is the villain Gary Mitchell?

Answer: Some are convinced that it is because Gary Mitchell is one of the few superbeings in the TOS canon universe that could single-handedly create the level of havoc implied in the synopsis. Gary Mitchell is also a canonical character, which the villain is thought to be. Further, Mitchell is an Academy friend of Kirk, which supports the “personal” aspect of Kirk’s pursuit. Still further, Mitchell is a Starfleet officer, which jibes with the “from within” reference in the synopsis. The character played by Cumberbatch is acknowledged to be the prime villain in the movie, and he is seen wearing a Starfleet-type uniform in leaked photos where he is in hand-to-hand combat with Spock.

Cumberbatch’s character may also be immune to the Vulcan nerve inch, from the same evidence.

However, depending on how one interprets the “one man” reference in the synopsis, it could also refer to Khan. Some continue to believe that the synopsis leaves substantial room open for Khan either to be the villain, or to give rise to the primary villain.

Those who deny that Mitchell is the villain point out that the IDW Countdown comics building up to the events of this movie have depicted Kirk as having phasered a hole through Mitchell’s chest, either actually killing or appearing to have killed him. It is said that this means that Mitchell must be dead, and to claim otherwise would require the writers of the comics, which producers say are canonical, to contradict their own canon. The counterargument to this is to say that even if Mitchell had been killed, there is no finality in this kind of death in science fiction, especially for characters who are superbeings, and in fact some say that Mitchell’s death may be a kind of MacGuffin or red herring. In response, the argument is that Mitchell was killed in the comics before he actually became godlike.

Proponents of the theory that Khan is the primary villain point to the fact that Benecio Del Toro, an actor of Hispanic or Spanish background, was strongly considered for what is believed to be that role, before turning it down. Khan was originally portrayed by the famous Ricardo Montalban, of similar heritage.

Further, they argue that Khan is a much better-known character in the Trek universe, whereas by comparison Gary Mitchell is hardly known at all.

744. John from Cincinnati - November 28, 2012

…These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. It’s five year mission, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before….

745. John from Cincinnati - November 28, 2012

Governor Kodos the executioner?

746. Richard Johnson - November 28, 2012

@733 A godlike entity got shot out of a photon torpedo tube so he’s dead? Not to mention the sheer fact that they did a comic specifically about the character…

The comic avoided including Dr. Elizabeth Dehner, who sacrificed her life to help weaken and kill Mitchell in the original episode. Alice Eve has a Dr. Elizabeth Dehner hairstyle from a set photo (she does not wear this hairstyle off-set.) The set photos of Spock fighting Cumberbach appear to dramatize the end of a comic that’s already been released.

Plus, I hate to bring this into a “Star Trek” nerd discussion, but the reason they’re not going for “Garth” is because that episode is mediocre, and the team was presumably trying to bring a dramatic, mythical, allegorical weight to the material that reflected the best of the original “Star Trek” (and not “Star Wars,” as wonks criticized.) Classic sci-fi intellectual “substance” was mostly lost after “Next Generation,” especially. In my opinion Kirk vs. Mitchell was the most interesting the original “Trek” ever got, thematically, coming straight out of the rich tradition of weighty 50s and 60s sci-fi literature pondering man’s nature. The end of the episode, between Kirk, Dehner and Mitchell is still somewhat staggering, as a dramatic moment, Shatner and lame fist-fight and all. I hope this is mainly the reason they chose the Mitchell story.

747. Smike - November 28, 2012

To Bodly Go “Where No Man Has Gone Before” has gone before LOL

748. DrkMatter - November 28, 2012

His age, very close to Kirk’s.
Wearing a starfleet uniform in the leaked photos.
“One man weapon of mass destruction.”
And last, but not least, Urban’s slip of the tongue, “”He’s awesome, he’s a great addition, and I think his Gary Mitchell is going to be exemplary.”

It’s Gary Mitchell.

749. cd - November 28, 2012

665. Hair is parted on the other side; totally different.

>;>}

750. Gary Mitchell - November 28, 2012

Gary Mitchell got to Earth

751. Nony - November 28, 2012

I always thought Mitchell died a little too quickly/easily in the comics for it to be a final thing, and pushing Elizabeth Dehner out of the picture with a throwaway line or two seemed very fishy. Why mention her at all if she would never be shown in any capacity, and why leave her out if that comic would be the only opportunity to re-do that story and those characters in reboot canon? It’s not as if she’s a discardable character in the Mitchell story – she is someone people remember. I expected her to show up later in the comic. She didn’t. Chehkov’s gun, so to speak, still hasn’t been fired.

752. Nony - November 28, 2012

(Chekhov. Damn typos.)

753. star trackie - November 28, 2012

Yes, the being with God-like powers was supposedy “killed” in the comic….but in a way that could easily bring him into the new movie. It’s called a diversion folks. Throw in a little movie-making magic and anything is possible.

754. Sebastian S. - November 28, 2012

I’m still reading lots of “It’s Khan” nonsense.

Really? Khan is suddenly a “one-man weapon of mass destruction”?!? Is this the same Khan who got his a$$ handed to him on a paper plate when Kirk kicked his genetically enhanced butt in engineering with what looked like a kitchen paper towel dispenser?!? THAT Khan?

Okkkaaaayyyy then…. :-o

Incidentally, Khan only took over the Enterprise with help from the ship’s historian and his revived followers. Hardly a one-man engine of devastation here, folks. I think Khan’s reputation far outstrips what we actually SEE of the character on screen….

Still thinking the villain could be Gary Mitchell (the IDW comic leaves his body floating in space; he could be regenerating in that photon tube. After all, a phaser rifle didn’t stop him in the TOS version, remember?) or Garth of Izar (that would better fit the ‘threat from within’ description) or (my withering hope) an all new character.

But frankly; I’d be happy with almost anyone except for Khan (or Harry Mudd). ;-)

755. mr mugato - November 28, 2012

Tribbles. Mark my words.

756. Jack - November 28, 2012

751. One possibility: they were playing with the idea that things had changed. And it was a short comic — Lee Kelso and Mitchell had suddenly appeared out of nowhere, with a bunch if explaining…adding another new character would have been clunky as heck.

Or, yes, they could have been saving Dehner for later. But…

757. Gary S. - November 28, 2012

Trek Into Darkness: a voyage to The Tribbles homeworld?
YES!

758. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

There was a considerable buzz prior to Star Trek (2009)’s release and the use of viral marketing.

Is the concept of viral online marketing passe’?

This very site contained a “viral”-type banner ad that invited users to click on it — leading to a number of pages that were equally intriguing.

See: http://www.hatricksblog.blogspot.ca/2008/05/viral-marketing.html

I look forward to similar creativity with regard to STID.

759. Sebastian S. - November 28, 2012

# 756

Wouldn’t surprise me if Alice Eve were playing Dehner.
She’s a bit too ‘sexy’ to be playing the more average looking Carol Marcus (not to mention that Marcus was never a Starfleet officer; and in the spoiler pics we clearly see Eve in starfleet attire). She also looks quite a bit like the character; even her hairstyle from the set pics is a dead match for Sally Kellerman’s in WNMHGB.

If the villain is indeed Gary Mitchell, then I had a thought about how to do t that doesn’t rule out the IDW comic book. Perhaps the IDW comic could be condensed into a prologue sequence that could open the movie (ala Kirk’s birth/George Kirk’s death in ST09). They already condensed the WNMHGB story from an hour long TOS episode into a single volume comic book; wouldn’t be too hard to show it as a 15 or 20 minute prologue sequence. Then after the credits we see “One Year Later…” onscreen.
The movie then officially begins…

It would bring people not familiar with WNMHGB (or the IDW comic) up to speed on who Mitchell was and why he was so important to Kirk.

Just a thought….

760. dalek - November 28, 2012

@742

“I’m a soldier, not a diplomat.”
– Kirk, Errand of Mercy

Just saying!

761. George Zip - November 28, 2012

One man weapon of mass destruction = Gary Mitchell IMO. Maybe the “called home” thing equals the ENTERPRISE coming back after being damaged in the barrier. We know in TOS it had to limp home for repairs and reconfiguration.

#759 above; good thought process. I can see it.

(And then this one ends with the post-credits teaser the Brain Trust wanted in the original; fade to a star field, and we see a ship floating amongst the shadows; it tumbles sunward and we see a familiar shape and the words SS BOTANY BAY on its side…)

762. CJS - November 28, 2012

Gary Mitchell has no cachet. Outside of the fan base, he’s a meaningless commodity. Why even bother to keep it a secret? The same goes for Garth, Ron Tracey, Charlie Evans, Korob & Sylvia, the God Apollo, any random Platonian or any other character from the 1960’s.

One shouldn’t read to much into the hyperbole of the PR hack that wrote this synopsis. “One-man weapon of mass destruction” tells us nothing about this antagonist. It doesn’t necessarily mean that he physically possess the power of a WMD.

763. Picard's Fish - November 28, 2012

we’ll know so much more in:

— 16 days —-

Let the countdown begin!!

764. Red Dead Ryan - November 28, 2012

I find it lame that if it is Gary Mitchell, that he comes back from the dead just to get revenge on Kirk by causing mass destruction, and possibly killing his family in the process. Kirk then responds with his own quest for vengeance against Mitchell, and kills Mitchell.

And it makes the whole “he’s dead, but not so dead he can’t come back” scenario entirely lame in the process. Yeah, I know its sci-fi, but still, this card has been played so many times before.

Also, for those saying Mitchell could survive being blasted in the chest with a phaser, how come you are so certain then his being buried under a giant boulder at the end of “Where No Man Has Gone Before” actually killed him? Would he not have had the ability to somehow lift the boulder high enough to crawl out?

765. Fuba Mushu - November 28, 2012

In all of this talk about who the villain is, everyone keeps referring to characters from the real Star Trek universe. Garth. Mitchell. Khan. Why does it have to be one of these characters? Why can’t it be a new character?

Consider this:

First, this is not the real Star Trek universe. This is a lame, bastardized version of the real Star Trek universe. We’ve been introduced to a major character who did not exist in the real Star Trek universe.

Second, the argument that this must be Gary Mitchell because he and Kirk were so close only applies to the real Star Trek universe. In this lame, bastardized version of Star Trek, Gary Mitchell has not been seen or referenced in any way, shape or form. If Kirk and Mitchell are so close, such good buds in this bastardized version of Star Trek, why was there no mention of the name or scene with the character in the first movie?

766. Fuba Mushu - November 28, 2012

@CJS

#762

Amen!

767. George Zip - November 28, 2012

FWIW, I love the idea of Cumberbach as Gary Seven. He looks the part, he can do the suave pseudo Bond character well. But I don’t think it’s in the cards because, as others have said, Cumberbach is the confirmed villain/opponent (almost uttered “nemesis”), and Seven isn’t a villain.

768. George Zip - November 28, 2012

#765 – it’s been confirmed that (a) Cumberbach is the villain (or at least opponent to Kirk) and, (b) he’s a canon character. I forget when this was noted but I do remember the canon character confirmation.

769. Red Dead Ryan - November 28, 2012

Not to mention if it is Mitchell, after he gets killed at the end of the movie (most likely the film will deal with the villain in the “traditional” manner) people will still claim that he’s not really dead, or that he could still come back to life for the third movie.

770. Red Dead Ryan - November 28, 2012

Also, some have mentioned George Samuel Kirk as the potential villain.

Why? Why would Kirk’s brother suddenly be a bad guy in this timeline?

That is so lame.

771. Nony - November 28, 2012

@756 Jack
I don’t know, it seemed equally as clunky to me *not* to have her and explain her away with just ‘something awkward with Bones, so she left’. My guess is, if she is in the movie, she may be introduced as a part of McCoy’s backstory in the comic centered around him, which is due out in January or February, I think.

772. George Zip - November 28, 2012

boborci — I still think it would have been fun to leak some intentionally misleading spy shots or clips.

For instance: scene starts on the bridge, the turbo lift opens, and we see Quinto in a bland jumpsuit with some gear around his head — he starts walking stiffly, and there’s Urban behind him with a remote control making him walk. (I think the visual would be great, but I’d love to hear Urban growl, “HIS BRAIN IS GONE”)

Others:

A single shot of Quinto with a beard.

A picture of the Balok puppet on the view screen.

Any picture of Clint Howard.

Alice Eve in a flower dress with Yelchin.

Will Ferrell dressed like one of the guys from The Apple.

Sarah Silverman dressed as Miri.

A faked F/X shot of the doomsday machine.

(I could do this for days, eh?)

773. olly - November 28, 2012

Cumberbatch is playing Khan. His fans know he’s playing an iconic character from the series and that its not Gary.

774. Nony - November 28, 2012

(cont’d, accidentally submitted too fast) It may also be why the comics are being released in the order they are – I mean, why would Keenser and Cupcake both get their own stories before *McCoy*? Because there may be relevant information in the McCoy issue, and they don’t want to introduce a movie character in the comics too early – just close enough to the movie when the publicity is starting to rev up and we’re really paying attention.

Speculate, speculate, speculate. :)

775. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 28, 2012

When the whole fleet has been destroyed and Starfleet itself compromised then I hope that this will reflect in the third movie. Even darker with new uniforms that look like military uniforms, darker bridge of the Enterprise, an upgraded ship looking more like a warship. Everything is more grim as they have to be prepared for attacks from every side and at every time. The Federation has become vulnerable and they somehow have to make up for it by becoming more military focused.

New ships could be built, for example a big war-crusier called Excelsior.

This way the new timelime would differ even more from the prime timeline.

776. Rudy 'Stretch' Twigg - November 28, 2012

I am sorry my English is very carzy, but here in France nobody care about new Star Wars film.

Star trek film in 2009 is very bad, so many people’s like 1960 Star Trek television much better

777. Well Of Souls - November 28, 2012

708. boborci. On the Kennedy statement: ” if you want more, I got it”. I am most certainly interested as my dad was a buzz man in Kennedy’s campaign for Wisconsin. He was the guy who would come into town alerting the locals that Kennedy would be arriving to their community ala the recorded music of Frank Sinatra singing High Hopes. In some of the vintage PBS shows depicting the Wisconsin primary of the time, the station wagon with the big horn speaker on top is my dad. He had some great stories about his time spent on the road. He later received several letters signed by Jack himself, recognizing & thanking him for his services. Realistically all my dad really wanted was a little extra $ to replace some of the old wooden boats with aluminum boats @ the resort where I was raised. BTW, a copy of the letter from JFK was always an easy “A” for the day in history class for me & later for my kids.

778. BulletInTheFace - November 28, 2012

It’s not Khan. It’s obviously not Khan. It’s clearly not Khan. There’s no doubt that it’s not Khan.

Why?

‘Cause it’s not Khan.

779. Brady - November 28, 2012

Meh.

780. Red Ryanne - November 28, 2012

764 well i find the idea of a British actor portraying Khan lame!

781. Well Of Souls - November 28, 2012

708. boborci. pt.II… Coincidentally, I was born that same year just a month or so before John Jr.. Jokingly my dad’s comment was’ “I can’t see why he’s getting all the attention & not one mention of my son.” LOL. Clicking on my name will give you a little artifact from the past.

782. Phil - November 28, 2012

@770…because no one knows anything, so we are all guessing. We have had two years of several people coughing up possible Khan scenarios, and suprise, the synopisis doesn’t seem to have it being Khan……maybe we will actually have ourselves a real origonal story afterall, with some canon characters added as background characters, which actually makes a hellava lot of sense…..

783. al - November 28, 2012

bob orci, the hsca you mentioned did find probable cause for a conspiracy, but its findings are old hat now. little reason to think it was on current scholarship. see bugliosi’s book

784. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

Although the present comic series can be considered canon, anything that goes on film may trump whatever is written in the comics. Therefore, it is possible that the writers might contradict what is told in the comics, in order to have the story they want put on film. For the Star Trek franchise, film trumps all else, in terms of what is considered true canon. I do think that it is doubtful that the writers would do this, but they could.

If Gary Mitchell has indeed developed god-like powers, then I am not sure a direct hit with a phaser would knock him out for long. He may quite possibly have developed self-healing abilities, so who knows…

Anyway, the assumption is that it must be someone from the TOS TV series. What about the movies? No, I don’t mean Khan and a redoing of the Wrath of Khan either. One of the protagonists from the TOS movie series would have been about Kirk’s age…just saying.

This is an alternate timeline, which can mean that the same two people could still meet, but at a different age and in (slightly) different circumstances from those of the prime timeline.

Kirk’s older brother, Sam, being a possible villain? Quite possible. Anyway, what makes or turns a person into a villain? Nero did not start out being a villain – he was a simple miner who wanted nothing more than to be able to take care of his growing family…
S

785. Phil - November 28, 2012

Seems like a few people have taken the ‘detonated the fleet’ comment too literally, and out of context of the whole statement. “And everything it stands for’ would tend to suggest a crisis in the Federation, as opposed to yet another Trek bad guy wrecking havoc on individual ships. If Kirk is to become this bigger man in this movie, then we need a plausable story that grows his stature within the Federation, and not just some engagement in some corner of the universe.

786. Jack - November 28, 2012

784. Agreed!

787. Sahlgren - November 28, 2012

Enough with the Mitchell or Khan. Those are both too obvious. Mitchell IS dead in the comic, he’s dead. Khan? Nope. Already did that movie and it was great.

I still say it’s Finnegan.
or maybe Redjack. RedjackredjackREDJACK!
Powerful enough to manipulate ANYONE and make them do anything.

What do the Cumberbatch’s green/turquise eyes mean? They’re pretty unsettling and no one’s really talking about them. Seems like an obvious hint to me.

788. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

I wonder – was it Bob Orci (or another of his team) who first told us that this movie’s villain is someone iconic to the TOS series? Anthony – perhaps you could help confirm?…

If so, I wonder if this is the lie that Bob talks about telling us…

789. Jack - November 28, 2012

771. Agreed. But, they breezed through the whole story in a few pages… it would have taken a lot of attention away from our heroes. In that pilot, aside from Kelso, Mitchell and Dehner, everyone but Spock and Kirk was a marginal character… But you’re absolutely right.

Either it was a fun way to avoid a brand new character and/or they may plan to use her somewhere else.

So, Bob was possibly lying about canon, or about it not being Gary Mitchell? Didn’t Zac Snyder say Zod wasn’t in Man of Steel?

I hope Bob wasn’t lying about the face melting.

790. Visitor1982 - November 28, 2012

It’s Dr. Pulaski!

791. Rick Johnson - November 28, 2012

Hate to regurgitate old posts for ADD people, but this is pretty much case-closed on Mitchell being the villain and Eve being Dehner, especially in light of the synopsis and Cumberbatch being in Starfleet uniform:

Hairstyle of Alice Eve in character, vs. Dr. Elizabeth Dehner:

http://bit.ly/Tt1XSv

http://bit.ly/QKF4M5

For people saying Mitchell is “dead” via the comics, 1)he’s fired out a photon torpedo tube for convenient, Spocklike rebirth, 2)the stills with Spock pinching Cumberbatch actually appear to be a recreation of Spock pinching Mitchell and sapping his power in the comic series, 3)the comics lack Dehner, who weakened Mitchell enough for Kirk to kill him. Alice Eve: Dehner. She’s dying at the end of this one too, kids.

792. EM - November 28, 2012

@ 657. Red Dead Ryan

“Pretty sure it isn’t Gary Seven. Seven wasn’t a villain. He was seeking global disarmament.”

There are, always have been, and always will be people who egange in radical, violent behaviour in the name of politically correct, peaceful ideals.

793. Peter Loader - November 28, 2012

It could be Khan. If we assume the Enterprise has been on a mission for at least a year. The Space Seed has happened, though albeit differently. Khan could be very much the villain, who has escaped his fate on Ceti Alpha 5 and has returned to Earth to conquer it, having infiltrated Starfleet to secure key positions for the takeover.

794. Jack - November 28, 2012

758. I think it is a bit passe — all the ARGs and phony websites… Although Prometheus did it. I don’t think TV shows are doing it as much as before…

I think if you’re going to do those sorts of things, do them well. A lot of that Trek 09 additional marketing (the dance parties, the art stuff, that mobile game, those advertsing partner sites) was all a bit forced. I remember going to an awful official party in Toronto for the X-Men premiere where all the waitresses were wearing Storm wigs… did it make anybody see the movie who wouldn’t have? Doubtful.

795. Jack - November 28, 2012

790. Again, the Starfleet uniform doesn’t prove it’s Mitchell. Or anyone else. The guy wouldn’t change his shirt after being resurrected? If it is Mitchell, apparently he covered up the gray at his temples. And, sure, he may have lost his powers — hence the lack of silver contacts. And he’s be a more interesting villain if he couldn’t just change everything with his mind.

Again, he might have kept the shirt, or might have had a stockpile of them somewhere (or just liked the fit and used his brain to make a bunch more) and, yes, he might be the villain… but we have about as much proof with Mitchell as we had with Khan (he has dark hair! He’s buff! They were casting a latino guy, like Ricardo Montaban!)

So far, we have a haircut (even though nobody else other than Spock in Trek 09 has the same haircut as the characters had on TV), a uniform and a bit about a one man force of destruction that could apply to nearly every movie villain ever..

But WNHGB is kind of a one-note story about absolute power corrupting absolutely, choosing head over heart and the weakness, and power, of compassion. This movie would have to have a lot more going for it.

Trek is tough. Nero would have worked as a villain in most other franchises. Heck, look at MI:4 where we knew even less about the guy and his motives (he’s crazy and wants to destroy the world — enough said).

We need a character, not a ‘villain.’ and, other than having god-like powers caused by flying too close to the barrier, Mitchell doesn’t have a lot of background in starfleet at this point (he was at the academy with Kirk — and then he was ‘possessed’ and maybe died).

Could still be Khan, could be Mitchell, could be anyone (heck, even Janice Lester could be inside Cumberbatch… and I think she’d wear head to toe leather). Coud be someone new.

796. NuFan - November 28, 2012

People have to explore more than just trek sites.

Bob Orci told AICN in a live podcast that it’s not Gary Mitchell.

Entertainment Weekly said the only thing keeping the villain a secret is trekkie denial.

I choose to put one and one together correctly.

But at least now you have to admit that you are not getting a remake or rehash. You are getting an all new Khan story!

797. Jack - November 28, 2012

Howdy, Bob. So, has Cumberbatch’s identity been guessed on this page? Of course, we have a bunch of names, and ‘someone new’ to choose from.

How’s Ender’s Game coming? Should I read it before seeing the movie? I was a big fan of The Amazing Spider-Man… I’m hoping you guys keep that sense that he’s an ordinary, wisecracking, skinny kid with a backpack who’s in over his head.

798. skippydog - November 28, 2012

“detonated the fleet”??? Who approved this? It sounds like something you would read in bad fan faction written by an 12 year old. How do you “detonate” a fleet anyway?

799. Trekzilla - November 28, 2012

Maybe Spock is inside the Doomsday Machine in that spacesuit? LOL!!

800. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

@Jack (793), thanks for sharing your experience.

I agree that viral marketing has to be done well in order to work, or else it just introduces a giggle factor to the whole promotion.

There was a promotion for a recent movie that involved placing fake circuit boards on newspaper vending machines, which resulted in the bomb squad’s being called. It worked so “well,” I remember the promotion, but I don’t remember the name of the movie.

Although I do think we could easily think of viral techniques for the next movie that could easily work: A dark theater. Really, really dark. Then suddenly lots of lens flares. Then darkness again.

;-)

801. Trekzilla - November 28, 2012

If I find out Cumby is playing Khan, Orci can kiss off my ticket money. In no way is that actor suited to play Khan. But aside from that, I would not pay to see Khan in another Star Trek movie.

If Khan is in this film, I’ll spend that money on Man of Steel twice!

802. Trekzilla - November 28, 2012

#797 — You hack the self destruct codes of the ships and set them off simultaneously? :-) Just a thought. Can anyone read my posts? :-)

803. Anthony Thompson - November 28, 2012

It’s Cupcake. No doubt.

804. filmboy - November 28, 2012

@661, I disagree. I think Carol Marcus would be a great character to use in STID. She was one of the few women who seemed to be Kirk’s equal and she was the only one (that we know of) that he fathered a child with.

In addition, I just find the idea of this Kirk becoming a father to be very interesting. This Kirk lost his father on the day of his birth and never knew him. He never had him as an influence and guiding figure in his life. I just wonder what this Kirk would do should Carol come to him and tell him he is going to be a father?

Would he chose to stay away and never reveal he is the child’s father, fueled by his fear over putting his son through what he experienced with his own father, losing him far too early? Or would he choose to abandon Starfleet and his command to be there for the child? To be his father and out of danger?

I mean to me I think Kirk becoming a father is an interesting place to put this version of the character. It creates some very compelling drama for Kirk as he is forced to choose which family is more important to him: his crew or Carol and his child. The focus on family in the synopsis could lead one to theorize that this plot line could play out in STID.

Not that I have anything against Elizabeth Dehner. I just feel Carol Marcus would be so much better in the film and not just because she has a child with Kirk. It is more her character and what she brings to the dynamic of the Enterprise family.

805. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

#801 – Agreed.

The word “detonate” is a sensationalist word, evoking an (almost) immediate visceral response from the reader…

As others have mentioned, it is quite likely that the word “detonate” could be interpreted both literally and figuratively. I wonder if the “fleet” used in the synopsis may not actually mean Starfleet, as in Starfleet Headquarters in San Francisco. As the synopsis does point to a conspiracy coming from the inside, perhaps it is Starfleet Headquarters itself that is literally blown up. Anyone heard of suicide bombers and martyrs for the cause? These people have been around FOREVER…sadly.

That would certainly give those who like some bang, bang and big ‘plosions a little something for their bucks… meanwhile others have to start cleaning up the mess and try to make sense of what happened, why and how to prevent similar from happening again.

806. Rick Johnson - November 28, 2012

@803 Just ignoring the Mitchell-doubters now…

I think they’ve got something good cooked up with the Dehner/Mitchell thing. WNMhGB is my favorite episode of any “Star Trek” ever, and Kirk’s appeal to Dehner/Mitchell is the first and maybe even best “Kirk moment.” (they did a good job re-creating a classic “Kirk moment” with Kirk vs. Spock in ’09.)

For some reason I was obsessed with that scene growing up, used to watch it over and over again on VHS. The episode has great Spock material, too: Mitchell is the essence of illogical, power-hungry, corrupt core of the emotional human.

You add a love story into that, I only think it gets better. Hopefully they know how to expand the material and make it awesome.

807. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

I have always wanted it to be written into a story and be part of Kirk’s story that he becomes a dad, not necessarily to Carol Marcus (I really hope not). Given who he is and the responsibilities and obligations he has, being a proper dad wouldn’t be easy for him to fulfill, but do it he will, to the best of his abilities, this time round, no matter what the mother may say…

Anyway, I already *know who she is and the where’s, how’s, why’s…perhaps a sub-plot for the third movie?…

808. THX-1138 - November 28, 2012

I would be so much more interested in a Gary Mitchell movie than Khan movie.

I’ve already seen the ultimate Khan movie. A new take on Mitchell would be at least interesting.

And if reading a comic book is some sort of requirement for understanding the particulars of what will appear on screen then count me out. That’s dumb. “Let’s make Star Trek accessible to the general public!” “Hey great idea! Let’s make them have to read a comic book! That will surely resonate with the masses!”

809. equivocalus - November 28, 2012

Has anyone considered the possibility of BC being a KLINGON SPY? It’s a TOS trope

810. equivocalus - November 28, 2012

A surgically-altered klingon spy…it would explain his ability to kick Spock’s butt and destroy fleet from within.

Thoughts?

811. CJS - November 28, 2012

Arne Darvin!

812. enterprise1965 - November 28, 2012

Boborci, is Matt Decker the villian after stealing the enterprise? Into darkess refer to the Doomsday machine? Am I even close to the story?

813. Peter Loader - November 28, 2012

Funny how actor Robert Walker (who played Charlie X) is in a movie titled Out of the Darkness…

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0907480/

Enough said.

814. CJS - November 28, 2012

Who else with superior physical attributes might undergo surgical reconstruction in order to conceal his true identity? Someone thawed out of suspended animation by a rouge Starfleet officer and then surgically altered from a Sikh warrior to a pasty faced Englishman so that no one on Earth or in Starfleet could recognize a tyrannical leader from Earth’s past?

815. Mad Man - November 28, 2012

808: That’s very possible, but I doubt it. It would be cool to make him a Klingon spy. Cumby is playing a TOS character, otherwise they would release the character name.

I’m still thinking it’s Khan. But I wouldn’t be surprised that it was Gary Mitchell at this point, since Orci has already stated he lied. So, if it is Mitchell, then that would mean the comics are all BS and that Orci lied directly to Herc from AICN live on the radio.

816. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 28, 2012

I am sure that when we see the trailer we will see a long shot showing 8 – 10 starships being “detonated.”

Some here are pointing out that the synopsis is poorly wrtten, but would someone with poor writing skills write “detonating”?
Without having seenit in the trailer?

NO. They would not.

The description does appear to be poorly written. Someone (probably JJ’s secretary) wrote the synopsis after having just watched the trailer.

It’s my belief that this is as deep as it will ever go as to how they blew up those ships.

It will be called an “inside job” and this will help kickstart Kirk’s executive actions, that will be strongly questioned by his bridge crew
Is Kirk going to be W in this Trek?

817. Basement Blogger - November 28, 2012

@ 800

Trekzilla says,

“If Khan is in this film, I’ll spend that money on Man of Steel twice!”

Really? Look, I don’t think Khan is a good idea even though I believe it’s Khan. But what if they make a great film? Are you going to skip that? The Supreme Court has promised a deeper film. I’m very interested in seeing big screen Star Trek that will blow my mind as well as my senses.

What would Captain Kirk say here? Oh, this is from Star Trek 3:

“Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant!”

Okay, Khan is not so fresh. But a different story involving him could be new. So save your quatloos for the upcoming Star Trek movie.

818. Smike - November 28, 2012

@786: “What do the Cumberbatch’s green/turquise eyes mean? They’re pretty unsettling and no one’s really talking about them. Seems like an obvious hint to me.”

Whoa…he actually wore green screen lenses? To make them shine adequatly when he becomes powerful? It’s not green-eyed Finnigan, it has to be a gadget to recreate Mitchell’s glowing eyes…

It IS Mitchell…Urban slipped the news long ago and Orci lied in order to cover up the traces and keep us guess… But it’s definitely Mitchell… the phaser-scorched shirt, the “rebirth” torpedo hint…

He WILL kill Kirk’s brother and family (another hint to TOS) and I can see Dehner taking on Mitchell after being exposed to some radiation deliberately by McCoy, who decides that his love for her does not outweigh the needs of the many…(“Love will be tested”)

And yes, Peter Weller is here to care out ESP experiments in an attempt unlike his grandfather, Paxton, to turn Humans into Supermen in order to “save” Earth from potential alien threats…a fashist agenda within Starfleet, “detonating” everything it stands for…

819. CharlieX - November 28, 2012

@40. What about Charlie?

820. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

It seems that my gremlin son has voted here, without my knowledge. When I tried to vote just now, your site said that I had already voted…what to do?!

I voted the second one – just as excited as always, which is very, very excited and a little scared and tentative at the same time.

821. Perplex - November 28, 2012

@588: “our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death” – didn’t they hire a chess expert for one scene? This quote might be something we should take literally….”

I hope it’s 3d_chess at least.

822. Smike - November 28, 2012

Look up some interviews by Gary Lockwood and Benedict Cumberbatch on You Tube and you’ll see…apart from the different accent (US/UK),, both have the SAME voice!

823. Commodore Adams - November 28, 2012

@ 512. Anthony Pascale

I don’t know what’s up with the conspiracy theories either, people can’t just believe anymore? Its pathetic and im sorry that you have to post such comments with regards to peoples needing to challenge what has been posted.

The one reason I visit this site is because the news and info posted is legit. I don’t take everything at face value, there are grains of salt, but I don’t come on here to debate every article posted. If Anthony says its official, nothing has indicated to me to believe otherwise.

824. BulletInTheFace - November 28, 2012

822:

What?? LOL. No… no, they don’t.

825. Sebastian S. - November 28, 2012

# 818 Smike

Actually, that fits very well; even with the IDW comic book. Mitchell did say humanity were like insects to him. So wiping out Earth or Kirk’s family or what not would be like any one of us killing ants in our kitchen. It would give Kirk tremendous impetus to stop him, that’s for damn sure…

And yes, we saw Mitchell take a phaser rifle square in the chest. And Cumberbatch is in a starfleet uniform with a burn mark in his chest. And glowing eyes in the promos. If it’s not Mitchell? I’d be genuinely surprised (and as long as it’s not Khan, I’m cool with surprises).

There is a stack of evidence for Mitchell (including Karl Urban saying so) and absolutely NONE for Khan (especially after reading this new synopsis). Cumberbatch would’ve been laughable as Khan (who may have been the villain in earlier drafts of the script), but he’d be dead-on, stone cold perfect as Gary Mitchell…

826. Jack - November 28, 2012

Greenscreen eyes? Nice. I’ll have to take a better look at those photos..

Not that it means anything, but Mitchell in the comics, of course, looked like Lockwood and not Cumberbatch. You could argue they didn’t want to give it away, I suppose.

So everybody here thinks it’s Mitchell? Didn’t everybody here think it was Khan not that long ago…

I still don’t buy that it’s Mitchell. What, he regenerated, caught a flight to Earth and then started complex machinations within the upper levels of Starfleet from behind the scenes? Or he allied himself with a sneaky group already screwing up Starfleet from within? Or that group tracked down Mitchell and thought they could control him — or they sent someone else with a high esper rating to the barrier to get ‘infected’? Or replicated it in a lab?

Again, all possible. But convoluted. If it is Mitchell, woul dhe have the powers.? Would they have a range? Godlike powers make for a pretty boring villain. Look how ridiculous Mitchell looked flying around in a ship with is crazy eyes and no discernable powers in Of Gods and Men…

When does the countdown start, anyway?

827. Jack - November 28, 2012

825. “And glowing eyes in the promos”

Wasn’t that shown to be good old James T?

828. Craiger - November 28, 2012

Cumberbatch is Kirk’s evil self.

829. Drunk Garak - November 28, 2012

It’s interesting the the very first words spoken in the trailer for The Wrath of Khan from 1982 are: “Beyond the darkness…”

Just something to keep in mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rM4ODtN64M

830. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

Ever since the Nova car marketing failed miserably in Spanish speaking countries, I suppose choosing a name carefully for the market where anything is to be sold (including concepts and ideas) is wise.

So I suppose there is some merit to the argument that if your target audience is young adult then it would be unwise to have a major villain share the same name as a certain Sponge’s goofy sidekick. Fortunately, the character has a last name so choosing him can be mended by switching to that. Unfortunately that name is Mitchell which is associated with a well-meaning comic menace.

If you are creating STAR TREK “for the rest of us” why would you risk the rest tittering every time your fear-inducing character’s mentioned on screen?

831. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@720 “To all those who say JJ has ‘raped’ the franchise, I didn’t know that dull, boring and forced character interaction is what makes good Trek. Damn, we sure need that DS9, VOY, ENT and last two TNG films back, don’t we.”

Agree with you generally. However, plese don’t include DS9 here, dude — that was a great show with much better characterizaton and action then VOY, ENT and TNG.

832. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

#830..

“sidekick” should be “pet”

833. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

The evidence leans strongly in the direction of Gary Mitchell, and personally that is who I now think the villain is.

I think they are playing a harmony variation here from TWOK as much as from WNMHGB. Instead of Spock getting the torpedo casket burial and a second life, Gary does. Instead of a HERO getting that send-off, the new VILLAIN does. And they are combining aspects of WNMHGB and TWOK, so they get an epic “villain” who, like Khan, has a score to settle with Kirk, but without requiring Khan to be the villain this time.

And since they leave Space Seed and TWOK alone, i.e., they are not making new versions of those stories, that is going to make many fans very happy.

Now obviously Gary Mitchell is beyond even Jean Gray/Phoenix in his power. He’s like an Omega-level mutant (in Marvel/X Men terms) which makes him quite a formidable adversary — far more so even than Khan.

I didn’t much think of Gary Mitchell as a star villain for a movie, but yeah, it makes perfect sense in this new timeline.

That’s why Bob gets paid the big bucks. :-)

834. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

826: “Not that it means anything, but Mitchell in the comics, of course, looked like Lockwood and not Cumberbatch. You could argue they didn’t want to give it away, I suppose.

***

You could also argue that the IDW comic came out first, and Cumberbatch was cast much later.

That, in fact, is what I WOULD argue.

835. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

Hi, dmduncan,

Just wondering about the source of information on Gary Mitchell’s power level. I’d be interesting in knowing more about what his capabilities were/are.

Also, on a “Star Trek predicts the future” note, which is one reason so many of us are so into Star Trek (but hardly the only reason!), a physicist employed by NASA is planning an experiment which could confirm the possibility of warp drive. (See lead story at my blog.)

Thanks.

836. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@748 “His age, very close to Kirk’s.”

Hmm, but then why was the first choice to play the role, Benecio Del Toro, about 20 years older than Kirk. How would you explain that???

@751 “I always thought Mitchell died a little too quickly/easily in the comics for it to be a final thing, and pushing Elizabeth Dehner out of the picture with a throwaway line or two seemed very fishy. Why mention her at all if she would never be shown in any capacity, and why leave her out if that comic would be the only opportunity to re-do that story and those characters in reboot canon? ”

@754 “the IDW comic leaves his body floating in space; he could be regenerating in that photon tube. ”

Why would the writers go through the trouble to do a fake Mitchell kill in the comics and then have to explain why he survived and provide a back story as well for the 99.9% of the movie-going public who will not have read the comics? It makes no sense at all. I will acknoweldge that some of the Mitchell points here approach at least consideration, but this idea of some resurrection of his from the comics story makes absolutely no sense at all. Why would they make the storytelling of Mitchell so much more complicate for the movie??? This is just not even close to credible.

@754 “I’m still reading lots of “It’s Khan” nonsense.”

Ah, you must mean the CONFIRMED article from Anthony where multiple inside sources confirmed it was Khan. Yea, that was just such nonsense. What an insult to Anthony to make such a statement.

@780 “well i find the idea of a British actor portraying Khan lame!”

Good point. That would be like having a Mexican actor playing him. And who would accept that?

@782 “because no one knows anything, so we are all guessing.”

Again, anyone holding this opinion is essentially insulting Anthony here.

@785 “Seems like a few people have taken the ‘detonated the fleet’ comment too literally, and out of context of the whole statement. “And everything it stands for’ would tend to suggest a crisis in the Federation, as opposed to yet another Trek bad guy wrecking havoc on individual ships.”

But who in the hell with an half-decent high school education would use the word “detonate” in this different context that you are implying, Phil. I have never heard that word used the way you are suggesting it.

@796 “Bob Orci told AICN in a live podcast that it’s not Gary Mitchell. Entertainment Weekly said the only thing keeping the villain a secret is trekkie denial. I choose to put one and one together correctly. But at least now you have to admit that you are not getting a remake or rehash. You are getting an all new Khan story!”

A dose of common sense in a morass of self-deluding crud.

837. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

The ending of X Men 3 with the confrontation between Jean Gray/Phoenix and Wolverine was the best moment of any of the X Men movies for me.

So I think yes, a character with god-like powers can make for some powerful drama.

838. Craiger - November 28, 2012

Are they making Star Trek Avenngers style?

839. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

@dmduncan (834) — another question for you: If it turned out that Cumberbatch was not Gary Mitchell, would you consider that an important opportunity had been wasted?

I haven’t actually read the Countdown comic in question, so my question is why they would even bother to have a Mitchell story for any reason in the comics.

Also, I fixed the link to my blog in this posting.

840. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

835. Hat Rick – November 28, 2012

Hi, dmduncan,

Just wondering about the source of information on Gary Mitchell’s power level. I’d be interesting in knowing more about what his capabilities were/are.

***

Hi Hat Rick —

I’m just comparing Gary Mitchell from WNMHGB, where he was able to actually bring things into existence! to how mutant powers were characterized in X Men. Like Jean Gray he had telekinetic powers, and he could also see what was happening where he wasn’t, and he could read minds. His powers were also growing — they weren’t static like most other mutants’ powers from X Men were, so we do not know how powerful he could become given the chance. Probably like Q.

841. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

I don’t know where the comic went with it, but in WNMGB Mitchell’s body paid a price for his powers. It bore the appearance of faster than normal aging. It could be observed that this was probably meant as minor allegory representing the corruption occuring within, but nevertheless it was on screen and the character never “regenerated” those effects away during the episode’s unfolding of the tale.

842. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 28, 2012

733. Travis

Classy. Calling me names? Wow, how old are you? Are you going to steal my lunch money too? Grow up, buddy.

843. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 28, 2012

@ boborci…

so when are you coming clean about the lie?

844. Jack - November 28, 2012

834. I hadn’t realized it came out last year. Ha! I started reading ‘em a few months back. I am grasping, I do realize that.

Still, the age seems wrong — if Mitchell was at the academy the same time as Kirk. But whatever. 30-year-olds play high school students fairly regularly. Yes, I’m grasping.

Plus, it doesn’t fit the ither castinng rumors. Which were, yes, just rumors as far as I know. But nne ofthose guys screamed Gary.

I look at the guy and I don’t see Gary Mitchell. A guy who has god-like powers solely because he got zapped by, something, seems like a really borng villain. Don’t get me wrong, I loved Mitchell the first time around. And this idea that he and Kirk had this huge history. He was his best friend. And there was the suggestion in Lockwood’s performance that there was a bit of resentment over Kirk being captain, maybe…

But the guy was already redeemed in the comic — his humanity apparently returned and he begged Kirk to kill him. It’s not like Khan who was marooned for 15 years and saw his wife died. At most the guy was stuck floating in a tube for a year or two. Again, it doesn’t quite fit with the backstory being started In the comics, with the Archon experiment and talk of Starfleet Intelligence taking over things like, well, Tribbles, of all things… It’s not even a shadowy conspiracy (it was out in the open between Pike and whomever he was talking to) — or, if it is, Pike’s aware of it/ part of it.

Sure. They could have used change/infection/evolution/possession/whatever, or the body of Mitchell, in researching a weapon … Or there could be more to that possession etc. Maybe it was part of an experiment, or an alien plot. Maybe the Enterprise was sent there for a nefarious reason…

Why didn’t they test the rubble for explosives…Oh, wait.

I’m really hoping it’s someone else. An infallible villain with magical mind powers seems pretty boring to me. Isn’t the usual strategy to weaken him somehow? And then strike?

845. Jack - November 28, 2012

841. Right, the graying at the temples. Overnight. I can’t remember if the comic did that or not…

And MJ ,yes, Anthony said his unnamed sources confirmed it was Khan. Could they have been wrong? Or misleading him?

I hope not, but it’s possible. And I have no doubt Anthony would have quintuple-checked. We’ll see in five and a half months.

846. Hat Rick - November 28, 2012

@dmduncan (840), thanks for the fine response. It’s certainly quite possible that he could have become Q-like, as you say. And, I think that there’s some sort of fiction that’s been written tying in the field to which he was exposed to a fragment of a Q that was left within it, or something similar. Interesting thoughts.

847. Grimey - November 28, 2012

I’m thinking it might be Charles Evans. A one man weapon of mass destruction.

848. Craiger - November 28, 2012

Please don’t let it be Charlie X I didn’t like that episode.

849. somethoughts - November 28, 2012

Poor starfleet, last movie the entire rescue fleet minus enterprise got bbq by narada. Klingons can easily dominate this alternate universe with loss of 99% of vulcans and starfleet losing all their ships oO

850. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

#831. MJ

Speaking of which, didn’t Dax say she dated McCoy sometime after his divorce? Something about him being “Great with his hands!”?

851. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

839. Hat Rick – November 28, 2012

@dmduncan (834) — another question for you: If it turned out that Cumberbatch was not Gary Mitchell, would you consider that an important opportunity had been wasted?

***

Not really, because Bob can come up with some unusual angles. Using MWI/QM to rebirth the franchise while keeping the Prime Universe intact for the first movie was brilliant. I wish I had thought of that.

So if he did something equally unpredictable and different from what I’m conjecturing for the second movie here, I’m sure it’s a different opportunity that was taken — something he would have missed had he done something else.

But I do think Gary Mitchell was “killed” in the IDW comic in a way that sets up a comeback. Whether they use that comeback in STID remains to be seen, but Alice Eve’s in-character hairstyle is replica Dr. Dehner.

I can’t wait to find out!

852. Closettrekker - November 28, 2012

I am happy to finally get the sequel. I trust it will be entertaining. That’s all I really ask of Star Trek.

I love TOS, and I thought ST09 really did my favorite characters justice, given the circumstances surrounding the alternate reality created as a result of the Narada’s temproal incursion. I like my Star Tek sexy, romantic, adventurous, and above all—-fun! As long as “Star Trek: Into Darkness” is those things, I will be a grateful fan.

I haven’t been to a movie theater since my 3rd viewing of ST09. ST: Into Darkness will be my next trip…. Looking forward to the next chapter in my 35 year love affair with this franchise!

853. Lurker - November 28, 2012

Botany Bay will be discovered at the beginning of the movie or was already discovered prior – and by a different crew. Khan was brought back to life on Earth, and with his “attributes” is accepted into Star Fleet.

Of course Khan being Khan, we all know he is doing this to gain power and sees Star Fleet as the perfect opportunity. (Let’s say he becomes a member of the Intelligence division) Maybe he amasses a following, in addition to his remaining crew. Along the way, he discovers Dr Marcus working on a secret project. Thinks this would be a great way to rule the galaxy with a weapon that destroys and creates at the same time.

In the process, Kirk’s remaining family is killed, or Pike, or Carol Marcus – you pick and choose. And for good measure Spock Prime is killed (again) fighting Khan. Lot of choices there to make this personal for Kirk.

The climax ends up on a Genesis planet with Klingons involved, because we all know they will want a piece of the action. Battles and explosions ensue.

This way we avoid the Wrath of Khan, and instead get the Wrath of Kirk.

854. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

And I have no problem saying that I’m not sure. Really. I don’t KNOW. But the evidence is leaning toward Mitchell more than anyone else. If new and better evidence becomes available I would of course recognize that and change my opinion. So this is all a snapshot of how things stand right now.

I guess what bugs me is that Karl Urban didn’t say he was joking about the Gary Mitchell remark, and he got a phone call from JJ about it, if I remember correctly.

On the other hand, Simon Pegg called the Khan rumor a myth, and other than AP’s mystery source, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that helps to triangulate Khan as the Cumberbatch role.

And I also don’t buy that JJ Abrams would fret about casting a Korean in the role of the Japanese Mr. Sulu, but wouldn’t think twice about casting an Englishman as a Sikh. JJ seems more even-keeled than that.

Bob denied it was Mitchell, didn’t he? He also mocked the idea that it would be him. Which makes me think Bob may have been spreading a little harmless disinformation. It’s a MOVIE, after all. To paraphrase Roy Batty: Nothing the god of screenwriting wouldn’t let you into heaven for.

Most of you probably did far more REAL damage with your vote this year.

So he’s off the hook if he was in here firing chaff in every direction to throw us off.

Hehehe!

855. Disinvited - November 28, 2012

#722. VulcanFilmCritic

Well, I disagree about Robert Lansing’s performance being characterized as stiff. Maybe secret agent cool, but stiff?

Many seem oblivious that the first incarnation of the Doctor was a physically “stiff” grumpy but loving grandfather. If WHO could thrive after that which you interpret as a non-starter, I think the American Who that you suggest had the potential to thrive as well.

856. Gary S. - November 28, 2012

Anybody who believes that we are all guessing here is NOT insulting Anthony .
Anthony said that sources that have been very reliable to him in the past
told him that the villain was Khan .
But Anthony has NEVER said that he KNEW it was Khan 100%.

857. Rick Johnson - November 28, 2012

@854 Bob Orci specifically admits to lying in this comment section. #680.

Best guess: somebody at the studio mailed Karl Urban the Gary Mitchell comic books. He loves Trek and read them, and just assumed that the new villain was now common knowledge, because he’s not an obsessive Internet guy.

858. Jack - November 28, 2012

Was Urban kidding? He said Mitchell after Bob had said Mitchell wasn’t in the movie…
http://trekmovie.com/2012/07/09/karl-urban-reveals-cumberbatch-star-trek-sequel-character/

And where Bob said no Mitchell, before Urban even said anything about him:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/56587

And, as was pointed out to me earlier — that Mitchell comic came out months before filming started…

859. Jack - November 28, 2012

From this site, July 14.

TrekMovie.com: A couple of weeks ago you were on a radio show and you confirmed that Benedict Cumberbatch is not playing Gary Mitchell in the sequel. Then last week Karl Urban says he is playing Gary Mitchell. Both can’t be true.

Roberto Orci: All I can say is that when I did that radio interview I had just been doing 22 hours of press. I had just got off a flight from New Zealand…

TrekMovie.com: Nice callback, but are you sticking with your original comment and it isn’t Gary Mitchell.

Roberto Orci: I would say that I never lie. While Karl tests all those hypo spray props on himself [laughs]

860. Jack - November 28, 2012

827. It was well known that the villain wasn’t common knowledge. Or known at all. These guys had been asked about it incessantly for months. In every interview. They know they’re not supposed to talk about it.

And it had been big news that Orci said it wasn’t Mitchell. The way Urban says it really seemed like a joke… The guy also plugged exclusive footage…

861. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

If Urban was joking, I think he would have said so.

Identifying some comment as a joke immediately after you make it is a trademarked Hollywood skill among actors. Show a sense of humor and stay out of trouble with possible future employers at the same time.

I don’t think he would have let it turn into a controversy with himself as the cause if he realized that’s what he would be creating. So, for whatever reason, he may have believed the news was already out.

862. Jack - November 28, 2012

‘Most of you probably did far more REAL damage with your vote this year.’

By voting for a Republican for the House?

Again, it’s ‘I think’ instead of going with what is, and isn’t known…

863. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

And Bob did admit that he lied about something, and said he hopes we are amused.

Well I’m already amused, and the forecast is for more amusement Thursday through Sunday, with afternoon spurts of torrential laughter, tapering off to sporadic evening chuckles.

864. Ahmed - November 28, 2012

That is one strange synopsis, specially the part about “has detonated the fleet..”.
But, at least, the marketing people are getting into gear & looks like we will get more news in the coming months.

865. Jack - November 28, 2012

I don’t know that it’s not Mitchell. But I do know that Bob said it wasn’t, and that shortly after that Urban said it was and the Internet went nuts. Bob also has said he’s lying about something. Where? Here? I don’t know.

This speculation that maybe Urban thought that it wasn’t a secret, or that he doesn’t follow the news, or he couldn’t have been joking because he would have said so is just fantasy at this point. Who knows what the guy thinks? The reason I thought it might be a joke? Also speculation, but based on the contrxt. Because Bob had just said it wasn’t Mitchell. And it was phrased oddly: All I can tell you is that he’ll be an exemplary Gary Mitchell (or words to that effect). In other words, I’m sworn to secrecy but I can tell you is that he’ll be an exemplary (guy my boss just said wasn’t in the movie).

866. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

865

Up there somewhere, in response to a Montreal Paul question.

867. RenderedToast - November 28, 2012

The comic doesn’t guarantee it’s not Mitchell – despite the insistence of Bob Orci and others, Countdown bears no relation to Star Trek XI. A pre-existing relationship between Nero & Spock is entirely refuted in one line during the film (during Spock’s mind-meld with Kirk – “He said his name was Nero” – evidence that Spock first met Nero after the destruction of Romulus) and its explicitly stated that the Jellyfish ship was built by Vulcans, not LaForge. So the film completely contradicts the comic book that they said was written with consultation from the film’s writers, who either weren’t consulted quite as much as they could have been, or simply didn’t give a damn about continuity between the two for some reason.

It seems pretty clear at this point that it can only be Gary Mitchell.

868. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

“Roberto Orci: All I can say is that when I did that radio interview I had just been doing 22 hours of press. I had just got off a flight from New Zealand…”

When was Roberto Orci in NZ? At the time though, I believe Karl was here because it was *school holidays in July but he had to leave for the US in the middle because of work commitments in the US – something to do with Judge Dredd…At the same time that he made the comment about Gary Mitchell, Karl also posted the short video of him surfing (probably somewhere around Waiheke Island) he made which also contained a couple of pictures of the cast from Star Trek 2013 – just a big spoof!

I personally think that Karl was joking – some dry kiwi humour! Good on ya, mate!

*School holidays are only two weeks duration in July – middle of winter in NZ.

Honestly, the villain could be almost anyone, even someone who is not at all iconic. It all depends on which lie Bob’s been telling us…:)

Also, remember what Chris Pine tells us about JJ Abrams – “the master puppeteer”. It just could be that all the actors, including BC, are just that – actors, having their puppet strings, including vocal chords, pulled by the puppeteer(s) and getting paid for it. None of STID’s actors are also producers/writers/director.

What say you, Bob Orci?

869. MJ - November 28, 2012

@854 “But the evidence is leaning toward Mitchell more than anyone else.”

Again, how can anyone say this when Anthony broke the story last Spring that confirmed Khan is the villain. I don’t recall anyone anywhere breaking a story that it was Gary Mitchell.

Again, I find it truly amazing that everyone wants to sweep Anthony’s confirmed story under the rug.

This is not only NOT leaning towards Mitchell, it IS Khan.

870. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

MJ – Stop now! What Anthony reported was a RUMOUR. A rumour is just that – a rumour. Rumour is NOT FACT. Therefore, it is not a FACT that the villain is Khan, nor is it FACT that the villain is Gary Mitchell or anyone else that people like to believe Benedict Cumberbatch. The real PTB have not revealed who the actual villain is. All we have is RUMOUR, which is not necessarily FACT. In reality, the rumour may not have any relevance to the actual facts as and when they do get revealed.

RUMOUR is NOT synonymous with fact. Stop shoving RUMOURS down our necks!

871. Mr. Mugatu - November 28, 2012

Please, people. In JJ’s Trekverse tribbles are shape shifters and can easily make themselves look human. The Mitchell thing is merely a clever ruse to confuse you.

872. Ahmed - November 28, 2012

@870. Rose (as in Keachick)

I will second that.

No one know for sure who is the villain. We can either speculate endlessly about it or wait for the trailer & find out for sure.

873. Jack - November 28, 2012

He seemed to be kidding about New Zealand, Rose. He was playing with Urban’s excuse.

And note, everyone, that they’ve not confirmed or denied any of these rumors (at one point everyone said it was Khan) once they’re out there — Urban’s been quiet, period, ever since.

Sorry, speculation drives me nuts. We’re all just guessing at this point.

874. Jack - November 28, 2012

MJ. Well, we don’t know who confirmed the Khan rumor, or how they know — so it’s a bit tough to judge for ourselves. All we have is, basically, it’s Khan but I can’t tell you who told me or how they know. It certainly hasn’t been officially confirmed. And I don’t think it’s an insult to Anthony to say any of that…

It might be, it might not be — but unnamed sources aren’t particularly convincing.

I guess what bugs me in all this is this idea that we shouldn’t be questioning that it’s Khan, or even Mitchell because of what Anthony or Urban or even Bob has said.

875. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

@869: Yeah, but AP’s mystery source amounts to rumor. And it may have been disinformation outright.

But the parallels between the comic and the spy photos, the way Mitchell “dies” and how the K/O love of doing variations of a harmony recalls another canon rebirth but with a variation, the Karl Urban comment sans retraction, the irritated Simon Pegg video denial of Khan, and Alice Eve’s replica Dr. Dehner hairstyle are all pieces of evidence — clues — that point away from Khan and toward Gary Mitchell.

Regarding AP’s mystery source, I think you may have bet all your chips on a losing number, MJ.

While I always considered Khan or some other member of the Botany Bay a possibility, I don’t see much to suggest it is a real one.

876. dmduncan - November 28, 2012

And if you recall, Khan in Space Seed also left Kirk without vengeance in his heart. Khan reconnected with his humanity and became heroic.

The vengeance came much later after CA5 was nearly destroyed and Khan placed the blame on Kirk for their suffering.

So that suggests some unknown scenario. What happens to Gary Mitchell’s body in that torpedo casket? How does he come back to life, and what happens to him afterward that turns him into an antagonist worthy of an IMAX movie?

Does he become a madman like Nero? Or is he more nuanced, like Q, Colonel Kurtz, or…Roy Batty? — surely one of the most interesting “villains” ever put onscreen.

I can’t wait to find out!

877. NCM - November 28, 2012

That Orci’s a slippery one. Anyway, I guess by saying he didn’t write the ‘press release,’ Bob acknowledged that it’s an authentic press release–but I never doubted…

MJ; for me, jury’s still out on court’s bad-guy verdict. I just thought that writer made a good point. Of course, along came another poster (mistakenly thinking I’d addressed one of his posts) and reminded me that in ‘Ongoing,’ it’s Mitchell who plays chess with Kirk (not Spock–I do like how these guys twist and tweak the old familiar just like that!), and Mitchell wins.

For your sake, I hope you’re right about Khan; even though, despite Bob’s disparaging of a good ole’ Anglo name, I’d be more interested in seeing them raise GARY Mitchell! from the dead. BTW, re: Harry’s diagnosis, I had to look it up, but…lol. I hope he’s recovered and, Harry, if you’re out there, hope you’re able to authenticate that email.

Good night owls!

878. Harry Ballz - November 28, 2012

NCM

no verification yet!

(biting nails)

p.s. thanks for asking.

:>)

879. High Hopes - November 28, 2012

The BIG question is…

Will we learn the identity of Benedict Cumberbatch’s character (by name) in the first 9 minutes during the December teaser?

880. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - November 28, 2012

My thought is what if Del Toro turned down the role in the movie because he was going to play Gary Mitchell?

No body seems to have considered this.

881. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

The synopsis is just movie speak – sensationalist words used to titillate and evoke the senses. I don’t see any typos or that it is necessarily poorly written. How do you know something was not detonated, because the inside bad boy within the fleet did not set up a nasty that could be remotely detonated?

Detonate is not the same as decimate…

882. MJ (The Original) - November 28, 2012

@875 “@869: Yeah, but AP’s mystery source amounts to rumor. And it may have been disinformation outright.”

Interesting here that when people want to believe in something so bad that all of a sudden Anthony’s new stories with multiple confirmations get twisted into either rumor mongering or having us believe that poor, naive Anthony was used and abused by his sources.

We shall see, but, in any case, I certainly don’t see how you can really claim that the evidence leans towards Gary Mitchell when Anthony broke the Khan story and Bob said it wasn’t Mitchell and Del Toro was originally cast for the part.

883. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 28, 2012

#879 – You’ll need to go see the Hobbit movie at IMAX 3D to get the answer to that question – just another two weeks to wait…

884. Jack - November 28, 2012

I hope it was legit, Harry ;)!

885. David C. Roberson - November 28, 2012

What if everyone is wrong and it turns out to be Sam (Kirk’s brother)? Wouldn’t that be something?

886. Jack - November 28, 2012

882. MJ, Anthony can defend himself. No one’s calling him naive. I’m not anyway. Nor is anyone saying he’s rumor mongering. As a rule I question anything coming from mystery sources.

I guess you can be insulted for him if you want.

Again, it might be Khan. Yes, we know, there were rumors of casting a Latino actor. Some of us are ‘t fully convinced and will wait to see/hear/read it for ourselves — nothing against you or Anthony.

887. Jack - November 28, 2012

Again dm, what if Dehner’s not linked to Mitchell at all this time?

888. Aurore - November 28, 2012

“I guess by saying he didn’t write the ‘press release,’ Bob acknowledged that it’s an authentic press release…”

________

Probably.

That said, by the time Mr. Orci said so (@ 679), I already knew why there was no direct link to the press release. Which was mainly what I, personally, was curious about ( @ 397 ) .

And, my curiosity was satisfied some time later ( @ 524 ).

:)

889. Spock's Tribble - November 28, 2012

Criminey …

I look forward to seeing the movie, but I can’t say I’m totally enthused about the concept being An Enemy Within …

And although they’re planning nine minutes of preview when “The Hobbit” is shown, I’m not sure those nine minutes are going to show much plot, so we probably won’t be any the wiser about THE VILLAIN.

Really, I’m looking forward to seeing my Trek family back in action. I could wish for a different plot emphasis but won’t know till I see it … it’s all done!

F I V E M O N T H S and hmmm 15 ? days?

890. boborci - November 28, 2012

843. I’ll come clean soon.

891. boborci - November 28, 2012

783. I read bugliosi’s pitiful book. on another thread, i will take it apart. major bs.

892. MJ - November 28, 2012

@891. Interesting then how it won the Edgar Award for best crime fact book.

Also, from the Washington Post, perhaps the most open newspaper in the world to conspiracy theories:

“Alan Wolfe
To say that Bugliosi wants to strike a nail in the coffin of Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists is putting it mildly; he wants to drive a tractor trailer through their ranks and scatter everyone in sight. Is such an effort really necessary? I am afraid it is, which is another way of saying that we ought to be grateful for Bugliosi’s obsession.Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, killed John F. Kennedy. Absent a trial proving his guilt, Bugliosi, author of Helter Skelter, has offered the next best thing: a prosecutor’s air-tight brief that leaves no reasonable doubt. A short review cannot possibly do justice to the case he assembles, so let me just offer a taste of Bugliosi’s methods. The first thing he does is to describe, in exhaustive detail, everything that happened on the day Kennedy was shot. Then, in the second half of the book, Bugliosi takes each of the leading conspiracy theories — that there was a second Oswald, that the mob plotted the assassination, that the CIA did it and so on — and demolishes their claims.
— The Washington Post “

893. MJ - November 28, 2012

@886 “Again, it might be Khan. Yes, we know, there were rumors of casting a Latino actor. Some of us are ‘t fully convinced and will wait to see/hear/read it for ourselves — nothing against you or Anthony.”

Agreed. What I take exception to is people all of a sudden saying that “its leaning towards Mitchell.” No, it is not.

894. Red Dead Ryan - November 28, 2012

Now, I am by no means an expert on the JFK assassination, but it seems to me Lee Harvey Oswald was not working alone. He was the patsy/stooge/ fall guy, and he ended up getting killed himself by Jack Ruby.

The fact that Oswald was shot and killed on live tv should tell you something. He was about to spill the beans, and Ruby was sent to silence him.

895. Vultan - November 29, 2012

Oh boy. The attack from within that “detonates” Starfleet sounds an awful lot like 9/11 conspiracy stuff.

What’s the name of the war zone world?
Iraqxion? Ceti Afghan 5?

Geez….

896. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

#895.

Nah, its more like the Trek equivelent of the Stormtroopers attacking the Jedi temple in “Revenge Of The Sith”….

:-)

897. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

Just because some posters refuse to see the writing on the wall doesnt mean, that the trail of breadcrumbs leading towards Gary Mitchell dont exsist.

I just wish there was a way to capture the look on some of our fellow posters faces when december 14th we discover that its NOT Khan.

898. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

780 Different time period, your talking about a time period where casting against race in studio productions was common place ala Mickey Rooney as a sterotypical Asian man in Breakfast at Tiffanys and many others like that.

So sorry but your defense holds no weight.

Heck one of star treks own – Alexander Sidig would be more appropriate as Khan than Cumberbatch

899. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

Is it pretty much the consensus that the synopsis means the sequel will touch on themes of conspiracy and terrorism?

The only eliments of ToS that dealt with conspiracy as I recall were the shooting daffodils that cured radiation poisoning (Also would introduce a rival for Spock’s affections.), the flying fried eggs whose planet of invasion would have to have some attraction for Kirks in general, and Landru who’d have to extend his sphere of influence..

The series ENTERPRISE is part of this new timeline so there’s a whole marketplace of Federation internal conspiracies to shop from there.

There’s a plethora of mass killers in both series from which a terrorist could be drawn. But if you rate the worst by greatest number of kills its probably a toss up between the artificial lifeform NOMAD and whoever made the Doomsday Machine.

If you delay NOMAD’s psychotic break with his original programming until after he returns peaceably to to launchpoint, he’s more than capable of detonating a fleet but I doubt 3 writers would come to a consensus to hang their hats on that.

Khan believes he should rule because he is superior. He amasses power to achieve what for him is that rightful end. If he found out about the juicing at the Barrier, how far would he go to attain it? Would he take on an already juiced Gary Mitchell?

900. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

MJ I dont see how you can imagine Khan out of what is written that press release, Again Khan was never about destruction, he was not a one man weapon of mass destruction.

And if it does turn out to be khan, and that is this movies take on him, well than they wont be getting my $19.00 at the Boxoffice.
Because thats not a take on Khan I care to see.
Khan is not the Joker, and if they are intent to make him be that way, well I will just say this,
If i want to watch a variation of the Joker on screen I will watch the much more impressive Dark Knight.

I still think its Gary Mitchell, but if its not I definately dont think its going to be Khan.

901. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

I also cant believe how all those Khanophant’s choose to ignore what was told to us about Khan, his M.O. and his backstory that was spoken by Kirk and scotty and questioned by Spock durring space seed.

Kirk and Scotty had a respect and admiration of him. not of what he stood for mind you Spock even accused them of romanticising Khans exploits of early 90s.

And if Khan was a one man weapon of mass destruction do you think Kirk would have merely dumped Khan and his followers off on a planet without any supervision to prevent them from doing who knows what?

902. MJ (The Original) - November 29, 2012

@900. Tucker, you just helped to prove my overall philosophical point about man fans here not wanting it be Khan so bad that they are willing to grasp at any tenuous straws to convince themselves that it it no so:

“And if it does turn out to be khan, and that is this movies take on him, well than they wont be getting my $19.00 at the Boxoffice.”

That is the difference between us. If it is Gary Mitchell or an unknown as the villain, I will still see the movie multiple times I’m sure and enjoy it very much. Thus, am not emotionally invested in it not being Khan, and so I can be much more objective than you here in assessing the limited evidence.

For example, I don’t need to pretend that Anthony never confirmed it was Khan or make up sound outlandish scenario the Supreme Court organized and internal campaign to dupe Anthony so as to misled us fans. I also don’t need to ignore that Orci directly said it wasn’t Khan. And I don’t need to come up with some weird scenario that they hand Mitchell die in the comics book so that they could then have to bring him back in the new movie — with 99.9% of the movie audience not even being aware of that comic book Mitchell story. Nor do I have to pretend that I missed reading that quote where he specifically said that it was not Gary Mitchell.

903. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

Oh and one more thing Khan is not the type of person who would be someone’s Lap Dog, or take orders or comands from anyone else.
So the idea that he would be taking orders from the Peter Weller Character is just laughable.

Who knows maybe it will turn out to be the story line is mashing up elements from several episodes maybe combining elements from oh i dont know, lets say those of the Doomsday Machine and Day of the Dove with a little Gary Mitchell on the side or perhaps as has been mentioned by others Garth or some other classic Trek advesary yet to be depicted on the Silver Screen.

904. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

Here is a thought instead why dont you just let people think what they want to think until the facts are 100 percent known.
You will notice I am not trying to change your mind on who you think it is, I am merely presenting why I believe its NOT khan, this is why I dont like interacting with you, If someone has a different point of view or belive with you, you are so quick to shoot it down.

SO what if It does turn out to be Khan I dont want to spend my money on seeing the movie, what effect does that have on you and your enjoyment of it. No effect at all.

Maybe if you just let people have their reasons for thinking the way they do.

And for the record my name is M.J. or Mark

905. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - November 29, 2012

There is only a short period of time remaining where we have the fun luxury of making guesses from a 97% blank slate that we have currently have.
Why ruin that fun with Absolutes!
especially when your no more in the know than anyone else here.

906. MJ - November 29, 2012

@904. Your post is hypocritcal, as you have posted counted time making the anti-Khan case, and even yesterday Anthony had to step in to get you to stop trollling about it.

And it I am not mistaken, your correct last name is “Tucker.” Given you showed up here recently and starting using my posting name, to avoid confusion for others reading our exchanges, I will refer to you by your know and actual last name whcih you yourself always include here: Tucker. Not sure why this bothers you, but given you are so oversenstiviy to any perceived slight, real or otherwise, I guess I can’t say I’m surprised.

“this is why I dont like interacting with you”

Cone on dude, there you go again with the personal stuff. The whole point of discussions here is to have a lively discussion, including differing views and positions. I mean, shesh dude, it’s not like we are 14-year olds in middle school here. I recommend you ighten up and try to enjoy the process a bit more.

907. Mark Lynch - November 29, 2012

I bet Bob Orci is laughing his arse off right now at all of this…

I really hope we get to see who the protagonist is in the 9 minute trailer. Which by the way, is the only reason I am interested in seeing the Hobbit at the BFI London IMAX (one of the best IMAX screens in the UK!)

Actually, the MoS trailer is high up on my list of “must see” too. :)

908. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

#901. M. J.

The problem with your reasoning is that in WNMHGB Kirk was endeavoring to do exactly that to Mitchell, who you do regard as a weapon of mass destruction, i.e. abandon him alive on Delta Vega.

909. gb980109 - November 29, 2012

@893. “Agreed. What I take exception to is people all of a sudden saying that “its leaning towards Mitchell.” No, it is not.”

I’d like to see your evidence that it’s leaning towards Khan. The synopsis would suggest it’s not him given that Khan isn’t an insider.

910. Marek - November 29, 2012

Get a life! It’s just a movie!

911. Picard's Fish - November 29, 2012

@907.. I think you mean antagonist.. if I’m wrong, then I’ll let you in on a secret: The protagonist is Kirk :)

912. Astrophysicophile - November 29, 2012

251, 670, and especially 372 make a strong case that the unstoppable force of terror from within Starfleet, the one man weapon of mass destruction, and that which propels our heroes into an epic chess game of life and death is Lord Garth of Izar. Moreover, 372 strongly implies that the war-zone world is Antos IV, and that the war that created the war zone was the Axanar war.

270 suggests that he modified to become someone with some superhuman abilities, like Khan. However, I think as a starship captain, Garth may have become an unstoppable force of terror and weapon of mass destruction by traveling to the energy barrier at the edge of the galaxy and getting mutated as Gary Mitchell was. Furthermore, I think he resurrects Gary Mitchell.

132, 306, 598, 619, and 762. The names Garth of Izar and Gary Mitchell are not the catchiest, mean nothing to the average non-fan, are hilarious, have no cachet, and are meaningless commodities, because the bearers of these names are supposed to be ordinary people who accidentally and abruptly gain absolute power and become corrupted absolutely. Khan Noonian Singh’s name sounds catchy, because the scientists who selectively bred and genetically engineered him to be a ruler purposely gave him a fitting name, as historically, a khan was the ruler or monarch of a Mongol tribe.

Personally, I like the name Garth of Izar. It reminds me of the name Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centauri and Sarek of Vulcan.

913. NCM - November 29, 2012

Best to you, Harry. I hope to hear that you haven’t been disappointed.

914. TREKWEBMASTER - November 29, 2012

I’m cool with the protagonist being Lt. Gary Mitchell, as long as they don’t write “James R. Kirk,” on the tombstone…LOL!

Does Dr. Dehner appear?

Oh, please don’t strangle Kelso with the cable this time around…lol.

Hey, Bob… how about giving TREKWEBMASTER.COM some exclusives….I really need some new media on the site….

Me Bairns, me poor poor bairns……

915. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

#912. Astrophysicopile

Well Garth sounds similar to Goth which can cause much more anxiety filled emotions to arise than Garry, the snail.

I like the name Garth for an antagonist. If he has time and reason to develop his mimic skills then he can mimic all the other candidates as well and really blow (detonate?) everyone’s mind.

916. Mark Lynch - November 29, 2012

@911
As Kirk once said to Decker in TMP, “I stand corrected.”

:-)

917. Aurore - November 29, 2012

891. boborci – November 28, 2012
“….I read bugliosi’s pitiful book. on another thread, i will take it apart. major bs.”
______

….If I may….LOOKING FORWARD TO IT !

:)

918. Trekzilla - November 29, 2012

I’m not going to go see a movie with a white British guy playing Khan. That idea is just retarded. If that’s what this is then i’m out. Sorry. I love me some Trek but that would just be stupid!!!

Might as well make a movie about Martin Luther King and cast an Asian guy in the role.

Who amongst you would think that would be a good idea?

See where I’m coming from on this?

Sorry Bob O — if Cumby is playing Khan, I can’t give you my money because that idea is just retarded.

919. Aurore - November 29, 2012

I do not know who the villain will be.
But, there is one thing I’m, personally, convinced of.

There is no way Mr. Abrams would cast Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan Noonien Singh.

920. Tom - November 29, 2012

I have a feeling they are going *The Heart of Darkness* route in this.

921. The Sinfonian - November 29, 2012

Boborci, here’s a different spin on the eternal question about STID’s development…

When Del Toro decided against an offered role: did you and Alex make changes to the script as a consequence of his turndown??

(See, that question doesn’t give any plot away, nor does it say who the villain in STID is, so seems a fair, non-spoiler question you could answer!)

922. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

The movie’s filmed, but I really hope they minimize any “terrorism” allegories, unless they surprise me. The first movie did surprise me–the stuff I was dreading (lame time travel plot) turned out to be the animating force of the film, as the original characters went through an arc of becoming their iconic selves.

If you look at WNMhGB has a kind of insane sci-fi “Heart of Darkness” story, I don’t really see how “terrorism” fits. I’m curious about Mitchell’s motivations in this one. Ideally Cumberbatch can portray the “dark side” of whatever 2001’s “Star Child” was supposed to be–but with a “god” driven by petty human motivations, where does the plot go?

923. boborci - November 29, 2012

892. MJ

you quoted the following from Washington Times a review of Bugliosis book. Because I only have a sec here, let’s whack the easiest mole. The review says Bug destroys conspiracy theories, including second Oswald. Well, lookey here: Hoover memo to President Johnson explaining and admitting a man who is not the Oswald we know was in Mexico c;aiming to be Oswald. Period.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/The_Mexico_City_Tapes

The book is full of claims that are this easily debunked, which is why he buries so many of claims in over a thousand pages off BS.

924. BulletInTheFace - November 29, 2012

#881: If you see no typos or poor writing in the release, then you have overlooked the typos and poor writing, and thus should not be seen as a writing expert.

925. n1701ncc - November 29, 2012

hey Bob an idea for the 3rd movie. Send Kirk and the crew back to 1963 and stop Hoover, Sinatra, Castro, Oswald, the Mafia, the Russians, Vice President Johnson, Nixon, Joe Dimaggio, The Dallas Police Department and other Kennedy family members from killing JFK. Now you would have a real alternate time line.

926. Phil - November 29, 2012

@925. Yep, a Trek themed episode of The Twilight Zone. Also will end up being the official recorded time of death for the franchise if it were ever made, but that’s another discussion….

927. Anthony Thompson - November 29, 2012

AP, when are we going to get a trailer? And with which film?

928. Spock Jr. - November 29, 2012

Just to stop every online site using the same leaked image over and over, when writing about the new movie, we desperately need an official Star Trek Into Darkness image. An Into Darkness-themed Starfleet logo would do…

929. John from Cincinnati - November 29, 2012

925.

That was already floated by Gene Roddenberry for the first motion picture and shot down.

930. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

@836

“Detonate” is often used hyperbolicly to evoke intense, and especially violent, emotional and philosophical reactions in literature and journalism.

While the use in this press release is most assuredly ambiguous here, I am really hoping it is not a literal destruction of the fleet, considering that is more or less the exact plot from the last movie. And honestly, what is to be gained after the entire fleet has been destroyed? Where does that leave Star Trek for the 3rd movie — one starship on the run from anybody who wishes to invade the Federation? Does The Supreme Court intend to destroy the entire alternate universe when they turn over the reigns so nobody else can play in their sandbox?

No, my take is that this word is intended to be duplicitous, implying both exciting space battles as well as the larger emotional devistation, but not a literal destruction of the entire fleet.

931. John from Cincinnati - November 29, 2012

I live and work in Vegas. I know people who have lived and worked here since 1958. There is no secret at the Sands hotel back in the early 60’s, JFK, RFK, Marilyn Monroe and Jack Ruby were all at the hotel at the same time. A picture of all of them was in the hotel lobby by the bell desk until the friend I know asked about it shortly after the assassination and was told by no gentle means, to forget about it. The picture was removed the next day.

932. John from Cincinnati - November 29, 2012

Boborci…I’m available for background info if you’re interested.

933. DX7 - November 29, 2012

“The Unstoppable Force Of Terror” sounds like it could be a ship, made me think of this

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Dreadnought!

As I remember Peter Weller hinted in an interview he has his “own” ship.

934. Jack - November 29, 2012

“For example, I don’t need to pretend that Anthony never confirmed it was Khan or make up sound outlandish scenario the Supreme Court organized and internal campaign to dupe Anthony so as to misled us fans. I also don’t need to ignore that Orci directly said it wasn’t Khan. ”

Orci said it wasn’t Khan? Oh, Mitchell.

Anthony getting info from mistaken sources is hardly an internal campaign to dupe the guy.

Again. Could be Khan. I’m not leaning toward Mitchell either…

935. dontcare - November 29, 2012

@918. Yo, do you dimbulbs realize that skin lightening treatments are extremely popular among the population of India? Guess what you look like afterwards, a pasty Brit, thats what. You all need to look up some real life stuff before jumping to conclusions that make an a– out of yourselves.

936. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

#924 – I never claimed to be a writing expert. It is many other posters here (presumably “writing experts”) who are making claims about poor writing and typos. I just said I could not see a problem with the synopsis. Perhaps if people objecting to this synopsis on the basis of poor writing and typos could point them out…

I would have thought that a *good* movie synopsis is one that elicits an emotional response, interest and intrigue on the part of the reader. The fact that the synopsis may appear ambiguous is what it is all about.

Besides, you are supposed to go see the movie to find out who is who and who is doing what and why…

937. Trekzilla - November 29, 2012

#935 — I got your “dim bulb” hangin!! Come get it!

Go watch your stupidass Trek movie and waste your money! I’m not paying to see it if Cumberbatch is cast as Khan!

Oh — and this “dim bulb” has Indian friends and they don’t look like Cumberbatch!!!

Mo-Ron!!!

938. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

Right from the start, when I first saw a picture of Benecio Del Toro, the first person I thought of him playing was a Klingon. Now that we have a fairer English guy playing the main adversary, I was not so sure about him playing a Klingon, then again?…Khan was not even on the “drawing board” of my mind.

Khan is just among a number of possible adversaries that Cumberbatch could be playing.

My own GUESS is that Ben is playing either a Klingon or a Romulan (which is what I first thought all along)

Time will reveal…

939. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

Wow Trekzilla. Just because you have not seen such Indians does not mean that what dontcare says does not happen. It does. Another very popular form of cosmetic surgery occurring in China among its young women is to have their eyes “europeanized” so that they can look like any other female from the caucasian/celtic…races and not have the Asian look.

I doubt you would see Asian women in the west doing this though, just as you don’t see Indians make themselves look fairer. No doubt sociologists, psychologists or other ‘gists would have a number of theories on why these phenomena are occurring, but that’s not the issue here.

You might like to find a brighter light bulb…

940. NCC-73515 - November 29, 2012

Could it be Robert April, who wanted the Enterprise and never got her? He wanted her in the beginning, but Pike won. Then he thought he’d get it after Pike, but then Kirk was chosen and April seeks revenge… XD

941. Jack - November 29, 2012

What typos are in the release? Detonate works just fine. They didn’t mean decimate or they would have used it. I can’t see any way to edit this to make it significantly clearer or work better. It’s an unrevealing tease. A couple of words could have been cut, but whatever. Sure, it uses the usual ingredients for movies — epic, life and death, unstoppable force, terror, sacrifices — but I like it. At least it’s not “the biggest threat the universe has ever seen” or an “unimaginable threat” or “Kirk has met his ultimate match, and nothing can ever be the same.”

I hope Abrams does indeed deliver.

–––

In Summer 2013, pioneering director J.J. Abrams will deliver an explosive action thriller that takes Star Trek Into Darkness.

When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

942. Jack - November 29, 2012

Hello to Keachick, by the way — I hope you’re well.

And same to MJ, dm, Ryan, NCM, Harry, aurore, bob and, well, everyone else.

Nope, there wasn’t MDMA in my latte this morning — it just that we usually launch into point counterpoint wthout saying ‘hi.’ I’m pretty glad you’re all still here and interested.

943. boborci - November 29, 2012

931. j from C

wow. never heard that!

944. dalek - November 29, 2012

It sounds very exciting and could be a very thrilling movie. I don’t think it matters who the villain is to be honest. It seems to me the movie is about Kirk and crew bonding under extremely volatile circumstances. Why does it matter whether it’s Khan, Gary Mitchell, Trelane or the 4 horseman of the apocalypse as long as we get a terrific ride with character development?

This synopsis actually promises we will get all of that.

945. Anthony Thompson - November 29, 2012

935 dontcare

A pasty Brit or Michael Jackson? lol. BTW, I’ve spent about a total of 3 months in India, have lots of Indian friends (including an ex) and have never heard of the “popularity” of such a product. Your source, please?

946. Trekzilla - November 29, 2012

#939 — You are being obtuse and putting words in mouth as you always do to others. I never said the skin lightening thing didn’t occur in India. I don’t know enough about it (not being a know it all ASS like some people) to have an opinion one way or the other. I would say though that most Indians do not practice or represent this bizarre cultural anomaly — otherwise, that would be the public perception of what resembles a person from India.

I can assure you that most people do not think of Indians as fair skinned and it would still be ludicrous to cast Khan as such.

I would recommend a brighter bulb…but in your case I think a whole new lighting fixture is required. Defective equipment. ;-)

947. Trekzilla - November 29, 2012

#945 — Thank you — you just made my case.

948. Peter Loader - November 29, 2012

Charlie Evans does not have to be a boy in this version. Maybe he’s been a tool of section 31, having been discovered by the Antares and never met Kirk. Section 31 could have been using his talents for a number of years in their operations. Now Charlie’s had enough and taking matters into his own hands. A one man weapon of mass destruction on the loose…

949. MJ (The Original) - November 29, 2012

@923. Bob, thanks for the reply and the link. I will take a look at that and try to keep an open mind.

950. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

Hi, Jack. How are you doing? I’m fine.

How’s the weather in Toronto? You do live in Toronto, don’t you? Is it snowing yet? Cold enough for you yet?

It is supposed to be late Spring here in NZ and yet warnings have been given to drivers to watch for snow and ice on one of the main highways in the North Island – the Desert Road. If it gets bad enough, the road is closed. Go figure…

It also appears that I need to have a little chat with that Cumberbatch chap – it seems that dragon Smaug (called *taniwha by the Maori) has been rather vocal of late. Mt Ruapehu had been rumbling and then suddenly the neighbouring mountain, Tongariro, erupted, for the second time this year. It is still steaming. This must be the work of the taniwha-dragon Smaug…

That Cumby chap has a few questions to answer…:-)

*I believe that taniwha are subterranean dwelling dragon like monsters responsible for earthquakes and volcanic activity (according to Maori mythology).

There always seems to be *interesting news on weather and geological subjects from here downunder…

951. Mad Man - November 29, 2012

I just re-watched Day of the Dove last night.

It would be too cool if Cumby was playing Kang. But that would be too cool for Abrams to do. So it won’t happen.

952. Of Bajor - November 29, 2012

It’s Khan….. http://trekmovie.com/2012/04/30/major-star-trek-sequel-spoilers-confirmed/

953. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

@ 948 — Charlie Evans …

I like this one! Works incredibly well with Gary Mitchell story … Kirk’s already dealt with Mitchell so he’s seen this kind of power before, and they’ve gotten Mitchell out of the picture so they can tell other similar stories.

Since Evans had the power to change physical matter, under the right situation, he could just as easily change himself to reflect the physical image he prefers (a la Josh Baskin, he wants to be Big). In this timeline he would have been discovered much earlier and younger, and therefore been given the training he never had to properly control his abilities and blend in with normal people.

More importantly, in this alternate federation tempered by Nero’s advanced technology, the incident with Gary Mitchell would probably motivate Starfleet to develop a way to control such an individual, something that would definitely be stepped up if Charlie were discovered shortly afterward. This would explain why Evans might not always be able to use his powers and be forced into hand-to-hand combat …

954. Planet Pandro - November 29, 2012

951
That’s funny, b/c when I first heard about Benicio Del Toro, Kang was my first thought…

955. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

OK, it was dontcare who referred to others as “dimbulbs”. Not nice. Not necessary, dontcare. I apologise to Trekzilla about the comment I made about the bulb.

The point is that having a “pasty” white looking person may well be of Indian origin because (a) of the perhaps not-so-common practice of skin whitening or (b) the person is genetically part-Indian but who has taken after the fairer, white side of the family. Such anomalies can and do happen. If all these things are possible now, what might be possible in the 23rd century?

I live in one of the most racially (and culturally) diverse areas of the planet and at times I do see what one could describe, as anomalies. The fact that I see and tell (to the best of my factual knowledge and ability) does not make me a “know all ASS” or this – “You are being obtuse and putting words in mouth as you always do to others”, as you Trekzilla and others have come to believe that I am.

Jesus (pardon the blasphemy) – the kind of not-so-nice stuff that some posters here have been shovelling at me at various times reminds me of an incident I experienced just after I had my first baby. A group of women who had just had babies went along to a post-natal educational meeting where coffee and chatting was part of the deal. I did not know any of the women, nor they me. The educator made mention of certain biological norms for women. However, I did not fit into what was considered the usual, the norm for the majority of women. This surprised me and I said so. Some total stranger mutters to her *friend* sitting right behind me that “she (meaning me) has to be different” in a really sarcastic, mean tone. As far as I can tell, I had never said or done anything to her and yet… The only reason she made that comment that I can fathom was that she did not like, understand, tolerate, whatever, the fact that I said that I had a different experience from most other women.

Unfortunately dontcare may have a point. I am not sure if or when some bulbs put out any light at all…:(

956. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 29, 2012

I wonder that Del Toro is still going to appear in this movie.

Khan is too irresistible for any professional writer of Star Trek.

However, I also wonder how a Trekkie would approach writing this sequel.

I bet boborci labels himself a writer, first.

A Trekkie would perhaps reference a more distant Trek badguy… and the movie would have intriguing science fiction, Klingons and Romuans, hot cyborg babes, and plenty of phaser fire!

957. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

Is the numbering of posts going askew here?

According to my viewscreen, we have another 44 posts to go until we reach 1000!

958. Jack - November 29, 2012

From this site, April 30, 2012 (29 days late for April Fool’s)

Spoiler 2: Cumberbatch is playing Khan

TrekMovie was first in reporting that Benedict Cumberbatch had joined the Star Trek sequel cast, to play a villain (originally a role offered to Benecio del Toro). A few outlets have also reported (including today’s AICN) that this villain was Trek’s most famous bad guy – the exiled Eugenics War leader Khan Noonien Singh (originally played by Ricardo Montalban). TrekMovie has also confirmed this with a number of sources so we no longer consider it to be a rumor. Khan is back in 2013, however sources indicate that the film is not a rehash of “Space Seed,” the original Star Trek episode where Kirk and crew first encounter the genetic superman from the past.

While big news, this is actually not a huge surprise. Trek’s new filmmakers have often cited the Christopher Nolan’s Batman series as their model, with the second film The Dark Knight successfully brining back the Joker and Khan is the closest to Trek gets to Batman’s Joker. And again the team kind of already let the cat out of the bag on this one when they recorded the DVD commentary back in 2009 and said they had considered a post-credits sceene showing the Botany Bay, Khan’s sleeper ship. Then of course there is Abrams widely reported casting process which began with Benecio del Toro and went through a number other prominent Latino (like Montalban) actors before he ended up picking Cumberbatch, after what has been said to be a very powerful audition….

(the same story also promised Nimoy… And Klingons!)

959. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

#952. Of Bajor

Thanks for refreshing my memory.

I am curious to know if there are doubters that Spock Prime/Nimoy will be in the sequel? Klingons?

960. Gary S. - November 29, 2012

Again,Anthony, has never said it is a 100%percent certainty .
Anthony believes his sources .
It is not however confirmed until the studio confirms it .
The villain may indeed be Khan,
But, until Paramount confirms it , is just another rumor.

961. Of Bajor - November 29, 2012

#959 Disinvited

I have been a visitor to this site for almost 6 years and have learned to trust that if Anthony reports something then he has checked it out a zillion times first.

I look forward to Spock Prime, Klingons, and Khaaaaan!

:-)

962. Trekzilla - November 29, 2012

#955 — Apology accepted. And I apologize for my part in the nastiness as well.

963. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

Actually, aren’t we al being a little close-minded? The reality is, all we really know is that Cumberlach plays a character from canon. But canon includes anything that could have been in existence during the next film, which opens the character to anything introduced during TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT. Why are we focusing solely on Khan, Gary Mitchell, Garth, and other characters from the original TOS universe?

964. Craiger - November 29, 2012

Wont it be a villain that the general movie going audience is going to know? We forget that JJ is mainly making Trek for the general movie going audience with some nods to Trek fans thrown in. What Trek villains does the general movie going audience know? They probably have never heard of Gary Mitchell, Garth, Gary Seven or Charlie X.

965. Hat Rick - November 29, 2012

By the way, I wanted to thank Anthony for publicizing this synopsis. It’s the biggest news to hit Trek in a long time, and it’s certainly inspired conversation and debate.

He is doing a great job.

966. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

I think that characters from TAS and ENT could be included in the list of possible villains, but not the other series.

I am saying this because I am going with the assumption that this alternate timeline is more or less running a similar course to the prime timeline. Therefore, many of those characters and events depicted in Enterprise and TAS could easily be part of the alternate universe’s overall background scenario.

However, the TV series TNG, DS9 and VOY (along with the TNG movies) occurred almost 100 years into the prime timeline’s future.

Another possibility is the villain could be someone who is much the same age as Kirk, however in this alternate universe, we meet him at a much younger age, ie earlier than we did in the prime timeline. I am thinking of Klingon Chang, someone who seemed easily given to betrayal and playing with the *enemy* when it suited him…

However, Paramount/Bad Robot ain’t given the word yet on who the “one mean dude” is, so my guess is as good or as bad as anyone else’s.

967. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

882: “Interesting here that when people want to believe in something so bad that all of a sudden Anthony’s new stories with multiple confirmations get twisted into either rumor mongering or having us believe that poor, naive Anthony was used and abused by his sources.”

Well that’s not true of me. I think you do have a lot invested in believing it’s Khan, but I have nothing invested either in Khan or Gary Mitchell. I don’t “want” to believe it’s Mitchell. That’s just what the evidence suggests. I’d change my mind in a heartbeat if/when it better suggests something else.

And there have been no additional leaks or independent confirmations that Khan is the villain, so AP’s confirmation is weak, and Simon Pegg flatly called it nothing but a rumor and untrue, which also matches JJ’s own denial.

Meanwhile, a series of facts have emerged which suggest it is NOT Khan. And in fact, nothing that we know about the movie itself yet suggests Khan. Not even Cumberbatch’s hairstyle, which is short — like Gary Mitchell’s.

And there is nothing that suggests Karl Urban was joking when he said Cumberbatch was playing Gary Mitchell.

So all in all, I’m thinking AP was a little too hasty in publishing the Khan news.

968. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

887. Jack – November 28, 2012

Again dm, what if Dehner’s not linked to Mitchell at all this time?

***

It’s possible! These guys are tricky.

With Gary’s god-like powers, it’s hard to predict how these guys will use it — perhaps even having Mitchell disguise himself as another Star Trek antagonist?

The problem is when you add more and more canon characters in key roles, you create a new end you have to tie up each time in the space of a couple hours, which could detract from the time needed to develop the core characters’ drama.

So I tend to think they won’t add too many familiar ingredients to the stew.

And the Mitchell scenario has proved rather uncontroversial. I mean, when the Khan rumor circulated, Bob and JJ got berated for allegedly revisiting a beloved Star Trek character that so many fans wanted left alone.

Not so for Gary Mitchell.

969. Jack - November 29, 2012

“And there is nothing that suggests Karl Urban was joking when he said Cumberbatch was playing Gary Mitchell.”

Apart from Bob saying previously in an interview, that had made all sorts of news, that Mitchell was on a list of characters not in it…

So Bob says, it’s not these guys including Mitchell. And then how ever many days later, Urban says Cumberbatch will make an exemplary Gary Mitchell (future tense, it seems)?

We can speculate that Karl didn’t know Bob had said this, or wasn’t on the Internet or Twitter or didn’t know that, well, the villain was a secret, or that the comment was supposed to be off the record. But there’s nothing that suggests any of that either.

We can speculate that it was all part of a big disinformation campaign. Again, guessing.

Come on, the guy (who gets this question constantly) ends an interview by saying I can’t tell you a thing except — who the top secret villain is?

Again, seems like a joke to me — but you’re right, I don’t have evidence. It’s a guess.

Nobody has said it was a joke. Nobody confirmed or denied Anthiny’s rumours either.

Although the guy did also say he had exclusive footage — which turned out to be a joke. Could he have been scrambling to cover it up, to make it look like he was kidding? Maybe. Who knows?

And to say ‘I was joking!’ doesn’t exactly follow the rules, which are — keep your bloody mouth shut, period. He may or may not have been kidding.

Could be Mitchell. Could be not Mitchell. Could involve Mitchell somehow. We really don’t know for sure yet.

Why do I keep arguing this? Speculation gussied up as fact bugs me.

970. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

Now, Bob said it wasn’t Mitchell. But Bob also said he lied about something that he’s going to come clean about soon.

Bob NEVER said it WAS NOT Khan, so he could not have lied about that. So the man himself is telling us he disinformed us about something, and it is likely going to be about something key.

And WHO the antagonist is, is precisely what we have all been wondering about, and it’s also what they have been so guarded about.

Therefore, that’s a good candidate thing to lie about. And if Bob lied to protect that secret, then the secret can’t be Khan, because he never denied it was Khan, i.e., the truth which his lie was told to conceal can’t be that the antagonist is Khan, because he never said it wasn’t Khan.

But he did say it wasn’t Mitchell. Which means that it can be Mitchell if that was the subject of the lie.

So when is Bob going to come clean?

After The Hobbit debuts in IMAX. Because then we’ll know.

971. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

969. Jack – November 29, 2012

I do philosophy. I know what speculations are and how to distinguish them from facts. That’s why when I gauge the things we DO know about this movie — and we do know some things (which I have named), I look at which possibilities they LEAN toward, as opposed to what they PROVE.

If they keep leaning, then they eventually fall to that side.

Things haven’t fallen yet, but it is too hard not to notice what the many pieces and parallels are saying because that is just a natural decision-making process we use during our daily lives.

It’s inductive, which means it is fallible — but necessary, and so familiar a process that it’s automatic.

972. dontcare - November 29, 2012

I tried posting several links about the skin whitening “obsession” (quoting the BBC) in India, and the post has vanished, so those wanting to see proof of this can simply go to google and enter “India skin whitening” in the search field. I found stories on it from the BBC, Al Jazeera, The Huffington Post, and others.

973. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

I don’t think there has been much evidence of anything. All we have seen are three frames of someone looking like Spock in a suit capable of sustaining a person’s life in what looks like a volcano or terrible firestorm of some kind.

The pictures of Quinto dressed as Spock with pointy ears were ones showing rehearsals between Quinto and Cumberbatch. Although Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana appeared to be in full costume and make up, we don’t actually know if that also applied to Cumberbatch. It is more than likely, but not necessarily a given. After all some of the pictures also showed Quinto’s stunt double, someone else, an IMAX camera, polystyrene coffee cups and JJ Abrams, the man himself!

What I have seen here is much arguing and repetition…;)

974. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

As for the skin whitening issue, Michael Jackson had vitiligo, a disease that affects the pigment of the skin. I believe that any race of people can get it, but it is more noticeable among darker skinned races. I also think he was having skin whitening treatments to even out his overall skin colour tone. It is also another reason why he wore the one white glove…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitiligo

975. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

#972. dontcare

In Google News:

http://telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/bangladesh/9686132/Skin.html

976. Richard - November 29, 2012

Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

Does this mean they’re going after George Bush? Oh well still not gonna see it

977. Max - November 29, 2012

#972 Skin whitening is very common in Asia in general. I saw heaps of TV ads in Thailand for products. And in Vietnam, people will wear full length thick clothing, big hats and gloves while working at beachside bars and restaurants so their skin doesn’t get any darker. I thoughtit was kinda sad but then my wife reminded me the all the white people on the beach were trying to get darker so what’s the difference? Oh and Rose, I’ve seen some nasty racism in NZ before especially towards Indian shop owners. And yes I know we’re no better here in Oz. Every country has its issues. Oh yeah and I’m now leaning heavily towards the villain being Mitchell .

978. concerned - November 29, 2012

Pacific rim’s press campaign is awesome. It really shows what Star Trek into Darkness should be doing

979. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

It should be quite obvious what the real enemy is, especially with the title being Star Trek Into Darkness. It is the darkness of the soul, of the mind within the collective consciousness of people as a result of Vulcan being destroyed. As news filters out about the events as far as is known and sight of how Vulcan died – ie the implosion, I can only imagine the mounting fear, anxiety, sense of vulnerability, anguish, despair, grief, anger, pain that would grip both the surviving Vulcans but also those within Starfleet and even the Federation itself. Such horror/darkness would no doubt spread like a cancer throughout, leaving no mind, heart, soul untouched, uncontaminated in some way. So too for Kirk and Spock. I wonder if or how our two heroes will be given the pen that says, “Find the crack” (ref. Fringe episode from 2nd season)…

There are people, beings, who feed off, prey on this kind of soul destroying darkness of the collective heart, mind and soul of people who are held within its grip. In comes that *Cumby* chap et al…

980. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

“kind of soul destroying darkness of the collective heart, mind and soul of people who are held within its grip.”

That’s the real “one mean dude”!

981. Phil - November 29, 2012

One would think that almost 1000 comments into this topic, that we would have successfully recreated the script and posted it by now….

982. dswynne - November 29, 2012

My guess as to who the one-man weapon of mass destruction Kirk has to retrieve? Fleet Captain Garth from the TOS episode “Whom Gods Destroy”. The character is suppose to be a genocidal maniac who has both shape-shifting abilities, as well as being a tactical genius. The “into Darkness” part of the title could mean that Kirk will have to do things that aren’t in keeping with the ideals of the Federation, and that will be the test he will have to undergo.

983. P Technobabble - November 29, 2012

I wonder if there will be a kind of mass Trekkie postpartum depression once the cat’s out of the bag.

984. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 29, 2012

882. MJ (The Original)

Okay… I know your belief on who you think Cumberbatch is playing. But other that the rumour from Anthony’s source (and it is a rumour until it is made official)… what other proof do you have that it could be Khan?

Let me respond to your first point that you will make ;) Del Toro: Well, yes, he is Latino. Yes, he was offered a role. People are assuming that he was offered the role of Khan because he is Latino. It was stated somewhere that the part was written with him in mind (although not sure if that is official)… okay… can it not be the were looking to have him the movie because he is an amazing actor and plays a really good bad guy DESPITE the fact that he is Latino?

Just to set the record straight… I really don’t care who the villain is.. I just want a really good movie. The reason I first came up with Gary Mitchell was because all signs pointed to either Mitchell or Gary Seven. The evidence is there. Much more than there is for Khan.

Okay okay… I know Gary Seven wasn’t a villain per say, but when Kirk & co. first met up with him… they though he was a villain. They tried to stop him. It wasn’t until the end of the episode that they saw his true agenda.

But why can’t Gary Seven be a villain? It would make a great twist on things. I am actually writing a Star Trek story where Gary Seven is a villain “for the greater good” instead of just being a bad guy.

Anyway, just want to know what proof you have that make you so sure that it is Khan… would love to pick your points apart! lol ;)

985. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 29, 2012

964. Craiger

Where as Khan is the best known Trek villain… he is not well known by the main stream. The movie came out in 82. Khan is regarded as Trek’s most popular and well know villain in the sci-fi community.

986. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 29, 2012

983. P Technobabble – November 29, 2012

I wonder if there will be a kind of mass Trekkie postpartum depression once the cat’s out of the bag.

…and also out of that bag will come a thousand other ideas (from us) that the writers wish they would have thought of, or wish they could use.

987. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

I surmised a year ago the possibility that there may have been two slightly different story outlines and basic scripts written, in case they could not get the actor they were really after to play the heavy. I see no reason not to think that this still may have been the case.

Of course, we’ll probably never know just which actor they were really after…eh Bob?

988. Classy M - November 29, 2012

If twitter is correct, Benedict Cumberbatch & Chris Pine are heading to Japan in December to do some Star Trek publicity. https://twitter.com/MovieStar_mag/status/273985937174847488

It seems very early to begin publicity but good to know the Japanese are excited about both Cumberbatch and the film.

989. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

#989 – Unfortunately I am not fluent in Japanese, however what I did see were pictures of Twilight – Breaking Dawn actors on one magazine cover and another magazine cover showing Benedict Cumberbatch looking more like Sherlock Holmes and words like Glee and the Hobbit. No mention? or pictures of Chris Pine or Star Trek.

I think that it is possible that once the Hobbit movie is released in Japan, that a little publicity for Star Trek with the two main leads, one good guy and one bad dude, could be cool.

Curiously, the IMDb STID site has no release date for Japan, although there is a release date for Hong Kong – 16 May 2013.

Now, if only they could be encouraged to jump the equator and head down to the North of the two islands not far from Australia and just above the big iceblock… so now I have a reason to start spring cleaning my modest little home…:)

990. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

@964 Craiger,

I don’t think anybody but Star Trek fans are going to recognize any villain by name, at least as far as the name having meaning. There may be those who have heard Khan in pop references, but very few who will actually know the traits of that character, or his exact relationship to Kirk, at least enough to motivate significant interest, especially when it comes to anyone born after about 1986 — and lets face it, that’s a huge market for whom this movie is targeted. More important to Star Trek is that Cumberbatch is an internationally recognized star, the most likely reason they approached Benecio Del Toro, which this franchise desperately needs to help penetrate deeper outside the US. Who that star plays is of far less importance to the general audience the franchise is trying to attract.

@966 Rose,

Agreed, it couldn’t be anyone from the TNG era who was born in that era (unless somebody else has come back in time), but it could easily be any Vulcan or Romulan about Spock’s age, or younger, or any other long-lived species as well — certainly the Borg, Q, and any other threat that was out there since 2250s but not discovered until the TNG era. I don’t know my Next Generation Trek well enough to really dig into this, but it seems like there were at least a dozen episodes that dealt with threats that had been around since the TOS days. And I would go so far as to say that it includes any references to deceased characters alive during the 2250s but first mentioned during the TNG era.

That’s all I’m saying …

991. Classy M - November 29, 2012

#989 – Sounds like your Japanese is far superior to mine, Rose. Mind, that’s not hard since I only speak a couple of words and don’t read it at all.

As to the ST connection: I was going by some of the tweets that discussed the reason for the trip. One of them said that both Cumberbatch & Pine were going to be in Japan in December, though at different times. (A shame, because I’d like to see them together.) Here are a couple:

Benedict Cumberbatch will come to Japan on 3rd December (for promote StarTreck2). Fantastic case happened here,Sherlock?haha

For those who interested, Benedict Cumberbatch is coming to Japan on 3rd Dec to PR Star Trec 2.

It’s possible Ben will do some interviews following the Star Trek trailer. Maybe… be still my heart… we might even get some new information.

The ‘Sherlock’ picture on the cover of the magazine probably means only that it’s the part he’s best known for there.

In any case, his popularity in Japan bodes well (I hope) for the success of STID… whenever it’s released there.

992. grover sald - November 29, 2012

In this timeline, Garth is the captain of the ship that crosses the Galactic Barrier. Bad news for the fleet when he returns with his big ego, silver eyes and a score to settle with Kirk…

993. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

I don’t know any Japanese at all. I just looked at the pretty pictures and read what English there was…:)

I have no idea why Chris Pine would be in Japan. The only explanation I can think of is that it may have something to do with promoting Rise of the Guardians movie, however the movie was released in Singapore on 22 November. The IMDb Rise of the Guardians has no release date for Japan either. We don’t get to see this film downunder until 13 December (Australia) and 3 January (NZ).

Most likely, just a wee bit of gossip or wishful thinking perhaps on the part of the twitterers…Anyway, Ben and Chris would be on the wrong side of the equator…:)

994. Grimey - November 29, 2012

I’m not getting the whole Gary Mitchell argument. In this new universe, the events in WNMHGB never transpired. Regardless of what may have been printed in a comic. IT’S NOT CANNON. Mitchell was never mutated. Beyond that, we will never know his fate because he was never friends with Kirk at the Academy and never served aboard the Enterprise. The point is moot.

I hope that it’s not a “Prime Universe” character. That’s boring, boring, boring. Living in the past is boring. Let’s hope that the powers that be recognize this and bring us something new and refreshing. The Trekiverse needs new blood pumped into it and shaken up a bit. I don’t want a movie that only we (Trekkies, Trekkers or whatever you want to label yourself) get. I want a new generation to get excited. To be able to relate and discuss the themes and ideals that are presented. I want to think and be provoked to rethink what I thought I knew. Let’s hope we’re not painted into a corner and all we have is to reimagine events that have already happened. Yawn…

995. I am not Herbert - November 29, 2012

JJ and his writers are the insidiously treacherous terrorists here!

Star Trek is getting raped by the fracking transformers! this sucks!

first they kill the vulcans, now the federation! I say thee: NAY!!!!!!

996. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@994 Kind of sick of this, but it’s Gary Mitchell.

The Alice Eve/Dr. Dehner haircut/accent is pretty much the end of the line:

http://bit.ly/Tt1XSv

http://bit.ly/QKF4M5

You have Cumberbatch in Starfleet uniform. The “one-man weapon of mass destruction” synopsis, now. Karl Urban saying so (hilarious joke to get nerds’ hopes up? Great marketing departments these modern studios have.) Orci lying and saying it’s not Mitchell. And Orci responding several times on this thread admitting he lied, and saying that he wants to admit it, after everybody said “it’s Mitchell.”

Basically telling us “it’s Mitchell.”

“Where No Man has Gone Before” is my favorite Trek episode of all time–they’re basically doing a “Wrath of Khan” kind of pseudo-sequel. The only justified flack the ’09 film got was being too alienated from the classic sci-fi themes that the best original Trek explored, which is why I think they chose Mitchell.

997. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

Anyone who says that Star Trek is getting raped, or that JJ Abrams or anyone else is raping Star Trek should have their posts deleted – instantly!

I am utterly sick of people misusing the word rape. Rape is a serious crime, often a very violent and is prosecutable under the law and so it should be. Ask any victim (male or female). Nature can also be “raped” in a way, in that terrible violence can be perpetrated on an ecology and all those who live within it. Fauna and flora can be wiped, even made extinct. That is also very serious…

Having a fictional series rebooted, rehashed, reimagined or whatever you might want to call it is NOT RAPE. You may not like the new rendering, but rape it is not. It is totally insensitive towards those real victims of real rape. The same could also said for those who are victims of real treachery and terrorism.

Please, Anthony – this is trolling at its worst.

998. Sebastian S. - November 29, 2012

To the Khan rumorists I offer this:

A portrait of a ‘one-man weapon of mass destruction’ getting his a$$ handed to him by Kirk with a plastic paper towel dispenser:

http://vincentpaone.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/space_seed_408.jpg

Yeah; boy, that Khan’s really a one-man weapon of mass destruction, he is. ;-D

Or as Kirk would say in ST09, “Bulls**t.” ;-P

999. Well Of Souls - November 29, 2012

@ 997. Rose (as in Keachick). I totally agree with you on the inappropriate use of language that maliciously goes beyond the bounds of a personal description or personal view. An opinion is one thing. Defamation is unacceptable & immoral.

1000. Well Of Souls - November 29, 2012

1000?

1001. Craiger - November 29, 2012

We forget the Klingons are in the movie. I guess they could also make Mitchell be kind of like a villain in a super hero movie and not like the one in Where No Man Has Gone Before. Maybe like Loki in The Avengers.

1002. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 29, 2012

I am not aware that Bob Orci said what he lied about. All he said was that he lied and was going to “come clean” soon.

Did Bob Orci definitely say that the bad boy was not Gary Mitchell? Not sure. Did Bob Orci definitely say that the character is iconic to the TOS series? I think he did. What if that is the lie and the Cumby character is totally new to Star Trek canon or is a character from TOS (TV or movies) that no one would have even have thought of as having a backstory and becoming such a mean dude?

I kept assuming that the villain would not be Gary Mitchell because in the online comic series, Gary Mitchell had been killed, so therefore could not be in the movie. Although the comic series written under the direction of Roberto Orci is considered canon, what gets put on film may overwrite, completely contradict what appears in the comics, and that becomes canon. Film trumps all. Therefore….

I think that JJ Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman can be deliciously *naughty* people when it comes to story telling and keeping people guessing… and people say that these guys can’t be thought provoking with their story telling and movie making…LOL

1003. Well Of Souls - November 29, 2012

Time for a new thread with the new logo or poster & bat for another thousand responses…

1004. Craiger - November 29, 2012

Or what if they perform genetic engineering on Mitchell? Starfleet could be starting up those experiments in secret because wasn’t that outlawed? Maybe Starfleet sees the Klingons as a serious threat along with the Romulans because of Nero.

1005. M.J. (Mark James) - November 29, 2012

Ha Ha thats great Sebastian!
Even though I dont think that will change the minds of the most adamant ones about it being khan. But hey let them think what they want lol

Ive said since that PR release that Khan was in no way shape or form a one man weapon of mass destruction.

1006. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1002 I’m stuck on this comment threat due to a gravitational quantum nerd warp field, but me and several other people (perhaps only in my brain) have postulated that the still frames of Spock fighting Cumberbatch:

http://bit.ly/Rmx6J5

….are a re-creation of the end of the “alternate timeline” comic book “Where No Man has Gone Before.” In the comic Spock neck-pinches Mitchell (vs. Dehner shooting electric energy) to weaken him. Judging by the set photos, Spock will neck-pinch Mitchell, fight him, and then maybe even Uhura will shoot him with a phaser, whereas in the comic, Kirk shot him.

This might even be the 9 minute preview. Point being: Dehner wasn’t there to truly weaken him. Alice Eve plays Dehner in the film. Mitchell will abduct Alice Eve at the end of act 2 in the film and there will be a rough re-imagining of the true end of “Where No Man has Gone Before.”

1007. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 29, 2012

There are rumors about Benedict Cumberbatch be going to Tokyo next week, promoting STID … I believe that this is possible … There are rumors that Chris Pine will be there in January … But I would not be surprised if he is there next week … just rumors!

;-) :-)

1008. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

#995. I am not Herbert

I can understand feel passionate about something but in what possible way could you possibly apply those appellations to the Bad Robot crew and believe they are voicing rational thoughts?

Bad Robot didn’t detonate Paramount and force the survivors to let them make STAR TREK movies. They were ASKED to this dance and then told they were going Dutch but stilll humg in there.

Whatever lack of inspiration you feel they have is dwarfed by the lack of thought you showed in chosing to express your sentiments with those particular statements.

1009. Max - November 29, 2012

There has to be Klingons It’s just not Trek without them. The war zone world would be Qo’noS in the midst of a civil war. I just hope they’re proper cranial ridge Klingons. Maybe Cumby is the last of them Genetic altered smooth heads established in Enterprise Season 4. Undercover in Starfleet.

1010. M.J. (Mark James) - November 29, 2012

984, I believe his proof is the oft mentioned “CONFIRMATION” that Khan was the villian from a reliable un-named source.

Keep in mind however the same article claimed that Nimoy was definately back as spock, even though a few days latter NImoy said via his twitter, that he was not returning as spock and that his words were being misinterpreted.

Myself personally I think it looks more and more likely to be Lt. Mitchell and I am pretty sure that Karl, let it slip on accident in that interview, because of extreme jet lag/exhaustion etc of his press junkets he was doing around the globe at the time. If you go back and re read the transcript of the interview it wasnt said in the manner of trying to decieve or lie, it was a true slip up sort of like how jason Flemying inadvertantly let the cat out the bag about Mathew Vaughn and Star wars in a recent interview at the premiere for Seven Psychopaths.

And that press release can not be spun any logical way to indicate khan, unless they do a complete rewrite on the character and his M.O. in which case whats the point, in calling him khan.

In anycase even if its not Mitchell the signs definately point further and further away from Khan and towards another person

1011. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 29, 2012

My interest in this site has pretty much been ruined by the last month or more of chaos that was permitted by the web master and perpetrated by visitors to this site, so this will be brief, and my comments will be rare. Not that it matters to anybody, but I felt the need to say it.

I don’t understand the negativity people have toward Abrams and co. They’ve had one movie thus far, and if you compare their two hours of Star Trek to any other version of Star Trek, they have performed VERY admirably. Stacked up against the debut of any of the Trek series, or any Trek movie, I can’t find any reason to trash them. Think of the awkward first two episodes of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT. Think of the sub-par films that have come out. To me, Abrams Trek is better than most of the Trek films and much better than the debut of any of the Trek series.

Two hours, folks, That’s all they’ve had to establish their own vision. I think the complaints of many here are ludicrous, hateful, spiteful and downright immature. Once I’ve seen the next film, I’ll either feel better or worse about their vision, but right now I can’t possibly justify trashing them. They did quite well their first time out.

Just my opinion, but it is a rational and carefully considered one, and that’s all I have to say. Cheers.

1012. M.J. (Mark James) - November 29, 2012

1009 for a while i was suggesting that His character could be playing a Klingon Surgicly altered to look like a human to infiltrate Star fleet no to disimilar from Klingon operative Arne Darvin( minus the tribbles of course) though he is definately not a one man weapon of mass destruction either.

1013. M.J. (Mark James) - November 29, 2012

I am curious now what the official divide is on who thinks its Khan and who thinks its Mitchell or even another character.

perhaps you could do a poll Anthony, just get a real concesses on how MOST interpret the clues

1014. Peter Loader - November 29, 2012

In my opinion…

Peter Weller = John Harriman
Benedict Cumberbatch = Gary Mitchell
Alice Eve = Elizabeth Dehner

1015. Richard Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1011 There’s very little negativity or personal attacking in this thread compared to an average Youtube comment section. I think once in a while some moron says Abrams ruined “Star Trek,” which is farcical considering most episodes of the best-ever “Trek” shows are truly mediocre. Even the films are mostly not-great.

My only objection to ’09 was ignoring the best “cerebral” sci-fi aspects of the original TOS show that basically every film also ignored, despite idealism and allegory and thoughtful content. They made up for it in ’09 with a kind of “best and brightest” narrative that really works.

But your opinion is really, really weak. If you want to fight in this comment section like a normal Internet comment section, I have no problem saying you’re stupid. Come at me, bro.

1016. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

From the press release:

“When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

So the threat comes from within. The unstoppable force of terror is one of their own.

That fits Gary Mitchell, but it does not fit Khan.

“With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.”

A one man WMD. That fits Gary Mitchell, but it does not fit Khan.

1017. Hat Rick - November 29, 2012

And it’s a good question (1010): Why would Karl Urban even mention Gary Mitchell, as opposed, to, say, any random villain from the Trek universe?

And has Karl Urban offered any opinions on Trek since then (other than, presumably, explaining away his comment)? If not, has he been issued a gag order from the “Supreme Court”?

1018. Craiger - November 29, 2012

What if Gary Mitchell doesn’t have God like powers? What if he is just so mad at Starfleet and the Federation because of something they did to him or his family accidently that he wants to raise an army to go after them? Or goes after the Doomsday Device or Khan and the Botany Bay?

1019. Check the Circuit - November 29, 2012

Hmmmmm. Are there clues in the synopsis? There is a reference to a “chess game.” Hey…wait. What was the first scene in the very first episode ever filmed that featured Capt James T. Kirk? Oh yeah! A game of chess! And what other Starfleet officer was in that episode but never to be seen again? I’ve got it! The villan of STID is none other than….

Dr. Piper!!!

Praise may begin. :D

1020. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

@1016 dmduncan

What do you make of this “personal score to settle”? That seems to be a palatable clue …

Is this related to Mitchell? Or is it something else?

1021. Gary S - November 29, 2012

Its possible the lie that Bob is talking about was saying that the villain is from the canon .
Just throwing it out there

1022. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 29, 2012

1015. Richard Johnson – Did I, in any way, suggest I was looking for a fight? Obviously you must be. I don’t care that you think my opinion a weak one. And comparing the negativity here to YouTube, of all places? You amuse me. If that is your measure of internet discourse, it is you who is looking for a fight. That won’t happen with me.

I stand by my “really, really weak” opinion, without the need to defend it. I’m not interested in “winning” some silly argument about Star Trek, or proving somebody wrong, or convincing them to feel another way. So aim your little internet fists at somebody else, please.

1023. Curious Cadet - November 29, 2012

@ 1014 Peter

Except Weller is playing a new original character, so it can’t be from Canon.

Any why couldn’t Alice Eve be playing Nurse Chappel or Yeoman Rand? It’s not as if she’s too big to become a regular, nor impossible to kill either of these characters off as the Supreme Court continues to mix up this universe …

Dehner is not really needed if this is Mitchell in this time period based on the comic. But I have to hand it to Orci, if it is Mitchell, it’s pretty clever making the first comic about Mitchell and killing him off immediately.

1024. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1021 It’s possible, but “adaptation” is the new Hollywood, and you could do much worse than adapting/sequelling “Where No Man has Gone Before.”

When I was 14. I thought that was the best episode of “Star Trek” I’d ever seen, even though the characters weren’t even defined. Spock was almost ill-defined in a good way–he’s almost psychotic in his belief than mankind cannot be trusted with power of any kind. It’s really interesting.

So I hope these guys drew from that–I respect not caring about “Star Trek”‘s shlockly incarnations, but the blockbuster and TV auteurs seem to not understand the DNA of classic sci-fi themes. They did a good Joseph Campbell job on Kirk and Spock in ’09, but don’t ignore the great sci-fi tradition of that age. It was a “cerebral” mythology.

1025. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

1020. Curious Cadet – November 29, 2012

@1016 dmduncan

What do you make of this “personal score to settle”? That seems to be a palatable clue …

***

Could be that Kirk’s family (brother and/or mother) die in the crisis caused by the antagonist. May even be Kirk’s loved ones were directly targeted.

1026. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1022 You were implying that this is a feral zombie comment section of people saying Abrams sucks. I see how many Internet comment sections become “zombie”-like, I don’t see it here at all. Writing a long post about how we hate Abrams is dumb.

As I’ve implied that you’re dumb, we can fight like idiots now, in the holy tradition of Internet comment sections:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rl46Dpy-P4

1027. Gary S. - November 29, 2012

#1024 I had not made theJoseph Campbell connection.
That is an interesting thought .

1028. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

Y’know, the only downside here for me is the tired revenge theme.

I don’t mind seeing a bad guy, but why does he always have to be out for revenge?

Why can’t we see a villain who isn’t motivated by a need for vengeance, but instead one based on differing ideological/religious/cultural beliefs instead?

1029. Ahmed - November 29, 2012

@ 1028. Red Dead Ryan – November 29, 2012

“Why can’t we see a villain who isn’t motivated by a need for vengeance, but instead one based on differing ideological/religious/cultural beliefs instead?”

Maybe because Hollywood think that people are too dumb to understand complicated issues ?

1030. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

#1026.

You obviously haven’t been on this site very long. On almost every thread, there is always at least one clown who takes potshots at J.J Abrams.

And I see that you launched some unfair attacks against Shilliam Watner who didn’t deserve it. SW was right; a number of posters (trolls more like it) stated on this thread alone how Abrams is supposedly “raping” “Star Trek”.

C’mon, man, try reading before posting something asinine.

1031. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 29, 2012

1026. Rick Johnson – Imply all you want, you can’t bait me. I know I’m not “dumb.” It is your right to think so, however. Go for it. In fact, I insist that you think I am the least intelligent thing to clamber from the primordial ooze.

RDR – thanks for the defense, but Mr. Johnson is no threat to me or my ego. I’ve been baited much more skillfully by others. How the hell are you, by the way? I’ve been away a long time and am just now sticking my foot in the water again. It’s a busy season for me anyway, so it’s pretty easy to be absent right now.

As for this “synopsis” I have to say it is the most general synopsis I’ve possibly ever read. It’ll be nice when we finally know some real details of the plot and cast, and can stop a lot of this silly hypothesizing/guessing/surmising that has been going on now for what seems to be forever.

Cheers, Red. Thanks again for your support. I don’t care what anybody here says, you’re one of the good ‘uns.

1032. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

#1031.

Thanks, Shilliam! Just remember, when someone posts insults towards you, its just their way of admitting that they lost the argument!

:-)

1033. dmduncan - November 29, 2012

I don’t think we’re going to get another antagonist “out for revenge,” but with his unique powers Gary Mitchell MAY apply a torture test to Starfleet and the Federation.

1034. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 29, 2012

Aw, Red, I’m too old and grouchy to worry about another person’s insults, especially from somebody who doesn’t know me. If I could, I’d have a beer with Mr. Johnson and we might even have a decent conversation. I hold no ill will toward him. I don’t think he has any actual malice in his heart toward me. I certainly don’t toward him.

1035. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1031 Decrying this comment section for too-much “troll”-Internet idiocy is insane–that’s all I was responding to, considering the Internet.

The horror-show reality of two morons exchanging warlike “insult” comments in an Internet forum is what I wanted to avoid:

http://www.hark.com/clips/ddfcvbnynw-above-all-else-a-god-needs-compassion

“ABOVE ALL ELSE A GOD NEEDS COMPASSION!” Also Gary Mitchell is the villain.

1036. Phil - November 29, 2012

@1013….
Khan – no. At this point there won’t even be a mentioned.
Mitchell – maybe. He might be a character, but a background one.
Other – this makes the most sense because it allows for original storytelling, and allows for established characters to be good background material, without falling into the trap of trying to convert a one hour episode of TV into a major motion picture. Also ensures a better chance of success.

1037. Shilliam Watner (Click Name for Trek Poster) - November 29, 2012

1035. Rick Johnson – Peace, man. All I said was that I don’t understand some of the negativity based on two hours worth of work. You’re the one who then went on to insult me. I haven’t insulted you and I won’t. I’m done with this conversation.

1038. Disinvited - November 29, 2012

One thing we know about Khan from his first screen appearance is he doesn’t hesitate to use torture to achieve his ends. If the writers wanted to make some kind of statement about torture,I suppose a fairly powerful one could be made if they have Khan figure out some way to torture a god, i.e. Mitchell?

1039. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 29, 2012

Has anyone brought up any of the other omnipotent beings this could be??? Trelane comes to mind and Charlie.

1040. Rick Johnson - November 29, 2012

@1037 I’m an insulting human, but don’t decry an Internet forum as trolls in a vacuum of stupidity.

Most of these people are morons–not you or me, maybe!!!–but have some self-awareness. I agree with everything you said except you wanted to make a thing out of it–some bizarre people think ’09 sucked, who cares?

If anybody was throwing their balls around saying ’09 sucked, in detail, I would gladly hang them by their excess testicular flesh, which is absolutely disgusting. It’s 1,000 comments, they haven’t even popped up.

1041. Anthony Thompson - November 29, 2012

For all those quoting Anthony P. above and his earlier report that the villain is Khan based on trusted sources, you are conveniently forgetting that he recently reported that the first trailer for the sequel would be screened before non-Imax Hobbit showings. This he said based on “numerous reliable sources”. But AP backtracked the very next day and has still not reported where or when the first trailer will be released!

1042. Check the Circuit - November 29, 2012

What if Bob’s lie was that the comics were “canon.” Maybe they were “one possible future” in an infinite number of possibilities. But the idea of classic episodes with new twists as the basis for new movies was the “hint” of what’s to come.

So the WNMHGB “episode” in the comics isn’t a factor in what unfolds in the actual movies. (Personally, if the villain is Gary Mitchell, I’d be bummed if the origin of his omnipotence isn’t presented as part of the movie…and you have to read the comic book to get the full story of STID.)

I guess we’ll know in May.

1043. Aaron (Naysayers gonna nay) - November 29, 2012

Don’t forget they are doing another prequel comic for this movie. So the comics already done don’t have to tie in… or maybe they will continue one in the prequel. For example wnmhgb comic could be continued.

1044. olly - November 29, 2012

I suspect there were a few reasons why Benicio Del Toro turned the baddie role down. 1. Money, 2. Lack of time to get his body in shape 3. Its Khan and he was advised there’s be an outcry – even for him to be playing it.

1045. MJ (the original) - November 29, 2012

DM Duncan and others, if I was to have a massive brain-fart and decide to ignore Anthony’s “it’s Khan” story from last Spring, then we would still be left with perhaps the most compelling argument against it being Mitchell: Why would the writers pick for the villain a character that they essentially would have to come up with a resurrection method and complex retelling of a back-story from a comic book that 99.9% of the people seeing the movies wouldn’t have even read of be familiar with??? Doesn’t make sense???

To me, beyond Anthony’s breaking story, this is the single piece of most damning logic against it being Mitchell. If you are the writing team and have Mitchell as the villain, then you are not going to make it so you have to resurrect him and provide a complex back-story just to use him in this movie — you’d start fresh and introduce him in the movie.

1046. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

Not to mention Mitchell will presumably killed again. If, indeed, he is the villain in the sequel.

So where’s the suspense in that?

Or is the suspense going to be coming in the form of Captain Kirk on a quest to avenge the death of his family at the hands of someone we just read about in a comic a year ago?

1047. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

correction

“Not to mention Mitchell will presumably BE killed again.”

1048. M.J. (Mark James) - November 29, 2012

As was mentioned earlier, Trek 09 conviently ignored certain events of Countdown (inspite of it being the OFFICIAL prequel story)

In anycase we can keep our minds open for a few more weeks, pretty sure the character question will be laid to rest on December 14th

1049. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

Unless Paramount does a last minute retraction of the nine-minute trailer, in which case, the torture will continue. :-)

1050. Admiral_Bumblebee - November 29, 2012

If it is Gary Mitchell then I have one question: Why is it possible to kill off a character (off screen) and bring him back in a movie, somehow telling his story and his resurrection but something similar was impossible for Prime Kirk?

1051. MJ (the original) - November 29, 2012

And I should remind folks here as well, that I was the one who noticed Orci using the word “cOn” in a post of his concerning the sequel here in Fall of 2011, which I decoded to be an obscure clue from him pointing to Khan. He later said it was a typo when I had posted several times about it, but it will be interesting to see if Khan is indeed the villain given this old clue that I think I deciphered from him. (FYI — this is all in the posting records of this site if anyone wants to go back and wade through it all).

1052. Red Dead Ryan - November 29, 2012

I don’t think the trailer will be pulled. But it would suck elephant balls if it did.

1053. MJ (the original) - November 29, 2012

@1048. Correct James — we will probably know the answer in two weeks — I can’t imagine the nine minute sequence would not introduce the villain, but you never know?

1054. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1046 “Or is the suspense going to be coming in the form of Captain Kirk on a quest to avenge the death of his family at the hands of someone we just read about in a comic a year ago?”

And it is worse then that, RDR — the “we” you refer two will probably be 3 or 4 people at best who know about that comic in your average theater crowd of say 300 people. Just doesn’t make any sense folks???

Although I won’t underestimate the ability of some of you to come up with some complex excuse to counter this? :-)

1055. astrophysicophile - November 30, 2012

992. In 912, I suggested the same.

1056. CJS - November 30, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch = Gary Mitchell
Alice Eve = Elizabeth Dehner
It’s a remake of Where No Man Has Gone Before

Peter Weller = Dr. Roger Korby
Benedict Cumberbatch = Android Ruk
Alice Eve = Christine Chapel
It’s a remake of What Are Little Girls Made Of?

Peter Weller = Captain of the Antares
Benedict Cumberbatch = Charlie Evans
Alice Eve = Yeoman Janice Rand
It’s a remake of Charlie X?

Benedict Cumberbatch = The God Apollo
Alice Eve = Lt. Carolyn Palomas
It’s a remake of Who Mourns for Adonis?

You could do this all day.

1057. Captain Slow - November 30, 2012

Yikes. That was longer than I thought. Oh well, it won’t actually convince anyone.

1058. dalek - November 30, 2012

If it is Gary Mitchell then why is he engaged in hand to hand combat with Spock when at this stage in his ever increasing God-like powers he could simply break Spock’s neck with a single thought?

The weapon that decimated the fleet: The Genesis Wave.

Khan in a Starfleet uniform. He was in one in Space Seed. Surely Khan has been discovered many years before these events and infiltrated Starfleet. Perhaps he has even found out his fate in the previous timeline by interrogating Spock Prime!

Blond lady Carol Marcus. She was clearly in Starfleet Academy at some point as Gary Mitchell said that he pointed a “blond lab technician” in Kirk’s direction and Kirk said “I almost married her!”

1059. Jack - November 30, 2012

Watner — things got a lot better here in the last couple of weeks. Anthony’s back. The imposter seems to have been banned. There’ve been more updates and the tone’s been better… a few rape comments aside…

1060. Commander K - November 30, 2012

Just found out Into Darkness trailer will be 1:03 minutes long…short n’ sweet…bit too short though.

1061. The Great Bird Lives In Our Hearts - November 30, 2012

The bad guy can be a Triskellion for all I care, just as long as the story is great, and believable. It doesn’t matter who, because if you’ve written a great story all you need is great actors to pull it off, and there doesn’t seem to be a shortage of talent on the roster.

1062. grover sald - November 30, 2012

1055. Whoops! You beat me to it!

1063. scottevill - November 30, 2012

While I still think that the Col. Kurtz of the Trek universe is probably Captain Garth, I am persuaded that Cumberbatch is playing Mitchell (and Alice Eve, Dr Dehner). I assume they will acknowledge the events of the comic in a Wrath of Mitchell type storyline resembling Apocalypse Now. (Has Chris Pine already referenced the necessary big reveal/flashback sequence in remarks about a heavy exposition scene he played with Cumberbatch?)

BTW, I took another look at the comic and don’t think they left wiggle room to bring Mitchell back. Except for the burial at space vs leaving him in a grave on the planet, the ending wasn’t changed. Nor do I think it needed to be changed. Isn’t “godlike powers” enough wiggle room on its own?

I did note that Spock showing up to neck pinch Mitchell was key to laying him out and wondered if the fight sequence we saw them shooting — which features Cumberbatch appearing to overcome the neck pinch to regain the upper hand over Spock — is a call back to that moment? “Fool me twice.”

1064. Hat Rick - November 30, 2012

@scottevill (1063), you are one of the few that referenced the neck pinch issue, which I also did in my blog (accessible by clicking my username).

But I’ve come to believe that the mention of Gary Mitchell by Karl Urban is rather inexplicable other than as a “Freudian slip,” as it were, from the fact that he was exhausted from his travels. A slip of the tongue letting the cat out of the bag.

How DID he explain it away, anyhow?

1065. Jack - November 30, 2012

I agree that depending on a plot point from the comics — without properly addressing it in the movie — might not work. Although, nearly every movie ever depends on characters’ backstory/memories/stories/histories/past interactions/former lovers/former friend turned enemy/dark secrets that we might not actually ever see on screen…

We didn’t need to see the prequels to understand Star Wars.

We didn’t need to have heard of the latest Bond villain before seeing sky fall.

Heck, we didn’t need to see Space Seed before seeing Trek II.

But, that said, some of those set-ups work better than others.

In MI:III we were supposed to care about characters who had apparently had a history with Hunt — Kerrie Russell in the helicopter, say… And it didn’t quite work.

And in Trek 09 Nero and Spock apparently had some sort of history — but there were barely two lines of dialogue that addressed it, and they didn’t really makes sense of it.

Sure, sometimes less is more — and mystery and trusting viewers to fill in the blanks is good. Overexpkaining is always bad. But sometimes we need a bit of information to make an emotional connection.

1066. JustMike - November 30, 2012

Since no one has presented this option so far, here is yet another ridiculous possibility.

Dr. Janice Lester swaps bodies with Ben Finney in her mad attempt to get to Kirk by “detonating the fleet”. Yes, I know it is an example of brilliant deduction on my part.

1067. 'Drew - November 30, 2012

For my money, I’m banking on Governor Kodos. A practitioner of mass-execution would be considered a one-man weapon of mass destruction. It would be personal for Kirk, does not contradict the comics.

His actions could have been viewed as “making the tough decision” and that hawkishness might be appreciated in StarFleet after the events of the first movie.

Then, some crisis prompts him to seise power and replay his methods on Earth.

1068. Jack - November 30, 2012

1054. MJ. True. But nearly all stories — even Space Seed — rely on creating a fake past… we’re told that people have been friends for years, or given some line about a grudge, or a betrayal… or some explanation about how our villain became a villain by being denied a promotion or didn’t get puppy or something.

I agree, though, that you shouldn’t have to read a comic, p lay a videogame or watch some web short to figure out what the hell is going on.

I still think the Star Wars prequels were completely unnecessary from a storytelling (but not moneymaking) point of view. We got enough backstory in 3 or 4 lines.

1069. Picard's Fish - November 30, 2012

14 days until we get something good

1070. Phil - November 30, 2012

Fourteen days from trailers and a website. Questions will be answered, the wait is over….

1071. section9 - November 30, 2012

Here’s how bad this movie will be:

Cumberbatch is playing Dr. Sevrin.

There will be Space Hippies.

1072. Craiger - November 30, 2012

What if they find Mitchell’s body floating in space, revive him somehow and the ship is Weller’s and Mitchell kills Weller and his crew and then seeks revenge on Kirk and Starfleet?

1073. Phil - November 30, 2012

That’s impossible…Article 437, section 237.23.ii of the Federation Enviromental Code specifically prohibits bodies floating in space….

1074. Jack - November 30, 2012

1073. Yeah, it’s kind of just like leaving ‘em on the side of the road.

1075. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

Star Trek Into Darkness trailer is 1.03 minutes long…

http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

It does not state where or when the trailer will be seen.

1076. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

The silence is rather deafing from my post @1045 from the main group here who has been saying it’s Mitchell. I can’t say I’m surprised though — there is really no logical response to that huge issue I brought up on why it can’t be Mitchell.

“This isn’t the reason for NOT Mitchell that you are looking for….move along”

1077. NuFan - November 30, 2012

I hope people aren’t expecting a one minute trailer to tell them the villain. And the opening nine minutes will only show us the detonation and chaos, not who did it.

1078. Jack - November 30, 2012

@614. It played out the same as the episode — except there was no Dr. Elisabeth Dehner to fight with/weaken him. So when he repelled Kirk’s phaser rifle blast, Spock snuck up behind him and gave him a neck pinch. The pinch worked. Somehow the pinch didn’t knock him out but let him become human (brown eyes again) long enough to beg Jim to kill him. Kirk shot him with a phaser rifle (instead of shooting rock and burying him in the grave Mitchell had created for Kitk, which I think us what happened in the episode). Instead of bring left on the planet, torpedo tubes are shown floating in space with Mitchell and Kelso’s names, respectively, on each — while Kirk in a voice(write)over talk about how the hardest part of command is seeing friends die/knowing he’ll have to send more to their deaths.

Other differences. Dehner’s not onboard because — this time — McCoy’s also on board and there’s done sort of history that apparently had her withdraw her transfer request once she found out he was onboard.

Mitchell’s not part of the regular bridge crew but is on relief — Kirk brought he and Kelso, who were a year ahead of Kirk at the academy — because he wanted friends aboard. Mitchell’s night relief for Sulu, who Kirk said earned his place as helmsman during the Nero fight.

Mitchell and Kirk play chess — Kirk says Spock’s still too pissed at him to ever want to play. Mitchell beats Kirk.

McCoy, Chekov and Uhura (was she in the pilot?) are aboard.

Spock mind melds with Mitchell while he’s sedated and says there’s no consciousness there and whatever it is, it’s not Gary Mitchell (like before, but back then Spock hadn’t mind melded on the show yet).

1079. spiked canon - November 30, 2012

Right there with you MJ

1080. Jack - November 30, 2012

1077. Agreed. If that.

1081. Jack - November 30, 2012

Ps. Do we know that it’s the *opening* nine minutes? That TDKR Bane clip wasn’t directly from the beginning, if I recall correctly. Close to it, but yeah.

1082. Jack - November 30, 2012

Okay, I’ll shut up soon — but the comic (archons, tribbles) has been laying ground for a conspiracy/weirdness within the fleet….

Sure, the comics might not be canon — but it qualifies as a threat from within the organization.

A resurrected Gary Mitchell in a Starfleet uniform with a hole in it doesn’t automatically qualify as a ‘threat from within.’ And mightn’t they have put his body in a fresh or dress uniform for the space burial?

Again, i understand the Mitchell arguments. But, for now, they have a few holes.

Still could be him. Could be Khan. Could be anyone.

1083. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

I am going a bit Fringe here and suggest that the *villain may be the two universes themselves. Through the use of red matter, a door to another alternate universe was opened inadvertently and even though the door seemed to close once Spock and Jellyfish came through, the repercussions of that event have set off what seems to be an unstoppable chain of events that is destroying the very fabric of the universe(s). Couple that with the majority of people’s highly volatile and emotionally charged negative energy states due to the implosion of Vulcan, surely various sorts of detonation are imminent. No one is immune from the devastating effects.

There is always some *vulture, snake, wolf, jackal, hyena, shark… to prey on, take advantage of a situation like this. Enter “Cumby” and his merry men! He becomes detonated and detonator. Just using the word contained in the synopsis.

*No insult intended towards the actual animals.

The more subtle negative effects can be felt as far away as the Menosian system, however Menosians long ago developed ways of countering such negative, destructive energies…

1084. Phil - November 30, 2012

Lighting up the Menosian crack pipe does wondeers to ward off negative destructive energies….

1085. Trekzilla - November 30, 2012

I hope it’s not Khan. I really want to give Paramount my money and see this new Trek film. I do. I REALLY REALLY do!!! And I told Orci here repeatedly over the years if its Khan I wouldn’t be going to see it. Hope he listened to me and others…if not he’ll “Pay the price for his lack of vision” (Emperor Palpatine) and will not get my ticket money.

But if its Khan, It will be the FIRST Trek film I have not seen in the theater and i’m spending it on Man of Steel.

:-)

1086. MONGO - November 30, 2012

Mongo want see Man of Steel too.

1087. Trekzilla - November 30, 2012

#1083 — I’d pay good money to see “your version” of the new film! I really like your story. :-)

1088. Craiger - November 30, 2012

What if Kirk thought Mitchell was dead at the end of the comic? Did he die space? Or on a planet? If on a planet they could have Weller be Captain of a Starfleet ship that visits that planet and finds Mitchell alive. That scene could be a tribute to Wrath of Khan. Or maybe with him having God like powers he can survive in space without needing oxygen?

1089. Craiger - November 30, 2012

Sorry I meant wasn’t dead at the end of the comic.

1090. Sci-Fiddy - November 30, 2012

dude, it’s totally Gary Mitchell:

http://spaceports.blogspot.com/2012/09/star-trek-into-darkness-comes-in-2013.html

check the blue eyes…

1091. Craiger - November 30, 2012

I also hope the don’t have mind control in sequel if its Mitchell and he uses it to control Starfleet brass and other crew members.

1092. avi - November 30, 2012

I knew it, Mitchell is the bad guy. This is going to be sooooo good!

1093. Trekzilla - November 30, 2012

#1090 — Hope you’re right!! I like the picture you linked to.

1094. drumvan - November 30, 2012

#1090

that image has been floating around for a while and has been de-bunked as a photoshop fan job. sorry.

1095. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

Yes, Phil – as in “find the crack” in order to let a light giving healing and insight into the darkness and so allowing the crack to open even further, bringing even more light.

Thank you, Trekzilla. Who knows – maybe you will be seeing something of a similar nature come 17 May?

1096. Disinvited - November 30, 2012

#1051. MJ

According to Google:

http://trekmovie.com/2011/12/05/b

You’ll have to use your browsers in page search (CTRL F, or F3 key) set to exact spelling to zip to it.

1097. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

@1045:

First of all, MJ, I don’t think we are “ignoring” AP’s confirmation story as much as we are not assigning the value to it that you are. It’s just one thing that stands alone, that is contradicted by a lot of other stuff, and that has received no further support since then. So as the days go by, the case doesn’t get stronger that AP was right. It’s just getting weaker as new things we learn just don’t seem to fit anything regarding Khan — and that includes the synopsis at the top of this page.

Now to your question:

“Why would the writers pick for the villain a character that they essentially would have to come up with a resurrection method and complex retelling of a back-story from a comic book that 99.9% of the people seeing the movies wouldn’t have even read of be familiar with??? Doesn’t make sense???”

It’s not as hard to do as you think. They could, as Rick Johnson suggests according to the spy photos we got, open the movie with an action packed retelling of the end of the comic. Mitchell dies — but not really. And with Gary Mitchell, having the powers of a god already goes 99% of the way toward providing an explanation.

When Lestat is “murdered” by Louis and Claudia, it doesn’t take much time to explain his rebirth when he finally reappears to pay his old friends a visit. That’s because his nature as a vampire already lays the groundwork for such a rebirth to happen and be believable.

Indeed, I happen to be leafing through an old classic Frank Herbert SF book I loved as a child. The Godmakers. So let me quote a paragraph from The Godmakers, by Frank Herbert. It’s very Joseph Campbell-like, and we know that Bob Orci is familiar with Joseph Campbell. These ideas are “out there” as mythic elements in the hero’s journey, and it is not unreasonable to surmise that Bob might be using them as well. Here’s the quote:

“To become a god, a living creature must transcend the physical. The three steps of this transcendent path are known. First, he must come upon the awareness of secret aggression. Second, he must come upon the discernment of purpose within the animal shape. Third, he must experience death.”

So rather than the death of Gary Mitchell being an obstacle, it may be an essential element by which to fully develop him as an antagonist, and one that is not necessarily a madman like Nero.

One thing is clear from the first movie: Bob, Alex, and JJ know how to pack a LOT of information into a small amount of screen time, so I don’t think the problem you suggest is as big as you think it is, particularly if Bob was privy to some inspiration in coming up with his scenario and the story structure.

And it doesn’t matter that the audience didn’t read the comic at all.

James Bond movies start out with Bond deep inside some operation we have no backstory details on as the movie begins, and that is about to blow up in Bond’s face before the credits roll — and it works! So the backstory could be quickly filled in after the start of the movie proper, just as was done with Skyfall.

1098. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

“Rengo-tsushin:Director, cast and producer attend “Star Trek” presentation in Japan
Star Trek:Into Darkness, will be in cinemas on September 2013 Japan, reveals a special footage presentation on 4th December from 9:50 at 109Cinemas Kiba, cinema2(IMAX), Paramount Pictures Japan announced. Director J.J Abrams, Chris Pine, Benedict Cumberbatch and Producer Bryan Burk will come to Tokyo to attend.”

Sorry Dee. I just had to post this here. Just too exciting!

Hey, Chris Pine and co, NZ is just a hop across the equator and my birthday is in December. Just say the word…:)

Also, the Hobbit movie is released on 14 December in Japan – another reason for Benedict Cumberbatch to be there.

Very cool!

1099. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

What’s interesting about the synopsis is that it suggests KIRK could be in the role of KHAN, i.e., someone who is falling into darkness on his way to avenging…whatever.

Kirk could be getting a torture test which as a hero he will pass, but not without paying the price of changing him and everyone else.

Apocalypse Now was about Captain Willard’s journey up the river and INTO DARKNESS. To find his way out of it, he had to go straight through it. And Kurtz was the doorway he had to pass through.

1100. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

I agree, dmduncan.

I have ruled out NO ONE as possibly being STID’s main villain, nor do I lean more heavily in any direction. Anything and anyone is possible within the confines of the TOS TV and movie series.

1101. Tom - November 30, 2012

#1050 Admiral_Bumblebee

I am with you Admiral. Should have just done the hologram scene. Shatner ego permitting

1102. Sebastian S. - November 30, 2012

# 1097 dmduncan

Excellent post! Well articulated.

1103. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 30, 2012

1098. Rose (as in Keachick)

Ok… I just hope it really happens!

:-) ;-)

1104. Sebastian S. - November 30, 2012

IMO, if they do go with Gary Mitchell (and IMO, that’s a FAR likelier scenario than Khan), his resurrection from the dead in the IDW comic would be a sinch. He was regenerating in the photon tube, and wasn’t fully dead. He survived a phaser blast to the chest in the TOS version, anyway. And as dmduncan pointed out, his being a demi-god IS 99% of the explanation right there…

I can easily picture the “Where No Man… ” backstory being told as a prologue; a 15 minute or so flashback (ala Kirk’s birth/George’s death in ST09). The IDW adapted a one hour TV episode into a single issue comic. No reason why a fast paced movie can’t adapt a comic into a 15 min. or so prologue. Orci/Kurtzman have proven they have a talent for conveying much information in a rapid, accessible and non-expositional way (one of the reasons why so many non-Trekkies also enjoyed ST09; it didn’t require many years of watching ST to get it).

Hell, maybe that could be the nine minutes they’re going to preview before “The Hobbit”; a WNMHGB prologue sequence setup for the new movie…

There are always possibilities… ;-)

1105. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

I’ve seen the trailer – it doesn’t confirm that Cumberbatch is playing Gary Mitchell. He has a monologue where he mentions “revenge” and he looks to have stronger than human strength, so it’s a possibility.

Also, the Enterprise goes underwater. It’s going to make a beautiful desktop wallpaper :)

1106. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

#1099 – Look, more than 1100 posts already!

OMG, dmduncan. You are too wicked…;) What if you are right – that it is James Kirk who is the one who ends up doing much of the “detonation”? What if whoever BC is playing is working alongside Kirk? That can still mean that his character is “one mean dude” as Chris Pine describes him, but what can Kirk do… Although Kirk’s intentions may start out good and genuine, his subsequent behaviour and actions do not make him that different from any other criminal protagonist. It is no longer easy to see him as being a good guy… Holy moly – what if?

Perhaps, that is the lie Bob is referring to. Kirk is certainly iconic, but not as a villain.

If this is the basic scenario, then it seems that Bob Orci (as one of STID’s writers) and I need to have another little chat. Did I not ask you to take care of “my captain”? Didn’t I? This is not what I would consider “taking care” of my captain. Well, Bob?…:)

Now it is up to you, Bob and co., to find a way for my captain to redeem himself and being healed of the darkness you have written/plunged him into. What say you indeed?…:) I can help you with this…just think – Menosia!

Oh and just ignore Phil and the others…

1107. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

#1107 – Have you already seen the trailer – for real? I hope you are not telling bs here. The Enterprise goes underwater? That, I have to see – FANTASTIC!

1108. AJ - November 30, 2012

“The Enterprise goes underwater:” The BS train begins…

1109. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1097. DM, I will give you credit for coming up with a plausible response to my issue. It is a bit of a stretch still, in my opinion, but I can’t refute your reasoning — there is a slim possibility you could be right.

OK, then the third most damning issue of why I think it could not be Mitchell that I would like you to address (with AP’s Story as #1 and the Mitchell Comic issue we discussed as #2) is this:

If it’s Gary Mitchell, a fellow student and friend that Kirk went to the Academy with, then why was Del Toro, who is way too old for the part, the first person they considered for casting in this role? ???

And in relation to this, you would have to acknowledge that the Del Toro choice would likely make more sense for Khan versus Gary Mitchell, given he’s Hispanic, as well as being 20 years older than Kirk. I.e. Del Toro is a much more obvious fit for a Montleban-Khan connection versus Del Toro playing Gary Mitchell — surely you can at least acknowledge this, right?

1110. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1107. Why are you asking yourself questions???

1111. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1105 Can you explain who your are and how you have seen the trailer already. I find this hard to believe, and the Enterprise going underwater piece silly.

1112. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1099. The Kirk obsession thing, and relation to Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, as I have mentioned previously, would tie right in with Khan. If Khan’s actions cause the death of Admiral Pike or Sam Kirk, then most definitely, a heart of darkness approach for Kirk’s character, alongside with the fight against Khan, could very well be the story for this movie.

This approach works better with Khan than Gary Mitchell, since presumably Gary was at least as good a friend at the academy as McCoy was — so Kirk would still have some empathy for Mitchell.

1113. The Great Bird Lives In Our Hearts - November 30, 2012

“The Enterprise goes underwater:”

Not before sprouting fin-like nacells..lol

1114. Killamarshtrek - November 30, 2012

Ok time to break all of this down. It’s obvious somebody here is telling lies. All we have to do is find out who it is and we know who the ‘villain’ is!

On the Khan side: either AP’s sources telling him it’s Kahn are telling the truth or Simon Pegg saying “it’s not Khan, that’s a myth” is telling the truth, but they can’t both be true so one of them is lying!

On the Mitchell side: either Urban’s ‘slip’ & all the weight of evidence about it being Mitchell are true or Orci’s denial that Mitchell (amongst others) is not in the movie is true, but they can’t both be true so one of these two is lying!

The difference here is, Orci has already admitted he is lying about something. The only other options he mentioned were, Charlie X, Ruk, Janice Rand, and The Borg. He doesn’t need to lie about them cause nobody thinks it’s them anyway!

Has that cleared things up a little?

1115. Craiger - November 30, 2012

I forgot did Orci say the villain is from Canon? If not what if its not a canon bad guy at all? What if its just some rouge Starfleet officer that doesn’t like their policies and launches attacks against Earth and Starfleet by gathering an army maybe even help with the Klingons. In one of the attacks Kirk’s mom and the rest of his family gets killed so he seeks revenge on the bad guy by going rogue himself and its up to Spock and the Enterprise crew to bring him back out of darkness?

1116. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

@1109:

I was one of those who argued that if they did Khan, it made no sense in 2011/2012 to duplicate the Hollywood culture of the 1960’s and to cast another Latino to play a Sikh.

Still, when the news broke that JJ was trying to get Del Toro, and then they couldn’t get him and they started looking at two other Latino actors, I DID think that was what they were probably doing, and that the likely explanation was the movie was about Khan.

That’s how it seemed at the time.

But JJ also said he always wanted to work with Del Toro, and when they couldn’t get him, they may have been in the mindset of okay, well then who is LIKE Del Toro. And in that mindset they may have looked at other LATINO actors until Cumberbatch got on their radar, and they changed how they were thinking.

So while it may have at first appeared that they were looking to cast a Latino, and that this suggested it was for Montalban’s role, it is very possible that there’s another explanation for why they looked at three Latinos first, i.e., something like what I said above.

You asked:

“If it’s Gary Mitchell, a fellow student and friend that Kirk went to the Academy with, then why was Del Toro, who is way too old for the part, the first person they considered for casting in this role? ???”

Del Toro is indeed older, but I think JJ probably thought they could just make him look like a contemporary of Kirk through makeup.

Keep in mind that when the Del Toro deal fell through, the next guy in line was Edgar Ramirez, who is only 3 years older than Karl Urban. And both those guys were on the list to play the same character. Benedict Cumberbatch, who got the part, is 4 years older than Urban — but I certainly can’t tell from looking at Urban, Cumberbatch, or Ramirez, who is older. And if Urban can play a Chris Pine contemporary, so can the other guys.

Harder for Del Toro, but they were all considered for the SAME role even though Del Toro is significantly older than all the other candidates — that’s what makes me think JJ thought they could fix it in makeup if need be.

I think what probably happened was he really wanted to work with Del Toro, and he let his desire as director overlook the age disparity.

1117. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1107, #1108 – No lies (although please continue to call it BS, it’ll be hilarious when you have to apologise to me in a few days) :)

The Enterprise seems to crash into water (beautiful shot of its nacelles silhouetted behind the spray). A shot earlier in the teaser shows it rising out of the water, so we’re not looking at the ship’s death here.

1118. Craiger - November 30, 2012

New Star Trek the video game screenshots:

http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3205621/new-star-trek-screens-surface-and-then-launch-into-the-final-frontier/

1119. Craiger - November 30, 2012

#1117 maybe that’s not water but a planets atmosphere? They should give us a full trailer and not just a teaser since we have been waiting this longer.

1120. Harry Ballz - November 30, 2012

“The Enterprise goes underwater”

Hmmmm, maybe the movie should have been called…….

Voyage To The Bottom Of The NCC……well, you get the idea.

1121. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1119 Rising out of a planet’s atmosphere was done in the last movie. Besides, I know what water looks like.

1122. Craiger - November 30, 2012

Actually weren’t those Saturn’s Rings?

1123. Sebastian S. - November 30, 2012

# 1116 dmduncan

Or it could be the simpler explanation is the correct one; Khan was probably the villain in an earlier version of the script (although I’m not sure why they’d cast another Hispanic, or court Hispanics for the role, but OK, whatever).

This also explains the ‘close source’ that got it wrong; he was informed by an earlier version of the script. So Anthony was only relaying information he’d received and (without reasons to the contrary) believed it to be true (which, for a time, it was).

I think the Gary Mitchell is the piece that fits the puzzle best; a ‘one man weapon of mass destruction’ with a starfleet uniform, pale skin, slightly grown-out hair (which grew after his ‘death’ on Delta Vega; hair continues to grow after ‘death’), and his generally non-Sikh appearance. It also explains the ‘friendships are tested’ part of the synopsis; Mitchell was a close friend of Kirk’s at the academy.
It all fits.

And I still think the ‘9-minutes’ before “Hobbit” may very well be (but not necessarily will be) a shortened “Where No Man…” prologue sequence for the benefit of those who’ve not seen the TOS episode or the IDW comic adaptation. Done in a ST09 Kelvin sequence prologue way….

I could be wrong (I still would like a new character, if at all possible), but the Gary Mitchell argument has a lot more meat on it’s bones so far.

1124. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

In the background, yes. Enterprise was rising out of Titan’s atmosphere. Lovely shot, and the shot of Enterprise’s nacelles breaking the water in the new teaser reminded me of it.

1125. Killamarshtrek - November 30, 2012

#1121 Ok so how have you managed to see the trailer?

1126. Sebastian S. - November 30, 2012

Edit on my last post: That’s # 1117 dmduncan, not # 1116.

Why do the post counts keep changing slightly?

1127. Dee - lvs moon' surface - November 30, 2012

so now… Enterprise is a spacial submarine… lol

:-) :-)

1128. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1125. I work in the industry. I’d like to continue that work, so I won’t say any more about how I saw it.

1129. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1127: Some people will definitely flip out over the idea of the Enterprise being submerged and surviving, just like they did over it being constructed on the ground. Why not though? She’s a tough little ship :)

1130. vva - November 30, 2012

Star Trek Into Darkness Trailer length 1:03 mins

http://www.albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

1131. P Technobabble - November 30, 2012

I think the villain is gonna be Khan Noonian Mitchell…

1132. rogerachong - November 30, 2012

I did not know this comic detail!

To JACK: Other differences. Dehner’s not onboard because — this time — McCoy’s also on board and there’s done sort of history that apparently had her withdraw her transfer request once she found out he was onboard.

Hey there is a strong rumour about that Alice Eve plays Dr. McCoys Ex-wife who is the CMO on the ship that Peter Weller commands. Now that will lend weight to the theory that Denher is McCoy’s ex. and indeed Gary Mitchell is the villain for Star Trek Into Darkness.

The story will then involve Peter Weller encountering an enraged Gary Mitchell who Kirk thought they had eliminated, while infact the phaser fire only rendered him incapacitated / near dead. He is now resuscitated by the energy force within (like the Terminator). Hey in “Skyfall” Bond was shot, fell off a 50 foot bridge, went over a waterfall all before the opening credits. Yet he still seems well enough after to be romancing some hot chick in no time. Enjoying death indeed! I wish my life was so entertaining.

1133. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 30, 2012

1116. dmduncan

Ramirez and the other guy were no officially looked at. It was more the fans and fansites thinking it was Khan and that these would be suitable subs.

MJ (the original)

You never actually replied to my post… way up there. I would to know your clues and hints that lead you to believe it is Khan. All you have is a rumour from AP’s source and the fact that Del Toro is Latino.

Someone stated that the part was written with Del Toro in mind. Why does that have to mean it’s because he’s Latino? Couldn’t it be because he is a great actor? Cumberbatch was cast in the role because he blew them away with his audition. Did they choose him promarily because he is British? No.

So, I would like to hear what other proof you have that leads you to believe it’s Khan. Who knows, you may even sway me into believing it. :)

1134. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

#1123

Yeah, the 9 minutes we see may well be a prologue that is presented as a short film, self contained, special presentation instead of a chunk of the movie randomly sliced off at the 9 minute mark.

It could be the part that plays before the Star Trek title rolls and the main story begins.

1135. Killamarshtrek - November 30, 2012

#1128 Fair enough thanks!

Can you say any more about the trailer? Was Cumberbatch in a starfleet uniform? Was he made up to look indian? Did he speak with his British accent?

1136. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1133. (the real) Montreal_Paul – November 30, 2012

1116. dmduncan

Ramirez and the other guy were no officially looked at. It was more the fans and fansites thinking it was Khan and that these would be suitable subs.

***

I don’t know what you mean by “officially looked at.” Variety is not a Star Trek fansite, and that’s what they reported.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118047180

1137. rogerachong - November 30, 2012

I am a chemist by trade and water is only a fluid just like so many others. Any advanced spaceship would be able to fly through water quite easily! Antimatter engines would allow the Enterprise to fly literally through a gas giant planet like Neptune and others that are largely comprised of liquid methane. That stuff is very cold by the way.

1138. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1135 I only saw the teaser once, and it went by so fast, it’s like trying to remember a dream. Cumberbatch spoke over the whole teaser, it sounded like he was using his normal accent. He certainly didn’t look Indian (that would immediately raise accusations of racism by the filmakers anyway, so that was never a possibility). He was wearing black, but I didn’t notice if it was a uniform. My guess is it was what he was seen wearing in on-set photos.

1139. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1137: Did the Delta Fyler have to be modified to go through water in that one episode? I’m sure a starship can travel through water, though it’s probably a little trickier than flying through air, especially if the ship’s been damaged. The pressure would be an issue at some point – remember the trouble Defiant had in a gas giant’s atmosphere.

1140. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

Jeff, God of Biscuits, can you tell us where the trailer was shown?

1141. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 30, 2012

1136. dmduncan

Yeah, again with the “sources”… not official.

1142. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

I am not sure about how the Enterprise manages to become a submarine as well as a spaceship, given current knowledge and capabilities of 23rd century Star Trek technology, but I love the idea. Then again, we do have the miracle worker, Scotty…:) and I wouldn’t be fooled by the apparent buffoonery of this Scotty.

I can imagine how cool visually such a scene of the Enterprise being underwater etc could look, especially on a big cinema screen in good 3D…Whoa!!!

So it seems that no only are we going to night goggles, sunglasses to see beyond lens flare and volcanic firestorms, but we’ll also need swimwear.

Perhaps, if Bob could be so kind as to give us a list, we can have our backpacks ready for opening night…

Gosh, I really can’t wait. Seriously, this is just so exciting!

1143. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1140: It hasn’t been shown publicly yet, but it will be soon.

1144. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1141

Yeah, but that’s not from a Trek site expressing its fantasies. That’s a professional industry publication — not a hobby blog like this place, whose owner goes on long unannounced and unexplained vacations — so I would tend to seriously consider its sources. I mean if JJ considered the guy, THAT’S official.

1145. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1143

Jeff, are you on the food side of the business?

1146. rogerachong - November 30, 2012

Really dmduncan, if he told you he would have to kill you!!

You must be American, you guys like to know too much, even about Bengazhi (by the way it’s classified and rightly so). Don’t you get it, we the people can’t always handle the truth.

1147. (the real) Montreal_Paul - November 30, 2012

1144. dmduncan

“While no offer has been made, sources tell Variety…”

“The studio had no comment on the casting process.”

And nowhere does it say that they actually read for the part. And nowhere does it say that JJ & co. were actually considering them. Industry rag or fansite… there was only speculation and rumour. Just saying.

1148. Aurore - November 30, 2012

:)

As I’ve said on other threads before, a few years ago, unless I’m mistaken, Mr. Abrams was concerned about casting John Cho ( a Korean-American ) as Sulu ( a Japanese character ). And, from what I understand, George Takei had to reassure him that his character had originally been created to represent all of Asia.

Thus, I always assumed that, if Mr. Abrams could worry about such details, he would undoubtedly be extremely careful were he to consider to tell a story involving a man from the Northern India area. ( “Probably a Sikh.” )

That is one of the reasons why I never believed the casting of Hispanic actors had anything to do with the fact that, a long time ago, Ricardo Montalbán portrayed Khan Noonien Singh.

I never imagined we would have a main villain named Khan in the upcoming sequel because Hispanic actors were, at some point, considered for a role in the next Star Trek.

‘Still don’t.

1149. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

@1146

Yes we can. We already know and handle it. It just doesn’t often get confirmed — which does not mean we do not know it.

1150. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1147

Yes, it says he wasn’t offered the part and he didn’t read for it. But that doesn’t mean he wasn’t officially considered for it. There’s nothing controversial about him being on the top of a short list of contenders which got ripped up when someone saw Cumberbatch.

1151. The Great Bird Lives In Our Hearts - November 30, 2012

1143- It would seem that your are vague enough on details for me to consider your revelation anything but wishful thinking. To an avid fan such as yourself one would assume that every detail became embedded in your brain once you saw it. Yet you can recollect very little. The idea, is good, though.

1152. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1147

You made it sound like Ramirez was mere fan speculation on hobby blogs devoted to Trek. The Variety article proves otherwise.

1153. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1148. Aurore – November 30, 2012

Yes. I think your reasoning there is…quite reasonable.

1154. Gary S. - November 30, 2012

My first thought upon hearing of his casting ,
was that Del Toro was being cast as a Klingon .
I dont know why, it just made sense to me .

1155. Aurore - November 30, 2012

Regarding Demián ( and to some extent, Benicio, Jordi, and, Édgar ) :

“sources told Variety late last year that director J.J. Abrams had expressed interest in casting Bichir as the villain in “Star Trek 2,” but the actor had already committed to starring in a Mexican stage production of “Swimming With Sharks” that his younger brother Bruno was directing. Bichir had already delayed his participation in the play to topline “A Better Life” and recur on Showtime’s “Weeds,” so rather than bailing for another major Hollywood film, he stayed true to his word and honored his commitment to his brother.”

http://trekmovie.com/2012/05/03/nimoy-tweets-on-star-trek-sequel-reports-another-actor-from-villain-casting-search-identified/

1156. rogerachong - November 30, 2012

Jeff, God of Biscuits: If you release your source you might loose your job. I like your amnesia though. Is there a cure for it?

1157. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1151: I understand your doubts, but I will add you to the list of folks I might expect an apology from when I’m proved right ;) If I was making it up, wouldn’t I come up with more?

It’s a very quick-cut teaser (note, not a trailer, so it’s not going into detail on things anyway), and I couldn’t watch it a second time, so it was hard to absorb everything. The only other thing I remember is Alice Eve screaming (at what, I don’t know), some walking around on a lava-like surface, and Cumberbatch talking about revenge.

1158. Aurore - November 30, 2012

@1153. dmduncan – November 30, 2012
_____

:)

1159. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1156: If there’s a cure, I’d like to know. My memory sucks at the best of times! :D

1160. Phil - November 30, 2012

That’s what I get for not reading every comment, not sure where a submergable Enterprise came from. No, a starship, at least one the size of Enterprise, would not be able to go underwater. Entirely different set of stresses involved with the environments, she would be crushed if submerged.

1161. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

Jeff, God of Biscuits may well have seen the trailer. For example, he may work on the food side of the biz and was catering/handling food at the executive meeting where the trailer was shown, thus enabling him to PEEK at the trailer, but unable to pay strict attention or to watch it a second time.

Don’t you guys ever pay attention to the people who move and work around you? They have eyes and ears too.

1162. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1160: Like a ship the size of Enterprise couldn’t be built on land? We may disagree with that too, but it’s there in the last movie. I’ll say again, it appeared that the ship crashed into the sea, so all we have to accept is that it can survive that and rise again out of the water.

1163. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1161: You’re really going with the catering theory? Alrightly, then :)

1164. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1163

Hehehe! Are you denying it?

I’m not committing to anything just yet, Biscuit God! Just…doing my thing. ;-)

1165. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

1160. Phil – November 30, 2012

That’s what I get for not reading every comment, not sure where a submergable Enterprise came from.

***

Biscuits claims to have glimpsed the trailer.

1166. Red Dead Ryan - November 30, 2012

I’ve never seen this “Jeff, God of Biscuits” prior to today. You’d think that someone who supposedly had access to the trailer would have been at least a semi-regular poster here, like Bob Orci.

It also appears that Anthony has disappeared again, leaving the door open for potential fakers. Not saying Jeff is a phony, but c’mon, the timing of this is a bit suspicious.

“Biscuits” could be real, and could be telling us the truth, or else its Stunkill posing as someone else again, this time spreading false information.

1167. rogerachong - November 30, 2012

@1160. Phil: No, a starship, at least one the size of Enterprise, would not be able to go underwater. Entirely different set of stresses involved with the environments, she would be crushed if submerged.

Not logical Phil. Just remember the hull can withstand the force created by a black hole in the last film that was less than 100km away in the dieing Narada. The deepest trench in the sea exerts a much smaller force than a blackhole. The order of magnitude is not even remotely close to many powers of 10! Water is just an unremarkable fluid. Space is near vacuum that alone can easily crush many things. Water will be solid at 0 degrees C. So in the unseen trailer the temperature of the water would have to be over that. In other words the water will be warm. Space is cold, very cold and that affects metals quite dramatically. Some planets have seas of liquid methane and other gases that should not hurt a starship if it is going to be an effective exploration vessel. The Enterprise is NOT a real ship but if it was, it would have to be able to handle water. As it has to handle blackholes and other spacial anamolies as the “Great Barrier” in “Where No Man Has Gone Before”. Just imagine the large forces at work at the boundries between galaxies!! It will be unimaginably immense and yet the Enterprise handled it albeit with some damage to the nacelles and crew members Gary Mitchell (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Elizabeth Denher (Alice Eve) Dr. McCoy’s exwife who took everything in the divorce and only left him with his Bones..

1168. Jeff, God of Biscuits - November 30, 2012

#1166: You’re added to the list ;)

Actually, I have posted here before, under a different name. Anthony even posted an article using info I gave him when they screened a few minutes of footage from the last movie three years ago. I’ve had to change my name as it was too easy to identify me. If Anthony’s around, he’s welcome to contact me to verify who I am, but it’s hardly worth it. Over the next week or so, you’ll have all the proof you need.

1169. Rick Johnson - November 30, 2012

@1166 Checking in with website is insane unless you’re obsessed with “Star Trek.” I mean there’s millions of Trekkies in the world and a thousand comments, and 8 million people around LA making a living and posting at Starbucks, too.

I believe the Enterprise goes into water–that sounds like Abrams, and it fits in with the “volcano” seismic crazy stuff Gary Mitchell is doing.

I don’t really understand Mitchell’s motivation in the film yet, though.

If the writers both honor classic “Trek” sci-fi themes and make a great blockbuster, it will be a moment long remembered. I’m optimistic.

1170. Anthony Thompson - November 30, 2012

Star Trek Into Waterworld.

1171. Anthony Thompson - November 30, 2012

1045. MJ

AP and his “trusted sources” were proven wrong RE: the debut of the teaser trailer. So…what else have you got?

1172. Aurore - November 30, 2012

Oh, DamOn…

When you said you were struggling to find a title, some time ago….
…Don’t tell me you were hesitating between “Star Trek Into Darkness” and…. “Star Trek Into Loch Ness”…

…My goodness….

Anyway….That is it people. I’m calling it.

Mr. Cumberbatch plays the “monster”.

:)

1173. Rose (as in Keachick) - November 30, 2012

Who were proven wrong? What about the debut of the teaser trailer?

As far as I know, it is to come with the screening of Hobbit – An Unexpected Journey, which is released in the US on 14 December. I have read nothing that refutes this understanding.

1174. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

Biscuits sounds legit. He’s at least not one of the obvious fakes with totally implausible “insider” info.

1175. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

With all the people involved with getting the trailer ready for distribution there ARE going to be those who’ve had a peek, and I find Biscuits’ inability to recall all the details sharply quite plausible.

1176. Craiger - November 30, 2012

Jeff could that actually be The Great Barrier the Enterprise is flying through? If they don’t stick with the comics and they just updated Where No Man Has Gone Before wouldn’t a nice nod to Enterprise would be to find that old style ship recorder and have it come from one of the NX Class ships?

1177. Craiger - November 30, 2012

What if the Gorn have found a way to look Human and Cumberbatch plays one of them? Or the same thing with the Klingons? He could use that formula that they used in Enterprise to make him become Human?

1178. Randall Williams - November 30, 2012

Speculation of the upcoming film is futile and illogical. Wait until Dec 14.
So many speculators may end up making asses out of themselves.

Not a attack, just a friendly nuge in the ribs! :)

1179. MJ (The Original) - November 30, 2012

@1175. Or it’s just Stunkill messing with us again. Who knows?

1180. gingerly - November 30, 2012

@1178

People are different! Some find speculation fun, others find it useless.
It’s all good!

As for Biscuits, the only part of what he said that would DEFINITELY determine he’s not a fake for me, would be Enterprise rising out of the water.

The rest can be applied by, *takes off the sunglasses* logic.

1181. gingerly - November 30, 2012

@1178

People are different! Some find speculation fun, others find it useless.
It’s all good!

As for Biscuits, the only part of what he said that would DEFINITELY determine he’s not a fake for me, would be Enterprise rising out of the water.

The rest can be applied by, *takes off the sunglasses* logic.

1182. dmduncan - November 30, 2012

@1179: That’s possible too.

@1180: Exactly. It’s fun. Another term for science fiction is SPECULATIVE fiction. So it’s always odd when people HERE think speculation is useless.

I just think it’s natural.

1183. Gary S. - November 30, 2012

I cant wait for the first person to say they saw the 9 minutes .

1184. Ahmed - November 30, 2012

I don’t care that much who is the villain, Khan or Gary or someone else, as long as the story is good, interesting & bigger than life.

1185. gingerly - November 30, 2012

@1184

IT’S NOT KHAN!!

I think I’ll wear a t-shirt of this at the midnight showing.

1186. Red Dead Ryan - November 30, 2012

Also, I believe six months ago, that there was this “Studio Insider” fellow who turned out to be a fake after he was busted by Anthony for spreading false information. I think he went under a few different names, claiming the sequel would feature both Khan and the Borg Queen.

1187. Ahmed - November 30, 2012

@ 1185. gingerly – November 30, 2012

“@1184

IT’S NOT KHAN!!

I think I’ll wear a t-shirt of this at the midnight showing.”

I didn’t say he is Khan, only that I care more about the story being good than the villain .

1188. DesiluTrek - November 30, 2012

First comment in December. Six days from the 33rd anniversary of TMP.

1189. Ahmed - November 30, 2012

@1188. DesiluTrek

It is still November 30th over here in Calgary, Canada :)

1190. Disinvited - November 30, 2012

#1051. MJ

So much for trying to Google from a mobile device. It did find a “cOn” match just not the one you were looking for which is this one:

http://trekmovie.com/2011/12/02/rumor-star-trek-sequel-villain-role-revealed/

” 261. boborci – December 3, 2011

But i am touched by some if ya’lls concern for my cOnfidence!”

1191. Devon - November 30, 2012

“1045. MJ

AP and his “trusted sources” were proven wrong RE: the debut of the teaser trailer. So…what else have you got?”

To be fair, they haven’t been proven wrong. When the story came about that the “Into Darkness” trailer wasn’t going to be attached to the trailer and “The Wolverine” was, the director of “The Wolverine” debunked that. I’m not saying they’ve been proven right, but they haven’t been proven wrong yet.

1192. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1191. Thanks Devon. Agreed! Actually, that was so obvious to me that I didn’t even feel the need to to respond to Anthony Thompson’s obvious attempt to bait me, but I do appreciate your post, dude.

1193. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

@1190. YEP, THAT’S THE ONE !!!!

That was I interpreted as an obscure clue from Orci that I has posted about way back then. I had posted about it a number of times following that, and Orci eventually responded and claimed it was a typo. Hmm??? :-) Like I said, if it ends of being Khan in the movie, then I would have to go back to this as a legit clue.

1194. MJ (the original) - November 30, 2012

Here are the complete posts from way back then — perhaps representing a seminal moment in Trekmovie.com history when a simple fan posting on this site solved an obscure clue provided by a Trek producer on one of the biggest secrets in Star Trek history:

259. boborci – December 3, 2011
Im so ashamed.

260. MJ – December 3, 2011
@259. That JJ lied about Khan?

261. boborci – December 3, 2011
But i am touched by some if ya’lls concern for my cOnfidence!

262. MJ – December 3, 2011
“cOnfidence”

I knew it. this is basically saying KHANfidence — that is why you had the “O” capitalized.

Thanks for the clue, Bob. It will be interesting to see how JJ backpeddels on his fib.

1195. M.J.(Mark) - November 30, 2012

Even MTV, who was on the Khan bandwagon in the past, think its leaning more towards Mitchell as well.
http://geek-news.mtv.com/2012/11/27/star-trek-into-darkness-villain

1196. M.J.(Mark) - November 30, 2012

cOnfidence? really? because he accidentally hit the caps lock before typing confidence? wow thats really grasping at Straws, lol
well whatever, think what you want.

But thanks for giving me a nice Hearty laugh tonight.
I am cOOOOOOOONfident that clue is not a clue at all

1197. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

Dude — Mark James Tucker — everyone knows that your main focus these days it to take potshots and ridicule me every chance you get. I have not even addressed you in the past week, but you keep dropping your turds on me every chance you get. You are not fooling anyone.

I mean how many times do you say you supposedly won’t address me anymore, and then the next day you are taking unsolicited potshots at me again. I am trying to take the high road these days and behave better now that Anthony is back, but you are not making that any easier for me.

Athony, if you are seeing this, I apoligize to you for this outburst of mine, but just felt I had to respond one last time to this troll who steals my posting name here and makes fun of me every chance he gets. I’ll try my best not to respond again the next time he lays into me. It is difficult though — I do feel like Captain Terrell sometimes in TWOK sometimes here with this dude — I don’t want to Kill Kirk, but Khan is insisting…. :-)

1198. Bucky - December 1, 2012

As mentioned above, the opening sequence is 9 minutes, that’s a chunk of screentime to do a fairly self-contained story. The opening of “Star Trek” is great and it’s pretty complete on it’s own almost as a mini-movie. Maybe, since they’re tossing the opening out there, it is basically a super-sped up version of “Where No Man Has Gone Before”.

1199. Aurore - December 1, 2012

“Biscuits sounds legit. He’s at least not one of the obvious fakes with totally implausible ‘insider’ info.”
_________

We’ll find out about that “soon enough”.

In any case, I like the idea of The Enterprise going underwater ( and, rising out of it )…

1200. Red Shirt Diaries - December 1, 2012

M.J.-Mark, the letter “o” on a standard keyboard is one the right-handed side of a standard keyboard, with caps-lock being on the left side. So it would be a rather odd and very rare typo I think for the left hand to hit shift or caps-lock at the same time the right hand is hitting “o” on the other side of the keyboard. So this would be rare in and of itself, but then consider that the context of this typo making the word sound like “Khan” within an article about the Trek 2013 villain, and yes, that is at least an unusual coincidence, and comes across as a possibly legitimate clue to at least be considered.

I myself see more evidence pointing towards the villain being Mitchell now. But if in spite of this new evidence on Mitchell, if it would somehow still turn out to be Khan, then as MJ said, this clue that he claims to have uncovered may look a hell of lot more believable then.

M.J.-Mark, on another manner, why do you keep changing your name here? It was easier to tell you and “MJ” apart when you went by Mark James Tucker. Now, it looks like you are deliberately shortening it to try to get back to “M.J.” Is it really that important for you to irritate “MJ” by doing this, because you are creating a lot of confusion here for the rest of us in the process?

I would humbly request you go back to using your full name, or better yet, pick a new posting name. It definitely comes across here to me like you are trying to steal MJ’s identify just to piss him off and confuse everyone – basically making trouble for the site. And I really don’t think that this is your intention, and some of your other posts seem thoughtful and interesting concerning Trek topics.

1201. Aurore - December 1, 2012

…I’m sorry.

I forgot to reply to Jack, earlier…..

Hi, Jack!

Hi, everyone.

1202. M.J. (Mark) - December 1, 2012

I continue talking to you cause you continued talking to me(and taunted me for saying i was going to ignore you), and I havent been rude in my coments back to you.

And if you took offesnse at me saying that your grasping at straws cause of a capital O and then saying it gave me a good laugh then I do apologize. As i honestly dont see it as a potshot.
If i was taking pot shots, i would have said something after you repeatedly refered to me by my last and middle names after i asked you not to. or after you repeatedly bullied me cause I think lord of the rings is over rated, or that i enjoyed enterprise.

As for your other accusation, i said from day one, that i was not you and never implied other wise, i even posted my email address my screenname links to my twitter account, and i have had periods between both intials from the time of my first post. Heck I even went ahead and added my full name in ( ) after you requested I alter my screen name.

The majority of the posts are not in response to you But again as i said in less than 2 weeks we will probably all know 100 percent who the villian is.

Anthony if you consider my comment that i made about a capital O in the middle of cOnfidence to be offensive or out of line I am sorry, and will understand if my post is removed.

1203. M.J. (Mark James Tucker) - December 1, 2012

I took off James and Tucker cause he insisted on calling me strictly by my last name and then by my middle name after i asked him to either refer to me by my first name or my nick name.

As I said above I have never once tried to imply i was MJ (the original) my very first post i put periods between my initials.
As long as he either calls me by my first name or knickname i have no proble putting my full name back in the ( )

As for accidently hitting caps lock, when typing, I do it myself all the time when i am typing fast, or when iam typing in my room and all the lights are off late at night.

But you make a good point Red Shirt

1204. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

Is this better Red Shirt?
And thank you for your post, definately gave me some food for thought

1205. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

1199,
the enterprise going in the water could be a very intersting and stunning visual.
on a side note
I think the way jeff describes Benedicts voice over, it also points more to Mitchell.

1206. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

You are trying to trick me into calling you “MJ” for some weird type of validation of being able to repeat my posting name for you as it seems to me. I mean, why else would anyone take offense to being called by their last name?

I tell you what though, I will meet you half-way. I will call you by your full and complete title then that you post here with: “M.J. (Mark James Tucker)” . Let me guess — you find that offensive as well I suppose?

Sheesh!!!

1207. olly - December 1, 2012

To Jeff God of Biscuits – did you think the teaser was a good one or quite lame?

1208. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

MJ as you can see after reading Red Shirts comment, I took it to heart, and i moved my nickname to the end.

I just felt after i asked you to either call me my full screen name or Mark, or M.J.(again with periods between my intials) you purposely were trying to goad me and get me riled up by only mentioning my last name,
Iam willing to accept i took it the wrong way.
perhaps this will bury the hatchet and we can move on.

can we get back to talking about the new movie now, even with our differing opinons on who the villian will infact be.

1209. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

Sounds good to me. I think that perhaps we both have Prima Donna tendencies at times that get the best of us. I am willing to make peace here and move on…sure, dude!

Peace!

1210. Aurore - December 1, 2012

“the enterprise going in the water could be a very intersting and stunning visual.”
_______

Absolutely.

“I think the way jeff describes Benedicts voice over, it also points more to Mitchell.”

I don’t know about that.

(Despite the many interesting comments regarding Mitchell I’ve read so far, to me, the villain could be anyone, so to speak. I personally would still prefer to see a well-written new character to the “canon”, I must say.)

1211. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1200. Red Shirt Diaries

Not to mention, if it is a CAPS LOCK problem why did Bob unlock it for the “n”? That would mean he saw the “O”, realized CAPS LOCK was on, and decided NOT to correct it before typing the “n”?

Mark, himself, ruins his own argument by properly demonstrating what happens normally when CAPS LOCK is accidentally hit.

1212. Jeff, God of Biscuits - December 1, 2012

Craiger (#1176): No, it’s definitely water, as in the sea or ocean. The Enterprise is at the surface of a planet again. I think it’s Earth, but don’t quote me on that.

olly (#1207): Oh, I thought it was great. I’m dying to see it again. Looking back, it’s just a little frustrating that it doesn’t answer any big questions we have about the film, but it is just a teaser after all.

1213. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1172. Aurore

Wait a sec…while I put on my I’M NOT SERIOUS tee.

Confess, by typoing “DamOn” in that manner you have revealed yourself to be boborici or his assistant to which he dictates these responses.

1214. Aurore - December 1, 2012

“Confess, by typoing “DamOn” in that manner you have revealed yourself to be boborici or his assistant to which he dictates these responses.”
______

Damn….

BUSTED!

1215. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1175. dmduncan

When Google on my mobile device kicked out a match for MJ’s “cOn” it pointed to a BREAKING article on Del Toro. In that comment thread you made a very good argument for the protagonist being Joachim. Just wanted to point out that Joachim could also be a Spaniard which Cumberbatch would be more than capable of portraying.

Also, hiding the Enterprise underwater when damaged seems more of a Kirk move against an Augmented foe than one he’d try against a god that can sense the bigger picture.

1216. Max - December 1, 2012

I agree it’s hard to believe that the cOn would be an innocent typo but I don’t see the conection between that and Khan.

1217. Max - December 1, 2012

Oh hang on, maybe I see the connection when pronouncing with an American accent, (doesn’t sound anywhere near similar with an Australian accent) Still even then it’s a bit of a stretch

1218. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

In boborci’s typing defense, when he spelled “c0nfidence” he most likely hit the NUMBER ZERO (just above the LETTER “o” on most keybords. No need for a “shift” or “caps lock”.

1219. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

And I think I’ve got the cast figured out!

Peter Weller: Cyrano Jones (Bob’s “lie” was that Weller was non-canon.)

Benedict Cumberbatch: Lt. Kyle (who somehow is “super-powered by some unknown space energy… he IS a Brit!)

Alice Eve: Yeoman Rand (The hair matches her later look http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Janice_Rand )

There you go. All solved. You are welcome! ;-)

1220. Gary Glitter - December 1, 2012

#344 – Jimmy Saville

Yes but a brit can put on an american accent. Us Brits can be very good at subterfuge and misdirection.

1221. Classy M - December 1, 2012

I think using the identities of known paedophiles as user ID names is in very poor taste. I would ask that ”Gary Glitter” and “Jimmy Savile” find different aliases. Thanks.

1222. Mad Man - December 1, 2012

I cant wait to see and hear Cumby play Smaug in the Hobbit. I’m looking more forward to that than any other movie right now.

1223. Michael - December 1, 2012

Well, we now know they will “NOT be Boldy Going…….anywhere. Or exploring strange “new” worlds..*sigh*

1224. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1218. Commodore Redshirt

Unfortunately, for your reasoning, I did an exact spelling search for Bob’s typo with a capital O. It’s definitely NOT the digit 0.

1225. Devon - December 1, 2012

“Well, we now know they will “NOT be Boldy Going…….anywhere. Or exploring strange “new” worlds..*sigh*”

And you know this… how? *arrrrg uggggh siggggggghhhhh*

1226. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1221. Classy M

Gary Glitter… the singer… is a pedophile? Really? I hadn’t heard about that… is this recent?

1227. Classy M - December 1, 2012

1226: Yes, the signer Gary Glitter (AKA Paul Gadd).

He was arrested in the UK in 1997 in relation to paedophelia. He was also arrested in Vietnam on the same charges and served several years in prison. He’s now back in the UK and currently under investigation again for paedophelia (which came to light during the Jimmy Savile investigation). The UK has no statute of limitations as the US has, so these alleged events, though decades old, can still be brought to trial

I seem to recall he had a part in the Spice Girls movie that was cut when he was first arrested. He’s considered a pariah in the UK.

1228. dmduncan - December 1, 2012

1186. Red Dead Ryan – November 30, 2012

Yes, I remember that guy, and he was obviously a fake, but it’s just not implausible that we’re getting some real insider info right now. With the trailer being prepped by all sorts of people, SOMEbody is going to poke their head in the room when it’s being screened, SOMEbody is going to be looking over someone else’s shoulder who’s working on it at the lab.

We Star Trek fans are everywhere.

If we banded together we could have our own little public spy network. :-)

1229. dmduncan - December 1, 2012

1215. Disinvited – December 1, 2012

Yup. At the time I thought that was an interesting scenario. Still do, in fact.

1230. Gary S. - December 1, 2012

#1218 Which I have done myself many times.
Khan/Joachim could be in the film,
But sometimes an accidental misspelling is just that.

1231. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1227. Classy M

I never knew about that. Since Gary Glitter isn’t a huge name over here, things like that aren’t common knowledge. Make me want to find his old tapes I bought back in the early 80s and throw them out.

1232. Classy M - December 1, 2012

1231. (the real) Montreal_Paul

I was actually living in the US when most of the story unfolded and I didn’t find out about it till I returned home. I was shocked because I had quite liked him.

It’s always hard when you find out something nasty about someone you liked as a kid. James Stacy was another case in point.

1233. Freddie Starr - December 1, 2012

>>> “1221 Classy M – I think using the identities of known paedophiles as user ID names is in very poor taste. I would ask that ”Gary Glitter” and “Jimmy Savile” find different aliases. Thanks.” <<<

Agreed!

1234. Craiger - December 1, 2012

What if Joe Gatt actor they hired is Jaquim?

1235. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1230. Gary S.

Except in that particular case the typo wasn’t a zero.

1236. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

My bet is that Nick Tarabay plays Lt. Leslie (The evil Lt. Kyle’s sidekick) and Joseph Gatt plays Korob, on of TOS’s most amazing and powerful villains in a nod the fan base! ;-)

Nice work Boborci… we never saw that coming!

1237. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1234. Craiger

I would place bets that Gatt is playing a Klingon. We know that the Klingons were officially confirmed for the movie. And Gatt has that bad ass look of a Klingon.

1238. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

Noel Clarke also looks like a potential Klingon

1239. Mark Jame Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

1211, I wasnt making an argument that he had accidentally hit the caps lock. more of a possible suggestion
It does happen, it could even be a case where he was respoding on a phone or I padd or something in which case its the kind of loopy thing that predictive text can do without you even realizing it.

again no argument for it, just a possible reason.

1240. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

#1237.

“We know that the Klingons were officially confirmed for the movie.”

Wait, you insist that the villain IS NOT Khan, yet from the same report, you deduced that Klingons are in the sequel?

1241. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1211 “Not to mention, if it is a CAPS LOCK problem why did Bob unlock it for the “n”? That would mean he saw the “O”, realized CAPS LOCK was on, and decided NOT to correct it before typing the “n”?”

Exactly. Like I said, this was my interpretation of an obscure clue by Orci. If in two weeks, we see that the villain it Khan, then I think we look at my interpretation of this as a clue as spot-on. If it’s not Khan, then it probably wasn’t a clue. This will be proven right or wrong either way.

1242. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1240 “Wait, you (Montreal Paul) insist that the villain IS NOT Khan, yet from the same report, you deduced that Klingons are in the sequel?”

Perhaps he has multiple inside sources at the studio? Oh, wait a minute, those sources confirmed to Anthony that it was Khan…whoops!!!

1243. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1223 “Well, we now know they will “NOT be Boldy Going…….anywhere.”

Hmm. Tracking down a renegade across the galaxy sounds to me like they are being bold and going somwhere???

1244. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

MJ,
but isn’t it entirely possible that Anthony’s sources were going off of an earlier unused draft or script?

Dont forget Nimoy himself put the Spock Prime rumor that was also “Confirmed” in the same article by the same un named sources to bed saying that he was NOT going to be in the sequel.

To me its sounds like the sources might have been going off a first draft or a un used story treatment as confirmation

1245. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1244 Certainly it is possible.

1246. Phil - December 1, 2012

Ever so slightly off topic, the US Navy announced today that CVN-80 will carry the name ENTERPRISE…

1247. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

Sometimes sources are fed specific misinformation so the “powers that be” can trace leaks. I would not put it past JJ to use such a tactic to stop unauthorized information from getting out.

My guess is Anthony trusted his sources because their info had proven correct in the past.
Notice that the info around this site dried up right after the “misinformation” was posted here. And even Anthony himself seemed to disappear.

With this film, the level of secrecy is monumental.

And I for one have not lost a bit of enthusiasm!

1248. Ahmed - December 1, 2012

@ 1247. Commodore Redshirt – December 1, 2012

“Sometimes sources are fed specific misinformation so the “powers that be” can trace leaks. I would not put it past JJ to use such a tactic to stop unauthorized information from getting out.”

Sound a lot like what intelligence agencies do ;)

1249. Slornie - December 1, 2012

I don’t understand why everyone takes the “personal score to settle” bit to mean it has to be Khan or Garry Mitchell (Khan because of TWOK and Mitchell because of WNMHGB). The last paragraph talks about the Enterprise crew as “the only family Kirk has left”, which implies the rest of his family (brother, mother, Pike, etc) die during the attack on Starfleet/Earth. In the aftermath of that event Kirk will naturally have a personal score against the perpetrator, whoever it is.

1250. FusionVok - December 1, 2012

@1241: Or maybe it’s Khan, but the “clue” was really just a typo. A third possibility.

1251. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1242. MJ (The Original)

Well, well, well… look who finally decides to answer me… unfortunately not to the proper comment.

No, I am not getting that from AP’s “source” … many other outlets ran that story. And I believe that it was also confirmed by JJ or Orci. I will only believe what has been confirmed. If I was mistaken and it wasn’t official confirmed, then I retract my previous statement.

So MJ… gonna answer my previous comments?

1252. Mary Gitchell - December 1, 2012

I honestly can’t believe this discussion is still going on. Those in favour of the Big Khan Theory now rely on a typo by Bob while there is PLENTY of evidence it simply has to be Mitchell.

1 You don’t put a presumably dead body in a torpedo if you don’t want to hint at a possible ressurrection…at least not in Star Trek!

2 And no, you don’t write a character that exactly looks like Doctor Dehner into a story about Khan…even if she was Bones’ ex-wife…

3 Khan never was a “one-man weapon of mass destruction”… He may have led an army of powerful supersoldiers, but he isn’t that powerful…

4 Khan never was and never will be a pale-looking bloke with shining (!!!) blue eyes as on that teaser poster…

5 Khan wasn’t shot in the chest by a phaser, tearing a black Starfleet shirt apart just in the right place to fit with the leaked pictures…

6 Bob Orci admitted that he lied about something. And yes, he said that it wasn’t Gary Mitchell…

7 Then there is Karl Urban’s potential slip… I don’t think he would have thought about a minor TOS character like Gary Mitchell without him being part of the film he was shooting at that point. Khan yes, but Mitchell? You have to be very familiar with TOS to remember such a character. Something like that isn’t accidentally slipped if it’s not on your mind…

8 “Personal score to settle” and “friendships torn apart” sounds an awful lot of Mitchell as well… He and Kirk were friends once…Khan never was…

9 “unstoppable force of terror FROM WITHIN Starfleet”…Since when has Khan ever been a member of Starfleet??? Mitchell was and now he’s back…challenging everything Starfleet stands for by initiating and/or being subject to ESP experiments, a fashist project to create a race of true ESPers… (possible assisted by Weller’s Commodore Paxton Junior)… And there are Nazi-like uniforms in Starfleet now…

10 “Epic chess game”… Chess was only played in WNMHGB…3D chess for a 3D movie…

11 Yes, the 9 minute teaser will be a retelling of WNMHGB and the comic book…and NOT of Space Seed!

And don’t give me Kodos, Charlie X, Finnegan, Trelane or any other first season villain. None of them would work with the synopsis. Yeah, some of them might fit “weapon of mass destruction” (Charlie / Trelane) but they are simply not MEN and not members of Starfleet, nor do they involve Doctor Dehner.
Charlie and Trelane are Q-like entities and such powerful beings simply don’t work as action movie villains. That’s why Q was never reused for the movies. You need a villain that is powerful but on par with the opponent, not a nearly omnipotend creature that could do anything. Yeah, Charlie could “detonate” the fleet by mere thought but how could he challenge Starfleet’s core values? There needs to be some ideology, some agenda behind all that… and WNMHGB provides for this agenda… “creatinga race of true ESPers”…

Mutants like Gary Mitchell work especially well as villains when you think of the on-going popularity of comic book adaptations. Mitchell is Star Trek’s Magneto. He fits that type of villain and TPTB need a story that fits the modern action / comic book blockbuster vein…

Yes, they HAD thought about Khan earlier on… as genetic engineering goes in the same direction as artificially induced mutation. But they simply didn’t want to redo TWOK and had second thoughts…

Cumberbatch can’t play Khan because he doesn’t look the part. If they wanted to exploit Khan’s iconic popularity they would have cast an Indian or Hispanic actor. It is silly to assume they cast someone like Cumberbatch as Khan and make him use genetic enhancements to change his outward appearance… Why? Whoy would they do that from a marketing point of view? You don’t write in the Joker and make him look like Doctor Freeze or Penguine!

If you cast someone who looks like Mitchell, dresses like Mitchell, has got glowing eyes like Mitchell and is capable of the same stuff as Mitchell, you do not call him Khan (or Charlie) just to toy with your fans’ feelings… You have to assume he IS Mitchell…especially if Tip of the Iceberg Dehner is just round the corner!

1253. Ahmed - December 1, 2012

@1252. Mary Gitchell – December 1, 2012

“8 “Personal score to settle” and “friendships torn apart” sounds an awful lot of Mitchell as well… He and Kirk were friends once…Khan never was…

9 “unstoppable force of terror FROM WITHIN Starfleet”…Since when has Khan ever been a member of Starfleet??? Mitchell was and now he’s back…challenging everything Starfleet stands for by initiating and/or being subject to ESP experiments, a fashist project to create a race of true ESPers… (possible assisted by Weller’s Commodore Paxton Junior)… And there are Nazi-like uniforms in Starfleet now… ”

Good points

1254. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

@1252 “I honestly can’t believe this discussion is still going on. Those in favour of the Big Khan Theory now rely on a typo by Bob while there is PLENTY of evidence it simply has to be Mitchell.”

We shall see in 13 days. We shall see, indeed.

I have been making the Khan case for well over the year — you know damn well that the Khan case if more than just that clue/typo thing, and I will not dignify that comment by repeating for you all of the pro-Khan arguments again.

Except for a handful of regulars here like DM Duncan with some legitimate reasoning for Mitchell, I am seeing here a lot of you Johnny-come-lately “Einsteins” with your Gary Mitchell theories all of a sudden coming out of the woodwork. Well, you are all in for major disappointment on December 14th.

1255. Mary Gitchell - December 1, 2012

@1254. If it’s Khan, I won’t be disappointed. I love the character and if they find a way to fruitfully reinvent the character, so shall it be. However, given all the evidence (pictures, teaser poster, synopsis, Urbian Slips etc), there is currently NO convincing reason to belief it’s Khan.

You know, JJ may love and cherish all his secrecy and the guessing-games we all play… but it all has to make sense in the finished product. Five years ago, some of us may have mistaken for a Klingon because of the forehead tattoos. In the end he turned out Romulan enough to give closure to Old Spock’s legacy. It made sense on many levels. If Khan makes sense in this one, so say we all. But for the moment, Mitchell is a lot more resonable to assume…

1256. The Question - December 1, 2012

hmm… The only Khan theory that makes sense to me at this point (considering the casting of Cumberpatch) is a ‘Die Another Day’ Gustav Graves/Colonel Moon scenario, where the truth behind the character is actually an on-screen reveal/plot point in the genetic engineering vein… Could this be the reason (beyond J.J.’s normal ‘secrecy’) why TPTB still want to deny it at this point?. But that ‘Die Another Day’ twist was kind of hackneyed… I guess it’s all in how it’s played…but BobOrci, are you really doing that??

I”m still compelled to believe it’s someone more like Mitchell.

1257. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

Montreal Paul, I have made all of my points on Khan over the past six months and you know them well, so pleas stop feigning like you aren’t familiar with them — Anthony’s story, Del Toro as the 1st choice for the role, and Bob’s clue. I am comfortable resting my case still on these three items.

We’ll see the weekend of December 14th…oh, wait a minute, you have “an out” as I recall — you “conveniently said you were disappearing from posting once the trailer and preview comes out so as not to spoil the movie. So that means you can be as critical and sarcastic as you want to be on the Khan theory, as you are not going to have to worry about taking accountability for your wrong opinion on December 14th, as your five month break from this site will start. My, how “convenient!”

I promise everyone here that f I am wrong on Khan, I will be here posting on December 16th (I am seeing The Hobbit IMAX Trek preview on the evening of 15th) and taking accountability for my wrong prediction. I won’t be disappearing and pretending I don’t know the real deal.

1258. Ahmed - December 1, 2012

Is the trailer still attached to the Hobbit or they changed that ?

1259. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1257. MJ (the original)

Sorry, buddy, but the arguments are very weak. And I do not have an “out”… I am not leaving the site for good. I just plan on avoiding any spoilers as of December 14th. But I will be back commenting the day after the movie opens.

I do plan on coming by to read non-spoiler articles here… like the comics and book reviews and science saturdays, etc. But I don’t plan on reading the comments in case someone posts a spoiler. Just like that jack*** did a while back about Skyfall. I was really pissed at that.

So, no spoilers for me. That doesn’t give me an out because if Cumberbatch is not Khan… I will be looking for you to man up and admit you were wrong. If he is Khan, I will do the same. I am a man of my word. I just like going in knowing very little about the movie I am seeing.

No matter what the outcome, all I am really hoping for is a really great and well written Star Trek adventure.

1260. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

@1259. “Sorry, buddy, but the arguments are very weak.”

What arguments? I have a confirmed story with Anthony’s inside sources support it — so my other two pieces (Del Toro’s casting and the Orci clue) are only needed to further confirm it.

Where is your confirmed story with multiple sources that it is Mitchell? Huh, where is your confirmed story — DON’T WAIT FOR THE TRANSLATION — ANSWER THE QUESTION?

Whoops, you don’t have a confirmed story — your’s is just a theory…just a theory — THAT’S ALL YOU GOT, AND WHAT YOU GOT ISN’T GOOD ENOUGH.

:-)

1261. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

Excellent article here:

Why Gary Mitchell Is Almost Certainly Not The Villain Of STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

http://badassdigest.com/2012/11/28/why-gary-mitchell-is-almost-certainly-not-the-villain-of-star-trek-into-dar/

1262. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

Question even if Cumberbatch’s character is not mentioned by name, but the teaser ends with a close up of him and his eyes glowing, would that be enough to get you to concede that Khan’s not the villian?

Just a hypothetical question MJ

1263. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

“I am not leaving the site for good. I just plan on avoiding any spoilers as of December 14th. But I will be back commenting the day after the movie opens.”

Dude, I commend you for thinking you might be able to do this, but you do realized that even on non-sequel articles you will be inadvertently seeing spoilers and comments on the trailer and 9-minute preview. It seems unrealistic that you could try to participate some on this site from December 15th to May without gradually learning what was in the trailer and preview. You should either just give in and watch the trailer, or go cold turkey and ignore this and other Trek sites — I don’t think there is a middle ground where you can avoid learning about the contents of the preview and trailer.

1264. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

@1263. Yes.

1265. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

And Montreal Paul, how would you come this site and avoid seeing headlines of story’s which give things away. Like, “Orci Comments on BC’s’s Khan Scene in the IMAX Preview.” You are not going to be able to miss headlines.

But still the fact that you said you won’t be posting in the comments section of the Sequel article does give you kind of freedom I don’t have to go a little overboard on being critical on the Khan story. I know I will be posting on December 16th, so I can’t go nuts here in my comments. But you can be more free to say whatever you want, as you know that by the time you return to posting on this topic, the movie will have already come out and this will be old news. Sure, we might share and post or two on this, but it will not be the same as if you hadn’t disappeared from this discussion.

I am sticking around to either take credit or admit I was wrong the weekend of December 14th — I won’t be checking out from my accountability on this. And I’m not trying to be critical of you here, because you have good intention, but it still is what it is in terms of your role and accountability for your opinions here on this issues — it simply won’t be the same it you wait until late May to finally weigh in.

1266. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

In other news the Burbank Best Buy has season 2 of TNG on shelf now, picked up my copy today. Getting ready to watch Measure of a Man extended cut in a few

1267. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

MJ,
let me ask you this then, do you not think that Alice Eve is pretty much identical to Sally Kellerman’s Dr Dehner?

1268. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1255 “teaser poster”

Mary Gitchell,

Please provide a link to this teaser poster that you claim adds to the Michell theory and doesn’t support Khan???

1269. Well Of Souls - December 1, 2012

@ cOn possible typo. I rarely use Cap Lock myself. I mostly use the shift key simultaneously when in need of capitalizing a letter. I’m not pointing this out in defense of either/or as a possibility of mistakingly or intentional on Bob’s use of the capital o. Just a simple observation is all.

1270. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1268. Sure she looks like her. She also looks a hell of a lot like Nurse Chappel as well.

Here’s what Anthony said on this:

“Original reports stated that Eve’s character is new to the canon. TrekMovie hasn’t been able to confirm (or debunk) those reports, however many fans have conjectured she could be playing a familiar character. Guesses have included Yeoman Janice Rand, Nurse Christine Chapel, Lt. Marla Givers, Dr. Elizabeth Dehner, Dr. Carol Marcus, and others. Of that group all but Marcus were members of Starfleet. And if the outfit is indeed some kind of flight suit, that might not fit a nurse or doctor very well, but this is an alternative timeline so you never know.”

Of course some people (and I’m not saying you Mark) seem to be throwing all of Anthony’s sequel news and opinions under the bus here, but I still respect him and take his informatoin as key to my understanding of what is going on with the sequel.

1271. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

I am not really saying the info he confirmed was never a possibilty, I am just more inclined to believe its based on a very early script or story treatment that was ultimately not used.

I know ive said this over and over, but the Nimoy himself even said that he is NOT in the new movie, even though AP’s article Confirmed he was.
So its not that hard to imagine that they considered Khan early on in the stroy process but ultimately went another direction

1272. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1271. Sure, that is possible.

1273. Mary Gitchell - December 1, 2012

@1268:

Does this look like Khan to you?

http://spaceports.blogspot.de/2012/09/star-trek-into-darkness-comes-in-2013.html

It’s good ol’ Gary…

1274. Sebastian S. - December 1, 2012

# 1252 Mary Gitchell (love the moniker, BTW… ;-D )

Thanks for a well needed dose of common sense. I would think by now that the Gary Mitchell connection has far more bullet points in it’s favor. Cumberbatch is a marvelous actor and BBC’s Sherlock is one of my favorite shows on TV at the moment, but the thought of him playing Khan Noonien Singh is utterly laughable. I just saw “Life Of Pi” last weekend and I could only imagine how racially offensive it would’ve been if he played, say, the older version of Pi Patel. Cumberbatch is too pale, blue-eyed, about 10 years too young, wrong voice, accent, hair and about a dozen other things.

And yes, I am very convinced that the 9-minutes of footage released before “The Hobbit” will be a brief, summarized retelling of “Where No Man Has Gone Before” (the IDW comics version). It would also be the only chunk of the film that could be seen as a short film in of itself (WNMHGB is a self-contained story). It also wouldn’t necessarily ruin the rest of the film (as so much of it already happened in TOS). This approach of a heavy teaser would be very much like ST09 with the George Kirk/Kelvin prologue….

1275. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

So how about a different topic. I think it is a safe bet that Kirk is going to lose someone important to him early in this movie. Who is that going to be?

I would say Admiral Pike or his brother, Sam, will likely be killed off the villain early in the movie.

Here’s a bit of stretch. I’m not saying I believe this will happen, but looking at the synopsis, what if Uhura was kill off early in the movie — this would really shake up Kirk and Spock per the info in the synopsis. Again, I don’t think this is likely, but it does unusually fit the synopsis. Or Uhura could be nearly killed or missing.

1276. Killamarshtrek - December 1, 2012

If you look at what Nimoy said, he denied ‘appearing’ in the film. He could have recorded a voiceover for the film and still technically be accurate in his denial!

1277. MJ (the original) - December 1, 2012

@1275. Thanks for figuring this all out for me/us. Heck, I think I can skip the expensive IMAX preview now and save some money. Well done, Sebastian!

1278. DeShonn Steinblatt - December 1, 2012

I don’t think there is anything villain related that can be gleaned from this appropriately vague synopsis. I like what little it does say, though.

And I, too, am getting tired of the fan-made fakery that Mary Gitchell linked to.

1279. Star Trek Junkie - December 1, 2012

I don’t know about any of you, but when I finish watching this movie I’m going to feel this huge emptiness because Star Trek will be going to sleep again, for at least a couple of years…

My point is, we need more. But we were cut off at the end of Star Trek: Enterprise, albeit we were given a rather large ‘Scooby Snack’ in 2009, but what’s missing is a weekly, televised Star Trek series. Anyone else want to sound off on this matter?

1280. Red Shirt Diaries - December 1, 2012

DeShonn,

I agree completely with you. The level of BS here the past few days is getting ridiculous. I go back and forth on the villain myself, but today I am thinking that everything from the Supreme Court has been disinformation, and that the villain is going to be someone that none of us expect.

No Khan and no Mitchell is my bet. Which will be hilarious on the boards here since these two camps have pretty much dug in their heels that it has to be either Mitchell or Khan. Just watch them all backtrack on December 15th.

1281. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

well I just want to point out while I really think it is Mitchell, I am 100 percent open minded to it being someone else.
But I am 99.8% certain its not Khan.

I would love it if he turns out to be another classic trek villian, as long as he is NOT khan lol

1282. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1281. I feel the exact same way — just as a mirror image. While I am reasonably confident its Khan, I am completely open to it being someone else, and I am 99.8% sure its not Mitchell.

1283. K-7 - December 1, 2012

All, it if is Mitchell, then how will they explain away the fact that he was not in Trek 2009 in the Starfleet Academy scenes? It is going to take a lot to convince me that Mitchell is this best friend of Kirk’s from his academy days, when he didn’t even make and appearance in ANY of the Starfleet Academy scenes in Trek 2009?

In this atternate Trek universe, from the record of Trek 2009 that we all have to go by, it is clear that Kirk’s best friend at the Academy was McCoy, and that he and Gary Mitchell were not best friends at the academy. This if proven by Mitchell not being scene in ANY of the key scenes in the movie. What, he’s Kirk’s best friend, but he doesn’t even show up at the Academy briefing when Kirk is put on academic probation, and he’s AWOL from Kirk’s Kobayashi Maru test? You’ve got to be kidding me!

Case closed!

1284. K-7 - December 1, 2012

#1275

They’ll probably kill off Pike — that would be my bet.

1285. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

The villain will be Lt. Kyle! Mark my words!

1286. Curious Cadet - December 1, 2012

@1252

Why does Alice Eve have to be playing Dehner? In this timeline, what could be the possible motivation for having her at all if Mitchell is already mutated? She could be Carol Marcus, Yeoman Rand, or even Nurse Chapel.

Not that Mitchell isn’t a strong contender, but I don’t see the need to complicate the story with an unimportant character like Dehner.

1287. Commodore Redshirt - December 1, 2012

On a serious note, I honestly hope Pike is NOT killed.
My guess is his brother, mother, and perhaps extended family get killed in an attack on Earth or an Earth Colony thus the “only family he has left” line… and Pike is his Star Fleet mentor, not his father.

1288. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

I don’t think Alice Eve looks like the actress who originally played Dehner. Except that they both happen to be blonde. Nurse Chapel, Carol Marcus, and Yeoman Rand were blonde as well.

The Spaceports poster was probably photoshopped.

Its still possible the villain is Mitchell, and its possible that they did go to the academy together, though we didn’t know it during Trek ’09, and there was no mention of him during the movie.

Yeah, the torpedo scene at the end of WNMHGB could be a nod to Spock’s “death” at the end of TWOK (but featuring Mitchell this time), but again, the whole “he’s not really dead” theme has been done to death a million times before.

And let’s not forget, that Mitchell, even as his powers grew, began to age at an accelerated rate, and was still far from having true “God-like” powers.

It’s also possible that BC is playing Garth. Garth also happens to go insane as he acquired his powers.

So yeah, its entirely feasible that Khan isn’t the villain. If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it. I have no problem with that.

1289. K-7 - December 1, 2012

“So yeah, its entirely feasible that Khan isn’t the villain. If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it. I have no problem with that.”

You mean you don’t have a conveinant excuse set-up for yourself where you can bail from this site for five months if you are proven wrong?

LOL ;-)

1290. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

#1289.

No excuses from me. Just like MJ, I am willing to admit when I’m wrong.

The only situation in which I stop posting here is if I drop dead between now and when the trailer comes out. :-)

1291. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) - December 1, 2012

Red dead compare the photos of Alice on set, with the photos of Sally Kellerman, right on down to the hairstyle she looks like the mirror image of Sally Kellerman as Dehner

1292. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1291. Mark James Tucker (M.J.) – December 1, 2012

I’m not sure, but I don’t think I can make that call until I see Eve’s rendition of the Hotlips’ shower scene from Altman’s M*A*S*H

1293. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

MJ, my old friend… I really don’t care who the villain is going to be. I just used Mitchell way back when to show that there are just as many if not more compelling arguments for someone else. And I would not say that AP’s article confirmed anything… except that his “inside source” gave him a great rumour to report on. And that is all it is right now… a rumour. Becuase without Paramount, JJ, Bob Orci or anyone running the movie confirming it… it is just a rumor. And I already cover the whole Del Toro thing. They were probably looking at him for the role because he is a good actor and plays a great baddie. IF they were wanting to go for a Latino sooooo badly for a Khan role, they why even give Cumberbatch an audition? And what was your other point… oh yeah… Orci typing “cOn” in a comment. Please.

I can give you compelling arguments showing that Cumberbatch is playing Gary Seven as much as I can give you for Mitchell. But after reading the synopsis… it looks more and more like it isn’t Khan.

As for me avoiding spoilers. Yup. I will be avoiding article for the movie and just reading non-sequel related articles. But maybe you are right – I should avoid the site all together in case AP posts who the villain is in a headline. Thanks for that! I didn’t think of that. But I will be back when I see the movie and will look forward to either gloating or admitting defeat if I was wrong.

Leaving this site for a few months does in no means I am copping out on admitting I was wrong IF I am. I am just the opposite of you, MJ, I really don’t like knowing too much about a movie before seeing it. That’s just who I am. I love to sit down with my popcorn and coke and be blown away by what I am seeing and hearing for the first time in the theatre. But I will be back, rest assured, once I have seen the movie.

And I don’t watch ET or any of the other entertainment shows and I will stay away from Trek sites. I listen to satellite radio or my iPod so there is no chance of me hearing it on the radio. Due to my hours at the TV Station, I usually record my TV shows or watch them online… never see commercials… or a potential tv trailer. So I do feel I can avoid spoilers until the movie… Unless the movie poster someone spoils it.

1294. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

I think we could use a few refreshers from Space Seed.

In it Carey Wilbur, the scriptwriter, has Khan identify himself as an engineer as a ruse to study Federation technology and the running of Enterprise itself. However, in the scenes filmed that are in the episode Khan later is shown dressed in a Starfleet Engineering uniform (which many would point out marked him early for his onscreen death later in TWoK). Is it that big a stretch to say it is possible he did so well in his computer studies that he actually joined Star Fleet and got assigned to Engineering as part of his plan to later take the ship? In his redshirted scene Kirk was one on one with Khan, with the Captain digging for more info and he wasn’t appalled at Khan’s attire.

“SPOCK:I fail to understand why it always gives you pleasure to see me proven wrong.
KIRK:An emotional Earth weakness of mine.”

“KIRK:He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous.”

“KIRK:We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.
SPOCK:Illogical.”

“KHAN:The trip is over. The battle begins again. Only this time it’s not a world we win. It’s a universe.”

“KHAN:I have ten times your strength. You’re no match for me!”

“KHAN:I will take her. And I’ve gotten something else I wanted. A world to win, an empire to build.”

1295. FDRLincoln - December 1, 2012

Well since we are all engaging in barely-informed speculation, here is my guess, putting together the flimsy evidence we have from the new comics, the synopsis, and the photos.

BC is playing Gary Mitchell.
Peter Weller is playing Captain Ron Tracey of the USS Exeter
Alice Eve is playing Dr. Elizabeth Dehner

The first part of the movie tells the story of Mitchell that we see in the new comic. Mitchell “dies”, gets shot off in a torpedo, etc.

Then the movie cuts to “a year later” and we see Kirk and company plus Admiral Pike negotiating a treaty with the Klingons.

Meanwhile, Section 31 has been studying the Enterprise mission logs about what happened with Mitchell. Star Fleet (under Section 31 influence) dispatches the Exeter with Dr. Dehner aboard as a special observer, to study the barrier and (hopefully) locate Mitchell’s body for further study. It is implied at some point that Captain Tracey himself is a 31 operative (which perhaps explains some of his actions in the alternate timeline on Omega IV).

Anyway, they find Mitchell who, thanks to his godlike powers, is NOT REALLY DEAD and was just regenerating. We don’t really see much of what happens here…perhaps he’s playing possum and awakens when Dr. Dehner and Dr. Carter (the Exeter’s surgeon) examine his body. But he awakens, causes some havoc, and we don’t really see too much of what goes on aboard the Exeter beyond that. . . .

More time passes. The Enterprise is on routine patrol, when a group of Klingon warships attack. What’s going on? What about the peace treaty? The Enterprise is badly outnumbered but somehow escapes, then pieces together through various subspace radio messages that a squadron of Federation ships has launched a sneak attack on Klingon border stations, sparking a war.

Obviously this is not right. Kirk queries Star Fleet, but there is political chaos in the Federation. Pike orders Kirk to withdraw to the Enterprise to Deneva for repairs as the government tries to unravel what’s happening…is this a civil war? etc.. This is also puzzling since Deneva doesn’t have the best repair facilities, but orders are orders.

The Big E arrives at Deneva, to find the Exeter and several other Federation starships already there. The other ships except the Exeter are wrecks. The colony is in ruins. Kirk fears the worst for his family. Admiral Pike orders Kirk to beam down to the planet where he is conferring with Captain Tracey.

It is a trap of course. Pike is either dead or under the control of the madman running the colony, the madman with massive powers of destruction who has undermined Star Fleet from within. Tracey and Dehner accompany Kirk “upriver” to meet the madman, all the while talking about how a mutated superior man could be a wonderful thing.

And upriver, Kirk comes face to face with his old friend, Gary Mitchell.

“You left me to die James. You could have tried to help me.”
“You asked me to kill you, Gary”.
“Are you not your brother’s keeper, James? Are you here to kill me again?”

Gary of course has killed Sam and his family for his revenge.

Kirk and Spock somehow defeat Mitchell, of course. I don’t know how it goes from there.

Whaddya think? Fun speculation? Any chance this is close? Are my methods unsound?

1296. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1294.

“Wilbur” should be “Wilber”

1297. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

Oh, and this final SPACE SEED kicker:

When Kirk is selling Khan on Ceti Alpha he tells him the alternative is to face court martial for mutiny.

I ask those far more educated in JAG than I, how does he charge someone with mutiny who isn’t a member of his crew or even the political system that spawned it?

1298. Adolescent Nightmare - December 1, 2012

How could a dead guy infiltrate Starfleet and join the conspiracy? Wouldn’t someone walk right up to him and say Mr. MITCHELL! You were reported dead 2 years ago! I demand an immedate explanation!”

1299. FDRLincoln - December 1, 2012

Mitchell is the conspiracy. Perhaps Section 31 thought they could control him or weaponize him, but they underestimated him. In the comic he shows the power to create illusions. With more time for growth, he could certainly control minds (well if you consider that a Godlike power anyway). Maybe it is a conspiracy to mutate more people into Mitchells or find some way to use the barrier energy to create superspies. Dehner seems like she could support something like that, and we know that Tracey wanted to live forever and was willing to break rules to bring something like that to the galaxy.

1300. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1258. Ahmed

According to Mr. Pascale’s latest update:

http://trekmovie.com/2012/11/15/exclusive-first-star-trek-into-darkness-trailer-also-premiering-dec-14th

Yes.

1301. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1299. I don’t know how many times I will need to repeat this. 99.9% of the people who will see STID will not have read the comic.

1302. Ahmed - December 1, 2012

@ 1300. Disinvited – December 1, 2012

“#1258. Ahmed
According to Mr. Pascale’s latest update:
http://trekmovie.com/2012/11/15/exclusive-first-star-trek-into-darkness-trailer-also-premiering-dec-14th

Yes.”

Thanks,

I’m planning to watch the trailer but will skip the 9 minutes preview since I really hate watching movies in 3D. Beside, I guess the 9 minutes will be online one way or another.

1303. Gary S. - December 1, 2012

#1295 just curious ,
Why Tracy ?
What gave you the idea that he will be Wellers character?

1304. Jack - December 1, 2012

“. Is it that big a stretch to say it is possible he did so well in his computer studies that he actually joined Star Fleet and got assigned to Engineering as part of his plan to later take the ship? In his redshirted scene Kirk was one on one with Khan, with the Captain digging for more info and he wasn’t appalled at Khan’s attire.”

Kind of.

Didn’t they give that Air Force pilot a tunic to wear? I can’t remember.

1305. FDRLincoln - December 1, 2012

1301: I know that. But 99.9% didn’t read the premovie comic in 2009 either. It didn’t matter, and with an extensive flashback the fact that people haven’t read the current comic isn’t a big deal either.

1303: Well I remember hearing that the Exeter shows up in the movie somehow. It is entirely possible that this is just a background mention or small bit of dialog. And in my proposed plot, it could be any starship and captain that finds Mitchell. But they could use Tracey as a bone to the canon fanbois, and the average moviegoer wouldn’t care or even notice. Paxton seems like he could do a good Tracey.

It is all just speculation of course. Somewhere, Bob Orci is reading this and laughing at us.

1306. FDRLincoln - December 1, 2012

Remember also that these are the guys who invented “red matter”. Something like mysterious barrier energy is right up their alley if it serves the purposes of plot and adventure.

1307. MJ (The Original) - December 1, 2012

@1305 ” I know that. But 99.9% didn’t read the premovie comic in 2009 either.”

But this is vastly different. In Trek 2009, they didn’t kill off Nero in the comics and then have to worry about coming up with some resurrection story in the movie so that they could use him as the villain. That is a huge difference — the Trek 2009 movie comics countdown was a simple background story.

1308. Jack - December 1, 2012

1280. I don’t think it’s Mitchell or Khan. But I can honestly say I have no idea who it is. Nothing rules Mitchell or Khan out — but I haven’t seen any actual convincing evidence that it’s either of them (other than rumours, that Del Toro casting stuff (which doesn’t necessarily mean Khan…), those pictures (same) and what Bob, Pegg and Urban have said).

1309. Disinvited - December 1, 2012

#1304. Jack – December 1, 2012

I meant to add in addition to Kirk’s court martial threat for mutiny threat.

But even so, red is the uniform of Security too and in TOMORROW IS YESTERDAY they most definitely didn’t dress him in a red Starfleet uniform.

But it is a poser that of all the clothing the ship can manufacture for away missions, et al. why they gave a stranger from the past a Starfleet uniform in response to an order to find him something more comfortable? What? 1960’s period attire would make him more comfortable?

And in SPACE SEED Khan underwent so many costume changes fleet red didn’t seem to make sense under any criteria other than a possibility it was earned for me?

1310. K-7 - December 1, 2012

“But this is vastly different. In Trek 2009, they didn’t kill off Nero in the comics and then have to worry about coming up with some resurrection story in the movie so that they could use him as the villain. That is a huge difference — the Trek 2009 movie comics countdown was a simple background story.”

Right, that is a HUGE difference and it does not make any sense why the writers would paint themselves into a corner like that. This pretty much rules out Mitchell.

1311. The Great Bird lives - December 1, 2012

1304-
Captain Christopher was given a gold tunic…

1312. The Great Bird lives - December 1, 2012

Either way, the story line has to be able to appeal to the general audience so whomever the key characters are, some back story will have to be written in. I think if you involve characters from previous episodes you will have to explain to the audience who they are.

1313. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

Let’s not forget, the Supreme Court went out of their way to make the comics canon. But then again, they apparently also said that they can overrule anything done in the comics with whatever they do in the movies.

So, if that’s the case, then the comics really can’t be considered canon, can they?

If they go with Mitchell in the sequel, then the WNMHGB remake would be irrelevent now.

Add to that the possible lie that potentially involved using villains from the comics in the sequel.

And if they violate their own canon (again?) for the third movie, then its clear they were being disengenous in the first place.

Either that, or they’ve painted themselves in a corner without realizing it, and have come to regret it.

There are some potential credibility and PR issues here.

1314. Baroner - December 1, 2012

Late to the string, let me say this: #49 has a point.

1315. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

#1313.

Agreed. Which would make the WNMHGB remake either totally unnecessary in the first place, or the set-up scenes in the sequel totally redundant, unless they totally ignore their own comic book.

There would have to be at least a scene or two to establish how Kirk and Mitchell met. And how their friendship formed. Unless of course the writers do something totally different, such as Kirk and Mitchell being bitter rivals from the start, and that he causes Kirk to suffer such that the captain has to get revenge against Mitchell.

This is different from the “Star Trek: Countdown” scenario, where all that needed to be included in the movie was to show why Nero was angry, and how he and Spock went back in time into an alternate 23rd century timeline. That was all done in a mindmeld scene.

1316. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

Can’t be Khan. In Space Seed, Kirk was able to fend off Khan and smack him around. He was beaten by Kirk and exiled. The was a megalomaniac but far from being the spiteful, vengeful person he was in TWOK.

This cannot be a remake of TWOK in anyway because this would be their first meeting. Khan didn’t have any vengeance or wrath yet. He became the Khan we know due to his exile by Kirk… the death of his wife… the isolation on a dead planet. All that made Khan the way he was. In Space Seed… he was just power hungry. How could he get out of a neck pinch and beat Spock if he could be beaten by Kirk? Make no sense to do a remake of Space Seed.

Oh, and Ryan… they also contradicted and stepped over their own canon in the countdown comic. Lots of inconsistencies there.

1317. DeShonn Steinblatt - December 1, 2012

Would the mainstream media ever forgive them if the villain turned out to be a complete nobody? If the villain is an all new character, wouldn’t the media treat all this secrecy like the most obnoxious publicity stunt in motion picture history? They would be eviscerated for it. Tarred and feathered.

No, it’s a canon character alright. Almost certainly the one and only canon character known by the general public. My own pseudo-Hasbro source was certain it’s Khan. Not that I consider it an enormously reliable source.

I’m going to continue to look for clues in real world sources and not Star Trek canon. Canon is not really in play anymore and the Supreme Court appear to have mixed emotions about canon at best.

1318. Jack - December 1, 2012

“They would be eviscerated for it. Tarred and feathered”

I honestly think nobody (excrpt for a few here) would give a damn.

Most of these people writing these movie news/rumour round- ups have no idea who Khan or Gary Mitchell even are.

BTW. I ‘m really glad this site doesn’t report on everything instantly, like Trekweb does. Gosh, Trekweb’s story on those trailer comments above here are already showing up in Google news.

1319. Jack - December 1, 2012

Imagine if, in 1982, Harve Bennett had decided the best villain was Mitchell, even though he was dead and buried?

1320. AJ - December 1, 2012

I think the villain is Kirk’s brother, Sam, or “Johnny” as he was called in ’09. In TOS, he was killed on Deneva. In the new timeline, you see him wandering a dirt road, just as disgusted to be left living with his drunk uncle as little Jim is, but he is a more brooding type than Jim, and just as brilliant. His mom sends him to boarding school in England, where he attends Starfleet’s UK program, and ships out, brilliant, yet now malevolent. He somehow acquires mega-strength for what could be a variety of reasons.

The blurb says Kirk’s crew is the only family he has left, and that love and friendships hang in the balance. I can see Spock lecturing Kirk as he did in WNMHGB that his compassion is preventing him from taking the only right decision, and Kirk getting angry, saying “Get the hell out of here” before finally admitting Spock was right and taking the resolution into his own hands because he has to, to save his ship and crew.

Just a thought.

1321. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

#1316.

Well, the “Countdown” contradictions are fairly small compared to the ones that would be apparent between the new “Countdown” and the sequel.

You didn’t have to deal with resurrecting a dead guy the last time around…

1322. Red Dead Ryan - December 1, 2012

Also, you have to take into account the level of secrecy around the villain. Why would they feel the need to do that if its Gary Mitchell, who we already read about recently in the comics?

Sam Kirk? So we’d have yet other “evil brother” villain? Nah. Its more likely that he’d be killed.

There’s only one villain worthy of such secrecy, and that would be Khan.

And its entirely possible that when Karl Urban slipped out “Gary Mitchell”, it was a last second switcheroo just when he realized that he was going to say “Khan”. And J.J Abrams warned him despite that, because he knew he was pretty lucky, and the next time the real villain might be inadvertantly blurted out.

1323. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 1, 2012

1321. Red Dead Ryan

Very simple. The “dead” God-like Mitchell left floating in space… not really dead, evolving. Resurrected, he becomes more powerful.

Then again… maybe it’s Gary Seven. In his mind, he isn’t a villain… he is doing it for the good of all mankind. Misguided. A man from the future. A man that easily powered out of Spock’s neck pinch. Hmmmm….

1324. Anthony Thompson - December 1, 2012

1320 AJ

Congrats. Out of 1323 posts so far, yours is the most ridiculous. By far. Are you serious? LOL.

1325. Hat Rick - December 1, 2012

The important thing to realize, it seems to me, is that the villain issue is only a small part of the renewed focus on the Trekverse we see in popular culture today. We can thank ST (2009) for making Trek a popular icon once again in a way not seen since the heights of TNG.

For new and updated information on the Star Trek universe as established by the 2009 movie, and other Star Trek-related news, please refer to my blog (accessible by clicking my username).

1326. Anthony Thompson - December 1, 2012

Bob has been conspicuously silent since this ‘Star Trek into Waterworld’ revelation / hoax came up!

1327. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

#1323.

Again, Mitchell wasn’t quite “God-like” when he asked Kirk to kill him. And he did ask to die. One of his eyes was turning blue when Kirk shot him. Not to mention that Kelso was also put into a torpedo. So would Kelso also be mentioned in the sequel?

Also, why would you bring back a character who asked to be put out of his misery, only to come back to get revenge? He’d be angry that Kirk wasn’t able to put him out of his misery?

“Kirk, I wanted you to kill me! You failed, and now I’m going to kill your family and make you suffer!”

That would be totally lame, unless the writers of the sequel decided to totally ignore the comics, and decided to tell a totally new Mitchell story, in which case, the WNMHGB remake would be irrelevent here.

1328. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Also, when he was shot in the chest, Mitchell gasped out in pain before he closed his eyes and died. No obviously he wasn’t “God-like” at that point.

He obviously did have some “God-like” powers, but clearly wasn’t enough to prevent him from feeling a brief pang of physical pain when Kirk shot him.

He’s dead, Jim. :-)

1329. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Also, he couldn’t avoid Spock’s neck pinch, which weakened him considerably, giving Kirk enough time to shoot him.

1330. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

I will also add, that Mitchell’s powers were similar to Palpatine’s, which, made them both extremely powerful, but not immortal. Not by a long shot. Neither were “God-like” in any sense of the word.

Q and Trelane, on the other hand, were truly “God-like” as they pretty much were (physically) invincible, at least to Picard and Kirk.

1331. bardicjim - December 2, 2012

What if Bob’s little lie is that the comics are Canon?

1332. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@ 1307 MJ,

The audience does not have to know anything about the comics, just like they don’t have to know anything about the prelude comic before going to see 2009 Trek. Mitchell is killed and resurrected for the fans in a comic. He is killed conveniently in the first issue to throw the hard core fans reading the comics off the track, we are told the comics are considered canon by Orci, as people start to second guess whether Mitchell’s death in the comics rule out his being in the movie. Brilliant. Then they cleverly resurrect him for the fans reading the comics to prepare them for the film. This is exactly what they did for the 2009 film (albeit without the resurrection). And it’s not like a major character hasn’t been implausibly killed and resurrected before. Sure it’s not original, but then the 2009 film wasn’t either.

As far as the film’s audience is concerned, all they have to see is a flashback sequence explaining how Mitchell got his powers, just like the 2009 film showed how Nero ended up back in time on his vendetta. Most likely we will also see a flashback of Kirk’s relationship with Mitchell at the academy which was absent from the 2009 film. IF IT IS MITCHELL. At this point, it could very well be Mitchell, or not, but certainly whether he has a convoluted backstory presented in a comic prequel that the film audience may never see is not a determining factor.

1333. Elias Javalis - December 2, 2012

I like the idea of the Enterprise goin for a swim. Very avatar-ish :) It also makes some sense..Spock in a volcano, ship in the water Lol :)

1334. AJ - December 2, 2012

1324:

I’m rarely ‘serious’ on this site, Anthony Thompson. Hell, maybe it was one of those little bluegills from TNG’s “Conspiracy” who got into him. There’s a twist for ya.

The Khan v Gary Mitchell debate is never-ending, and somewhat mentally debilitating, and nearly over, thank goodness.

1335. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1332 “He is killed conveniently in the first issue to throw the hard core fans reading the comics off the track, we are told the comics are considered canon by Orci, as people start to second guess whether Mitchell’s death in the comics rule out his being in the movie. Brilliant. Then they cleverly resurrect him for the fans reading the comics to prepare them for the film.”

You all do realize how dumb-ass this all sounds, don’t you? Come on, this is just plain nonsensical. Face it, you are tying to talk yourselves into this.

1336. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1321. Actually, AJ, although I consider it a real long shot, I too have thought about the slight possibility that BC is playing Kirk’s brother Sam.

1337. boborci - December 2, 2012

1326 anthony thompson

I’m drowning in the speculation;)

1338. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1317. Montreal Paul, you are making the mistake here of relating this Khan to Space Seed and TWOK. Yes, I agree, we will not see that Khan or those stories. So I am not sure what your point is?

1339. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“I’m drowning in the speculation;) ”

It seems to me that Bob just confirmed that the Enterprise will be seen underwater (i.e. using the word “drowning” here), which confirms that one guy’s story who claimed to have seen the trailer. Very interesting!

1340. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

Yes, Bob, and the waters are both deep and shallow, lots of quicksand…;)

OK – where was I? I doubt it is Mitchell or Khan. I’m thinking Romulan (sans ears… or not?) or Klingon (sans ridges).

Now, did you, Bob Orci, actually say that the villain was an iconic character from the TOS series? Yes/No

If Yes, was the statement the lie you said you would come “clean” about? Yes/No

No time like the present… Unburden yourself here, my dear man. We are here for you!

Ignoring me and these questions will not help you…

1341. Russ - December 2, 2012

Does anybody know what “J.J.” (as in Abrams) actually stands for? Jeff, God of Biscuits, do you know?

1342. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

JJ stands for Jeffrey Jacob.

1343. dontcare - December 2, 2012

@1320. They did mention JTK’s brother, George Samuel Kirk (only Jim calls him Sam), in the comics, and he survived Deneva, but he does not have a family AFAICR.

1344. dontcare - December 2, 2012

Also I gotta say, all this speculation, and no one has wondered about the words “love will be challenged” and what they might mean for Spock and Uhura, I am disappointed in you guys.

1345. Commodore Redshirt - December 2, 2012

1337. boborci – December 2, 2012

” I’m drowning in the speculation;)”

LOL!
boborci, you are a funny man.
I’ll bet you said that in order to watch all the foaming fans react to your use of the word “drowning” ! “Water”. I get it!! ;-)
Let”s just start calling the movie “STAR TREK INTO WETNESS”

btw: I still think you hit a number “0” instead of the letter “o” in the “c0n” incident.

1346. Bird Of Clay - December 2, 2012

1334. i hope they keep that. in my opinion, it was well blended with the plot and an interesting addition to the story.

greetings to all.

1347. Aurore - December 2, 2012

1337. boborci – December 2, 2012
“I’m drowning in the speculation;)”
_______

Oh, yeah….

You’re drowning in a sea of speculation.

And, you’re gOnna rise out of it. It will be quite a sight to see.

Almost as visually stunning as a certain scene* invOlving The Enterprise I would not mind watching….

:))

*If such a scene does indeed exist…

1348. Picard's Fish - December 2, 2012

whatever happened to the Arne Darvin theory?

1349. Mark Lynch - December 2, 2012

If the Enterprise goes swimming, I’m walking… !

1350. Hat Rick - December 2, 2012

At some point both sides will have to concede that we don’t have the answer to who the villain is. But it remains to be seen why the words “Gary Mitchell” would escape the mouth of Karl Urban if in fact Gary Mitchell wasn’t what Cumberbatch was playing.

1351. Craiger - December 2, 2012

What if Cumberbatch is Sam like MJ suggests and what if the Klingons attack the planet he is living on and his Mom is their and gets killed, so Sam decides to wage war against the Klingons? Then Kirk goes rouge to stop Sam from dragging the Federation and the Klingons into war.

1352. cpelc - December 2, 2012

OT –

But Best Buy and Amazon dropped price of TNG-R s2 to $64.99 today. I double checked on my preorder at Amazon and it hadn’t automatically lowered so I cancelled and placed the order again at new price.

Just a heads up for people to check on their pre-orders.

The commenters at TrekCore have been tearing the VFX work apart for s2 but I figure I’ll get it early and if CBS does issue a reworking like they had to for s1 I’ll get it for free for being an early purchaser.

1353. Disinvited - December 2, 2012

#1352. Hat Rick

I thought it was common knowledge that one of the reasons his McCoy is so inspired is that both Urban and his father are ToS fans?

1354. DaddlerTheDalek - December 2, 2012

I think that the Villain could be Lazarus, Garth of Izar, Gary Mitchell or a completely new Character. And don’t forgett the Klingons…

1355. Anthony Thompson - December 2, 2012

1352. cpeic

You obviously don’t understand how it works. Amazon doesn’t change the price on your order until it’s fulfilled. Then you’ll get whatever the lowest price was from the time you placed your order until day of issue. So you may miss out on an even lower price because you cancelled!

1356. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1339. MJ (The Original)

Really? Now you are reaching at straws.

1357. Anthony Thompson - December 2, 2012

1339 MJ

Or Bob could just be messing with our minds again. That’s one of his favorite hobbies, after all. : )

1358. Disinvited - December 2, 2012

Apparently, as of 11/29/12 Paramount has submitted what’s being listed as STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Trailer A to the various ratings boards:

http://albertafilmratings.ca/recentclasstrailers.aspx

and it’s length is 1:03

JAWS 4D:We’re gonna need a bigger starship…

1359. Tom - December 2, 2012

WHO FLEW THE ENTERPRISE UNDER THE SEA?!

J-J-A-brams!!!

1360. Gary S. - December 2, 2012

1357. and Bob is good at it too:)
Watching the Mars Rising Docuseries, Narrated by Shatner .
So, you caould say that I am staying in the mood .
It is on the Science Channel or Science , right now.

1361. Tom - December 2, 2012

There are rumors that Paramount Japan is expecting a visit from Abrams, Burke, Pine and Cumby. I have a feeling they are going to unveil the teaser anytime this week. WOOO! I have also read that STiD will be released there in September. Is Paramount compensating for that by playing the teaser there first?

These marketing plans are getting intriguing by the minute!

1362. Aurore - December 2, 2012

Star Trek : The Abyssal Frontier (?)

….Outstanding…..

:)

1363. Timbucktoo - December 2, 2012

Garth. Star fleet officer. Fleet captain. Supernatural powers. Can appear young. Kirk’s hero. Eloquent but mad soliloquies. Attempted planetary germicide. “Epic chess game” reference in synopsis is a dead giveaway folks. Watch “Whom the gods destroy”… It might as well be titled “queen to queen’s level three.”

They just gave ux the villain.

1364. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 2, 2012

Chris Pine is really going to Tokyo … There are many chances that this news is true, link below:

http://news.benedictcumberbatchfanjp.org/2012/11/st2star-trek-in-43a3.html

Where is Anthony again?

1365. Gary S. - December 2, 2012

Queens to queens level three was jut a password phrase .
There was no actual chess game in that episode .

1366. Starfleet Sideburns - December 2, 2012

@1343: George Kirk does have a wife and kid in the comics. And apparently Jim calls him “George” in the reboot timeline, not “Sam” as he did in TOS. Just sayin’, though you may not care as your screen name suggests. ;)

1367. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

I fail to understand why people who’ve read the IDW comic of “Where No Man…” would have such a hard time believing that Mitchell might come back? Don’t forget that in TOS’ WNM he could also stop his vital signs and appear dead at will… everyone seems to have forgotten THAT little tidbit.

He was adrift in a photon tube (ala the regenerating Spock in “Wrath of Khan”/”Search for Spock”) and at the time he was ‘killed’ on Delta Vega, he was nearly a demigod… he might just be taking a little nap.

To me a WNM prologue seems the perfect opening sequence for the new movie. A quick recap of WNM, then you see a psychotic demigod officer, seemingly killed by Spock (hence their ‘rematch’ later on in the spoiler pics), and then cast adrift into space. And inside the tube? An injured Mitchell, playing possum, is slowly regenerating… growing stronger….

1368. Tom - December 2, 2012

@1364 Yeah, and that was linked to a website that, from what I hear is the Japanese equivalent of the Associated Press.

1369. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1367. Sebastian S.

I didn’t forget it. But closed minded people only see things their way and are not even open to other theories.

1370. Gary S. - December 2, 2012

1367,Sounds plausible, but ,I think the synopsis was deliberately vague so that the theories would continue .
the synopsis wasnt meant to give answers .
It was meant to provoke more questions , and it worked.

1371. Elias Javalis - December 2, 2012

Say..1:03 for the teaser.. Just like the Prometheus trailer from last December!!

1372. Gary S. - December 2, 2012

I hope the final product inspires a more positive fan reaction than Prometheus did .

1373. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1369 Montreal Paul~

I suppose I shouldn’t have said ‘everyone’ forgot; perhaps ‘most’ seemed to forget would’ve been more accurate. ;-)

But yes, I very much believe the ending of the IDW comic was left wide open for a sequel. Gary played dead in the TOS’ version (early on in the story, in fact). By the end of the story, he was even more powerful. No reason why a phaser rifle to the body would’ve stopped him completely….

1374. Well Of Souls - December 2, 2012

Was Jeff, God of Biscuits, JJ himself posting here? hmmm…

1375. Gary S. - December 2, 2012

Trekweb is reporting that Cumberbatch is going to Japan to promote Sherlock.

1376. Craiger - December 2, 2012

Thought of something else could Into Darkness mean if Sam Kirk is the bad guy would Jim Kirk be willing to kill his own brother in order to prevent war with the Klingons?

1377. Commodore Redshirt - December 2, 2012

So no one else thinks the villain will be a super-powered Lt. Kyle? He IS British….
and he IS canon….
and he would be in a SF uniform…
AND there is no info to contradict it.
Oh well, maybe the ST INTO WETNESS teaser/preview will answer the questions.
;-)

1378. Rich Civil - December 2, 2012

The mention of the crew being only family Kirk has left makes me think of his brother having a role in the film.

1379. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@ 1335
“You all do realize how dumb-ass this all sounds, don’t you? Come on, this is just plain nonsensical. Face it, you are tying to talk yourselves into this.”

Of course I do. I’m not invested in the outcome in any way, this is all sort of like going to Vegas and dropping a $100 at the craps tables while waiting for the show to start. I’m not sure the same can be said for others here.

Be that as it may, there’s plenty of precedent for the resurrection of Mitchell in the comics, all of which will be simplified for the film audience, as was the completely unnecessary countdown comic for the first film. Again, I’m not saying that Gary Mitchell is the villain, but there is no reason why he can’t be at this point, and certainly not based on the comic alone.

The bottom line is Bob Orci said he lied about something, and until we know what that is, or how sweeping the implications, there’s no way we can rule out Mitchell.

Per Spock — “If you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. Improbable or not, Mitchell has not been eliminated as impossible yet. Not one of your arguments against Mitchell is iron clad at this point.

And I don’t remember if it was you who said it or not, but the casting of Benicio Del Torro proves nothing about the motivations of the producers with respect to the character, we don’t even know which character he was being approached to play. Del Torro is a well recognized international star, as is Cumberbatch, a significant factor for Star Trek which did quite poor box office outside of the US. Del Torro is a fine actor who could easily play any character besides Latino, including Mitchell. However, he’s too old to play Mitchell, but by the same token, Cumberbatch strikes me as too young to play Khan. The success of Star Trek as a blockbuster franchise depends on its ability to draw larger box office outside the US, and how recognizable the character villain is from canon is absolutely the last consideration the producers have to make to grow their audience. The fact the villain comes from canon (which my be the lie), is merely for the benifit of the fans (like nonsensically calling Vulcan’s moon Delta Vega), not the linchpin to guarantee audience interest.

1380. Harry Ballz - December 2, 2012

“STAR TREK INTO WETNESS”??

Sounds like Uhura might have a bigger part in this movie than originally thought.

1381. This is going to be a long year - December 2, 2012

They said the 9 minutes would only be released with the 3D Hobbit right?

So the first scene must be something that will showcase the 3D wizardry of this movie otherwise why not attach it to the 2D Hobbit?

Just a hunch but I wouldn’t be surprised if we are still left in the dark who Cumby is playing. Would JJ Abrams want us to dissect it for the next 6 months?

Blind guess: Captain Peter Weller anchors the scene and scraps with some Klingons on/in-orbit of a war-torn world.

1382. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

1330. Red Dead Ryan – December 2, 2012

I will also add, that Mitchell’s powers were similar to Palpatine’s, which, made them both extremely powerful, but not immortal. Not by a long shot. Neither were “God-like” in any sense of the word.

***

You have very selective memory, RDR, which causes you to be wrong.

In WNMHGB, Gary Mitchell could conjure objects into being. That is indeed god-like, and far beyond what Palpatine could do. If you were to measure Gary Mitchell’s powers by Marvel comics standards, he would be an Omega Level mutant, the most powerful type — and his powers were GROWING.

I’m afraid you are trying too hard to salvage whatever slim chance remains to be right about Khan, so you are trying not to see facts which disfavor your theory. You in particular enjoy being able to proclaim how right you are, so when you see that opportunity slowly disappearing with the steady release of facts which do not favor the Khan theory, you probably feel you’re being deprived of a future chance to gloat.

But you shouldn’t get so attached to data, because it changes, and each time it does, the conclusions it is possible to draw from it also change.

1383. Joseph Mirarchi - December 2, 2012

All the the phrases used in this Release seem to be buzz words to subliminally link our thoughts back to episodes of the original series. I look forward to seeing the movie (including its’ previews that will show before The Hobbit on 12/14/12)!!!!!!!!!!

1384. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

Love data, ignore reputation. Leave the noisy ego behind.

1385. jelly - December 2, 2012

1381- “Just a hunch but I wouldn’t be surprised if we are still left in the dark who Cumby is playing. Would JJ Abrams want us to dissect it for the next 6 months?”

I wouldn’t be surprised if we are left in the dark all the way until the end of the movie. Kind of like the Dark Knight Rises plot

1386. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1367 “To me a WNM prologue seems the perfect opening sequence for the new movie. A quick recap of WNM, then you see a psychotic demigod officer, seemingly killed by Spock (hence their ‘rematch’ later on in the spoiler pics), and then cast adrift into space. And inside the tube? An injured Mitchell, playing possum, is slowly regenerating… growing stronger….”

You all really need to look at this sort of a scenario from someone outside of being a hardcore Trek fan. This just sounds really dumb-ass, folks. Sounds like more of a Marvel comics movie than Trek.

I guarantee you that the movie will not open with something like this scenario. 100% Guaranteed!

1387. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

Note who else is going with Benedict Cumberbatch to Japan in the article? – Chris Pine, JJ Abrams and Bryan Burk!

Also note what is advertised on the left hand side of the article – BBC’s Sherlock series DVDs. Also note that the Hobbit is released in Japan on 14
December…

It should be pretty obvious what is going on here and Benedict Cumberbatch is the link – promoting Sherlock, Hobbit and STID.

Also I suspect, now that the first Hobbit has premiered and being readied for released on the worldwide cinema, Peter Jackson is turning his attention to finishing the second Hobbit movie and doing trailer(s). I’ll give you one guess what deadline he needs to meet to have the first trailer ready to precede which movie – first release date for STID, coincidentally here in NZ on 16 May 2013. The Hobbit – An Unexpected Journey opens in cinemas, just 10 minutes drive away, at 12.01am 12 December 2012 (NZ time).

Time will tell…

As for harnessing of energy for good or ill –
I read an article or was told by someone (quite likely a midwife) that if we could harness the kind of powerful energy needed and produced by one average healthy woman in *labour, there would be enough power to light up the entire city of Chicago for 24 hours – for REAL. Now, just suppose that in Star Trek’s alternate universe, someone had worked out how to do that… and more…

Kinda explains why I was so stuffed (and a bit euphoric as well) afterwards. They don’t call it LABOUR for nothing.

1388. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

I see that Bob has disappeared again and has not answered my simple questions. Oh dear – what to do?

Come on, Bob Orci. How hard can it be?…:)

Look – breaking confidentiality contracts be damned!…;)

1389. dontcare - December 2, 2012

@1366. Ok, I have not been able to read the story he appears in, because the series has been selling out at every comic book store near where I live for months now, and I was just going from general facts about the story gleaned from reviews of the issue, thanks for the clarification. As for my name, it is simply a statement that I do not care about who Cumberbatch is playing, whatever the role is, I am fine with it.

1390. Well Of Souls - December 2, 2012

@ 1380. Harry Ballz
LMAO!!! Zoe is sooooo easy on the eyes. Click on my name. Thought it would make for a nice distraction on trying to anticipate who the villainous character is.

1391. Disinvited - December 2, 2012

As any fan of VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA knows: You can find a lot of darkness there.

BTW, where are the leaks? If the trailers are being rated by film ratings boards the world over, there’s got to be leaks as to their contents.

1392. Peter Loader - December 2, 2012

My theory: Section 31 reanimates the alternate Mitchell using a Red Matter device and everything goes to hell.

1393. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

Where would they get the red matter or its device from? Nero had to wait 25 years for prime Spock to come through the wormhole in order to get hold of it and destroy Vulcan for starters. However, by the end of the movie, both the Narada and the Jellyfish containing the red matter were destroyed.

The red matter was made by Spock prime in the prime universe to destroy the supernova in the prime universe. A side effect of detonating the red matter was that it caused the Narada and the Jellyfish to be pulled through and back 129 years in time into an alternate universe. As far as I know, there is no way for either side to cross to the other.

Unless, of course, in the meantime, Bob and co. have got the Bishops and Bell working on the case…:) Personally, I hope not.

1394. Peter Loader - December 2, 2012

1393.

Bound to be a few drops of the stuff floating around in space after the destruction of the Narada. Doubt it all got sucked into the black hole.

Remember they shot some scenes at a laser facility?

1395. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1386 MJ (the original)~

“You all really need to look at this sort of a scenario from someone outside of being a hardcore Trek fan. This just sounds really dumb-ass, folks. Sounds like more of a Marvel comics movie than Trek.

I guarantee you that the movie will not open with something like this scenario. 100% Guaranteed!”

_________________________________

And what do you think your incessant fanboyish wanking about “Khan Khan Khan” always sounds like? EXACTLY the same thing… only less fitting to what we know of the movie so far (and it’s damn little, I admit).

But you know no more than the rest of us. You should stop pretending that you have some kind of ‘inside track,’ because you don’t. You can’t “guarantee” anything anymore than I or anybody else can. You sound like an arrogant, pompous fart bag when you say things like that…

1396. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

And I will back up my guarantee here as well — if Trek 2013 opens up with a “Mitchell reanimation scenario”, then I will never post on Trekmovie.com ever again.

1397. Harry Ballz - December 2, 2012

@1390.

Thanks, Well Of Souls!

I’m glad SOMEBODY got the joke!

1398. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

Oh, Harry. I got the joke too. How could I not coming, as it was, from the Harry Ballz? LOL

1399. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

#1396 – Hmmm. Yes, I agree. It is a possibility.

1400. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1396

How about you double the stakes; you’ll keep that same agreement if it’s not Khan as well. Deal? ;-)

Me? I’m not guaranteeing anything. I’m not that arrogant and I don’t work on the movie. I’m offering my WNMHGB prologue as a likely scenario. Nothing more. If it opens that way? I won’t crow about it, I’d just be pleased. If it opened well with another equally intriguing scenario, I’d STILL be pleased. But I’m not going to arrogantly proclaim that anything I present here on these threads is anything more than speculation.

I’m not Bob Orci, so I don’t know….

1401. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1401 Strike my last: That a reply to MJ’s post #1397, not #1396

Damn post counts keep changing on me….

1402. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“How about you double the stakes; you’ll keep that same agreement if it’s not Khan as well. Deal? ;-)”

Only if Anthony matches me by abandoning the site and takes it down…I mean, it is his his sourced story that I am really going out on a limb and trusting him on here, when everybody else thinks he got duped. ;-)

Seriously, if their is some dumb-ass Mitchell reanimation sequence in the movie, I will back my guarantee by never posting again. That is how confident I am that they won’t be stupid enough to reanimate a dead Gary Mitchell from a comic book story “nobody” read.

1403. Commodore Redshirt - December 2, 2012

Just remember that Boborci “KHAN’t” tell us any details.

1404. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1400. Sebastian S.

I know what you mean. I have no idea who Cumberbatch will be playing. I offered two different scenarios with the infomation we have presently… Gary Mitchell or Gary Seven. But I am pretty sure that, with the info we have and what we know, that it will NOT be Khan. Although I do not know who.

The only reason I suggested the other two was because certain people like MJ and Ryan say that all signs point directly to Khan. I just simply showed that it can be looked at differently to come up with a different conclusion… in fact, a majority of people see that too. :) I just find it amazing that certain people say it is Khan as if it was a fact and they had already seen the movie. Fact is, they have no idea either but they strut around feeling that they know more than anyone else here.

All I really want from this movie is a good Trek adventure that I will hopefully see quite a few times. I don’t care who the villain is. It could be anyone. I just want it well written and well acted. That’s it.

1405. Dadio - December 2, 2012

Bob Orci is Anthony”s source for Khan. Thats the lie

1406. Commodore Redshirt - December 2, 2012

1404. (the real) Montreal_Paul – December 2, 2012

“… I don’t care who the villain is. It could be anyone. I just want it well written and well acted.”

I agree 100%,

1407. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“I’m not that arrogant and I don’t work on the movie.”

I am not as arrogant as you make me out to be. As I have tried to post countless times here, the Khan deal is largely based on Anthony’s article that was confirmed by multiple inside sources. The other circumstantial evidence (Del Toro and the obscure Orci clue) I provided only act to support Anthony’s confirmed story. However, these other items of evidence did lead me to predict is was Khan several months before Anthony’s confirmed story — so Anthony’ story merely codified my prediction.

So you are mistaking my “arrogance” for “confidence.” And if I come across like some fart bag or whatever, so be it., as something tells me that his fart bag is going to be cutting a big stinky one if your face on December 15th. ;-)

1408. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1407. “Bob Orci is Anthony”s source for Khan. Thats the lie.”

I will not deny that this has crossed my mind since Bob admitted he lied about something. However, I find this implausible, as Anthony’s article said that more than one source confirmed it. And I don’t want to believe that there was some deliberate and organized plot by the Supreme Court to dupe Anthony — if that is so, then I will lose a lot of respect for Orci and company.

1409. dontcare - December 2, 2012

@1402. Well you certainly know less than nothing about comic books, just makes you sound like an idiot, the IDW Star Trek ongoing has been selling out every single issue every month, second and third printings as well. The IDW Star Trek series is extremely popular and selling very, very well, if you had bothered to do even a minimum of research about it you would know that.

And before you try to say some dumb crap about that just being sales to children, you should know that 95 percent of comics are sold to adults, most of whom do not plan to give them to a child (according to comic industry surveys).

1410. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1407. MJ (The Original)

“something tells me that his fart bag is going to be cutting a big stinky one if your face on December 15th. ;-)”

Now THAT’S arrogance! ;)

1411. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1411. 99.9% (or some number really close to that) of the movie-going public worldwide who will see Star Trek 2013 will not have read the Gary Mitchell comic we are referring to here. That is a fact!!!

I am sorry if saying this so bluntly hurts the feelings of hardcore fans who read these comics, but it is what it is.

1412. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1412. THANKS!!!!! I do try. ;-)

1413. dontcare - December 2, 2012

MJ, no that is not a fact, in fact it is mathematically impossible because there aren’t enough people in the world to make it true in relation to the number of issues of the IDW series that have been sold, once again your lack of even basic research and ignorant bias of what people in the world are actually doing/reading just makes you a fool.

1414. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1413. Go ahead and believe that if you must and keep on with your name calling of me then.

Whatever, dude.

1415. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

Oh stop it, you two! And MJ – at times it is hard to tell the difference between your “confidence” and your “arrogance”.

As for being “dumb ass”, personally I think a Khan/Botany Bay scenario could be just as dumb as any Mitchell scenario. I am hoping for neither. I’ve already had way too much Khan and Mitchell and I haven’t even seen the movie. Enough already. Anyway, I am way more interested in how our protagonists, especially Kirk, handles circumstances of fear and brutality etc created by a villain than in the villain or villains themselves.

Villains are, by and large, f*ckwitted, psychologically retarded bores. Hitler was such, but unfortunately they can still do a lot of damage, given the right conditions. Whether they have always been that way, or have become like that, is not of great fundamental importance to me. I fail to understand this obsession, one that has been central within this site for two and a half years at least…Duh.

1416. discospock - December 2, 2012

1407
Really classy there MJ, thats really inappropriate and unclassy saying your going to fart in peoples faces cause your right.

Anthony please this is trolling in its worst form, please help us with this

1417. discospock - December 2, 2012

1414 MJ, your the one telling people that your going to deficate in their faces.
So vulgar.

1418. discospock - December 2, 2012

Reporting you to Anthony. Totally uncalled for

1419. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

Just did the math, BTW, based on Trek 2009 and Trek Countdown 2009:

Number of people seeing Trek 2009 — from Box Office Mojo I calculated about 30M tickets sold; being conservative to account from repeat viewings, I lowered this number to 20M people seeing the movie.

From: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/IDW_Publishing#Sales_charts
— from this site you can see that number of issues sold of the Countdown series peaked just below 15,000.

So, dividing 15,000/20,000,00 = 0.08%

So taking 100% – 0.08% = 99.92 %

There is your math.

Next???

1420. PaulB - December 2, 2012

#1417/1418 – Relax, cupcake. If Anthony P. hasn’t banned MJ by now, he never will, no matter what MJ posts.

And MJ didn’t say he would “deficate” in anyone’s face. First, the word you wanted to use is “defecate.” Second, MJ said he’d fart, not defecate. If you can’t handle a comment like that, used in the not-too-serious context in which MJ used it, then you’ll never survive on this or any other Internet forum.

1421. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“1414 MJ, your the one telling people that your going to deficate in their faces.”

Thanks for taking this completely out of context. I was returning Sebastian’s joke of calling me a fart bag, and made a return joke on farting back at him. And since when is a fart “defecation”?

You are kind of the sick puppy on this one dude. Try reading the posts and context next time before accusing people of things they did not do.

Anthony, I am reporting this response from discospock to you.

1422. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1422. Thanks PaulB. Sheesh!!!!!

1423. OldDarth - December 2, 2012

My money is on Garth not Mitchell.

1424. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

BTW, I know the real discospock, and he “retired” from posting on this site a long time ago — he even announced his “retirement” in a post on this site. And he never engaged in this form of banter like this guy is doing. This is most likely a troll trying to make trouble.

1425. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

dontcare,

Did you see the match I provided above? Comments?

You challenged me to provide the match, and I provided it. Looking forward to your response?

1426. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

meant “math”, not “match”…and I typed it wrong twice….OMG. :-)

1427. Jonboc - December 2, 2012

“Seriously, if their is some dumb-ass Mitchell reanimation sequence in the movie, I will back my guarantee by never posting again.”

…at least not under the MJ moniker. lol

1428. Peter Loader - December 2, 2012

There’s an alternate universe where Gary Mitchell reigns supreme, a God a far as that universe’s inhabitants are concerned. But, Mitchell is bored, there’s nothing new or exciting in his verse… he want’s more… to become a full on God. Then, one day Mitchell detects an unusual event… the arrival of the remnants of a mysterious craft sucked into his universe through a rift created by a black hole, and a substance that he has never seen before… Red Matter.
After some preliminary experimentation Mitchell discovers that Red Matter can further enhance his abilities… he wants more… using his Red Matter enhanced abilities he creates a rift into our universe and travels there…

1429. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

From synopsis – “they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.”

As people continue to argue and speculate with never ending repetition – the wheel of *samsara* operates really well here, perhaps it might be time for some to take a little leap off the “wheel” and discuss/explain what “the fleet and everything it stands for” means.

Obviously we can assume that the fleet is Starfleet, however, has it ever been made that clear as to what the actual influencing philosophies, ideals, moral codes are, which the fleet is supposed to stand for? If not, perhaps, we could discover and understand what they could have been and how easily these ideals appear to have been compromised.

1430. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1402 MJ (the original)

They wouldn’t NEED to worry about being faithful to the IDW comic; can’t you understand? The (hypothetical) “Where No Man…” backstory could easily fit into a 9 min. prologue sequence, that’s what I said. And enough people saw the TOS version, so they’d be familiar enough with it to understand what’s going on. Even if not, Orci and Kurtzman have a knack for relaying massive chunks of information visually. No problems there. No one has to read the comics; anymore than they ‘had’ to read the Countdown series to get Star Trek 2009…

And I didn’t say Mitchell would be resurrected in the WNM prologue; I said that the end of the prologue would be his photon tube drifting in space (with a presumably regenerating Mitchell aboard), to be recovered/discovered later. He could be revived after the credits sometime later in the movie. Again, I’m guessing. Not arrogant enough to guarantee something I’m not personally involved in (unlike some). If I’m wrong? So what?

But you mean to tell me your Khan theory is based SOLELY on Anthony’s anonymous source and your other so-called ‘clues’ (del Toro, a typo from Orci and other hispanic actors being tested? How do you know they were testing for Khan? Maybe del Toro was testing for the Weller role)? Your evidence is far flimsier than anything the Mitchell argument has presented. Face it; you don’t know it’s Khan any more than I ‘know’ it’s Gary Mitchell. Admit it, and move on…

My favored scenario (the one I voted for in the last poll) would’ve been a new character. But if it HAS to be a canon character? Gary Mitchell is a far more logical “one man weapon of mass destruction” who’s capable of ‘detonating the fleet’ than Khan would be. He was also a demigod who is easily capable of faking his own death (he did it in sickbay in the TOS version), not to mention creating air and food to live on if he needed…

Khan got his ass handed to him by Kirk with a paper towel dispenser-looking prop in engineering. Hardly a one-man weapon….

1431. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

#1430 – Oh no, you mean Gary Mitchell is a bit like William Bell, as in he (Mitchell) finds red matter, messes with it in order to create the big bang only to find that he needs a *woman just as in William Bell’s case. William Bell needs Olivia Dunham’s unique and strong feminine energy to make a big bang and create a new universe. Enter Alice Eve as Gary Mitchell’s big bang.

*should anyone be surprised? I’m not.

It’s hard to explain…Bob Orci, are you getting this? What say you?

Star Wars? Really? Sheesh – not when they have created a series like Fringe!

1432. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1430 / Sebastian S.

We’ll see in less than 2 weeks. We’ll see.

@1413 / dontcare

I provided you the math you asked for –so where is the heck are you? Funny how you disappeared once I provided the math? What, no more “fool” name calling for me, or saying there aren’t enough people in the world to make my numbers work? Funny, isn’t it, how when I called you bluff and provide you quantitative facts that you all of a sudden disappeared? Or perhaps you did reappear….why is “disco” music suddenly popping into my head? ;-)

1433. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1431 Rose~

Um… I’m not sure I understand your post.
I’m not familiar with “Fringe”, so I don’t know much about Nimoy’s William Bell. Nor did I suggest anything about red matter either (a plot device best left forgotten, IMO). I’m not sure you were replying to my post, but the post # matches mine, so I’m guessing that you might’ve been….

I also never suggested Alice Eve as Dehner, but if she were playing that role, she wouldn’t necessarily have to be Mitchell’s love interest in this universe; she wasn’t even in the IDW version (it was implied she wasn’t aboard because her and McCoy were past lovers and she refused her transfer at Aldebaran).

But even so, she could be a very different Dr. Dehner in this universe. However, the set pics I saw on this site looked like Eve was wearing a variant of Kellerman’s WNMHGB hairstyle, so it wouldn’t surprise me if she were indeed playing Dehner (just a different interpretation).

And again, I’m VERY open to being wrong and being totally (wonderfully) surprised as well….

1434. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1429 “…at least not under the MJ moniker. lol”

Taking a page from the Alien franchise, perhaps my new name could be:

“Jonbocs”

This would imply a more action-oriented and kick-ass version of the poster as compared to the original more horror oriented and lower budget, “Jonboc”.

What do you think?

1435. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

MJ # 1435, # 1420~

Read your ‘math’ and it is nonsense.

It doesn’t matter HOW MANY people have read the IDW book. The movie could tell the WNMHGB story in a 9 minute prologue easily (not saying it will, but that it easily could). It won’t matter who has or hasn’t read the IDW book. The new movie’s box office will no more depend on that (useless) fact any more than ST09 needed people to read the Countdown books before they saw that movie… different mediums. One is not dependent on the other.

I’ve said it twice; please drop that “they won’t make a movie just for fans of the IDW comic book” crap. That’s a smoke screen and you know it….

1436. The Great Bird lives - December 2, 2012

1429- The “Fleet” is a humanitarian, and peacekeeping armada. I, myself get the feeling that we are about to find out who the Great Garth of Izzar really is. The synopsis provided suggesting the enemy from within. Well Garth was very charismatic, and had the power to change shape. If these powers were enhanced, perhaps he discovers he has a high esper rating and takes a trip to the edge of the galaxy. Even before he went crazy he seemed power hungry. If Kirk were called home to intervene with his attempt to take over the Federation Garth would make the fight “Personal” to Kirk. I think its time to watch “Whom Gods Destroy”.

1437. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1435. If you want to disagree with how they will handling the opening of the movie with Gary Mitchell, that’s fine — we an argue that.

But saying that my math in response to dontcares charge that he disagreed with my 99.9% figure is plain wrong. That match is correct. It is repeatable if you want to do the math yourself. The stats are right from Box Office Mojo and IDW # issues sold. These calculations are irrefutable…period!

1438. Classy M - December 2, 2012

It seems Benedict is definitely on his way to Japan. He recorded 2 episodes of the radio show Cabin Pressure this afternoon, and had to rush off to catch his flight. Interesting report of the recording here:

http://cumberbatchcoffeeklatch.tumblr.com/post/37060283021/spoiler-free-description-of-a-cabin-pressure-recording

Which concludes with “the second recording was pretty much the same as the first, except they did the retakes out of order, so that ben could do his first and leave early, so he could rush and get to the airport and fly to tokyo.”

1439. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

Sebastain, these false charges from dontcare below is why my math responds to — you are trying to have a different argument with me (which is fine, but is a different topic), but my math and stats are completely sound and repeatable by anyone and proves my 99.9% figure (i.e. that about 99.9% of people seeing Trek 2013 will not have read the Mitchell comic) conclusively:

“The IDW Star Trek ongoing has been selling out every single issue every month, second and third printings as well. The IDW Star Trek series is extremely popular and selling very, very well, if you had bothered to do even a minimum of research about it you would know that….in fact it is mathematically impossible because there aren’t enough people in the world to make it true in relation to the number of issues of the IDW series that have been sold, once again your lack of even basic research and ignorant bias of what people in the world are actually doing/reading just makes you a fool.”

The above charges from dontcare is what my math responds to, and I have proven dontcare’s charges to be completely without merit and bogus.

1440. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

The high frame rate 3D of The Hobbit is making people sick:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2241758/Hobbit-film-wizardy-left-feeling-sick–Cinema-goers-complain-camera-speeds-3D-effects-caused-headaches-queasiness.html

1441. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

I am 100 percent Poz, that the Enterprise will blow up when it crashes in the water, and that Uhura will die.
And I thnk Sam Kirk will die saving his brother after they have a big battle With Arne Darvin.

1442. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

the same complaints have circulated about 3D as well, everyone is different in what they can tolerate, thats why they have regular versions of the movie playing as well.
This will have zero effect on more movies being filmed in HFR 3D

1443. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1443. FYI — I assume that is you, Jonboc. It’s not me, in case you are wondering? :-)

1444. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

MJ perhaps you should quote Rentrac (the industry standard that computes box office grosses) not Box office mojo, whos operators have nothing to do with the industry.

1445. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

just laying claim to the name.

1446. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1442 @1444 What a bunch of wusses. Heck, many TV’s now broadcast as 120 Hz, twice frame rate of the hobbit. All these people needed to do was sit more towards the back of the theater.

1447. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@1436

I like the idea of the villain using the top secret information from Kirk’s mission to the galactic barrier, to take himself there and imbue the powers of Mitchell into himself, then come back with the goal of re-making Starfleet in his image. It helps explain why they chose WNHGB for the comics at all (if it’s not ultimately Mitchell, or to simply satisfy the hard-core fans desires for Mitchell’s fate in this time-line).

Garth being a contemporary of Pike and Garrovivk strikes me as being much older than Cumberbatch appears — though why a “god” couldn’t appear any way he wishes I do not know. I rather thought Mitchell intentionally added the gray to his hair to suit the image he sought. And to that end I still think it makes Charles Evans a contender. Then again depending on what Orci lied about, or taking your theory into consideration, it could literally be anybody from Starfleet canon …

The whole Return of the Archon conspiracy told in the comic series is also problematic as it suggests a conspiracy within the Federation, and it seems to me if the movie is tied to that at all, Khan and Mitchell are not the villains at all, nor likely anybody else who has been mentioned aside from Garth. Not sure why Orci would tell that story either unless it was related to the movie somehow, or just because he wanted to. But suggesting the conspiracy at all is certainly dark, and ties nicely into the synopsis, not to mention influencing he way he would depict Starfleet in any future films, if not the primary story line.

1448. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1446. I don’t see on Rentrack the ability to search for box office stats from past movies?

1449. TrekMadeMeFat - December 2, 2012

Still have a few doubts about Khan, but not buying Mitchell at all.

At all.

1450. The Great Bird lives - December 2, 2012

…And to those naysayers who think the Enterprise would NOT be able to operate under water, I say this:

A Starship could survive underwater as easily as a submarine- with primary, and secondary propulsion temporarily disabled, shields down, and inertial dampeners at full, Enterprise could user her reaction control thrusters to propel itself forward while cargo holds could be used as ballast tanks. Enterprise can survive much harsher environments then ocean water.

1451. The Great Bird lives - December 2, 2012

1447- I’ve always been curious as to the endeavors of Captain Garth. Other than the battle at Axxanar very little has been done to document his extensive exploits as Fleet Captain in Starfleet. But Kirk spoke of his ingenious strategies- that and the mention of queen to queens level three in the episode “whom Gods Destroy” makes me think of the epic chess game mentioned in the synopsis…

1452. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

1448 MJ,
Guess thats because since i work in the exhibition end of the industry I can see grosses reported going all the way back to when Rentrac first began. :) sucks to be you i guess

1453. Red Shirt Diaries - December 2, 2012

Guys, BoxOfficeMojo box office data and Rentrack usually differ less than 10%.

1454. Jonbocs - December 2, 2012

Mark my words when its in the water it blows up, has nothing to do with under normal conditions not being able to. has to do with having a big hole in its hull, and the warp core breach

1455. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1454. See, making very bold predictions that others will inevitably doubt isn’t so hard. ;-)

1456. Jonboc - December 2, 2012

“Taking a page from the Alien franchise, perhaps my new name could be:

“Jonbocs”

This would imply a more action-oriented and kick-ass version of the poster as compared to the original more horror oriented and lower budget, “Jonboc”.

What do you think?”

Nah…someone has tried a few posts up and, unlike Aliens, while somewhat informative, the posts just didn’t seem to improve upon the original…although I may be somewhat biased. :)

1457. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1415 “Still have a few doubts about Khan, but not buying Mitchell at all.”

Kudos to you for not caving into the Mitchell fanboy hysteria that has taken over this site in the past week.

1458. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1458. Ah, I didn’t think that was you, dude.

1459. Phil - December 2, 2012

Just about a thousand short posts away from setting the record. Let the speculation continue.

1460. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1457. MJ (The Original)
“Kudos to you for not caving into the Mitchell fanboy hysteria that has taken over this site in the past week.”

…..or the fanboy hysteria regarding Khan…

Sorry MJ.. fair is fair.

1461. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1447 “I like the idea of the villain using the top secret information from Kirk’s mission to the galactic barrier, to take himself there and imbue the powers of Mitchell into himself, then come back with the goal of re-making Starfleet in his image. It helps explain why they chose WNHGB for the comics at all (if it’s not ultimately Mitchell, or to simply satisfy the hard-core fans desires for Mitchell’s fate in this time-line).”

Now there is a quasi-Mitchell connection with at least some common sense to connect it to the comic and the new movie. This scenario is at least not DOA like the bogus Mitchell resurrection crap others keep trumpeting here.

1462. The Great Bird lives - December 2, 2012

I don’t care if it’s a Tribble/Targ crossbreed who’s the villain it just better be an ass kicking, mind blowing, logic splitting villain that keeps my heart racing in the theater, and my arse on the edge of the seat.
Let those who wish to speculate, speculate. It’s thought provoking to me, and it would be great if there were a thread where we could share ideas for a new television series, and “speculate” about what the powers-that-be may, or may not be conjuring up for the future.
Live long, and ponder

1463. The Great Bird lives - December 2, 2012

@1461,
Thanks

1464. Phil - December 2, 2012

@1450. Galileo launched a probe into Jupiters atmosphere, which stopped functioning when it was crushed at about 22 earth atmospheres, I’m guessing that’s about 308 PSI. At 100 feet below the water surface you are dealing with about 440 PSI. All the exterior of a starship needs to resist is radiation, and contain 14 PSI from interior environmental support, and at in concert with the main structure to resist flight pressures. Any air or starship that is unfortunate to get stuck in an ocean would be crushed by water pressure in short order.

1465. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

If the Enterprise is strong enough to not break apart when getting pulled into a black hole, then 440 PSI is child’s play. Tri-titanuim is a wonderful thing! Besides, with future tech, the Enterprise has to be at least as pressure resistant as today’s nuke submarines.

No big deal!

1466. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

dmduncan

I see your points. They are well made. I do agree that the evidence at hand does suggest that the villain may be Gary Mitchell as opposed to Khan. And it could be Garth of Izar, or someone else entirely.

I will gladly admit the (possible) error of my ways if/when I happen to be (officially) proven wrong.

But not a minute before. :-)

1467. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

There is no reason why the Enterprise could not survive being submerged in an ocean. Obviously, the main issue here would be to keep the ship from sinking to the bottom. But I would have to think the engines could still function, along with the inertia dampers and artificial gravity systems as they would in space, with or without a little modification. As long as the structural integrity is sound, it shouldn’t be much of a problem, even for a somewhat abstract and unconventionally-designed ship such as the Enterprise.

A ship travelling at faster-than-light speeds is obviously taking a lot more stress on the hull, not just from the extreme inertia, but also from radiation and particles, debris, and gasses passing by the ship.

1468. Lurker - December 2, 2012

Bob – the lead actors in Fringe should start showing up in Bad Robot movies.

Similar to how Nolan uses his “gang”.

1469. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1466

RDR~

Wow. An (almost) open mind…. ;-D

1470. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

#1469.

I (don’t) like to lose.

;-)

1471. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

That was meant for Sebastien S.

Damn typos…..or is it that damn post-number shift again?

Arrgh!

1472. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

Sebastian, for the record, I admit its slightly possible that Mitchell might be the villain and Anthony might have been duped by the Supreme Court (I’ve said this before, so this is nothing new from me here).

What I don’t buy though in the slightest though is some ridiculous cockamamie resurrection scenario resulting from that comic book Mitchell story. That is one of the dumbest ideas I have ever run across on this web site.

1473. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1472. MJ (The Original)

Yes, it’s about as ridiculously cockamamie as a pale skinned, blue eyed Brit as Khan. ;)

1474. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1473. Or a woman playing Starbuck. Or Johny Depp playing the American Indian Tonto. Or Lucy Lui playing Watson.

1475. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1474. MJ (The Original)

Gary Mitchell not really being dead racks right up there with all of them, You speak as though your theory is sound while everyone else’s is ridiculous. I think that is where people think you come across as arrogant.

1476. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

#1461 – Actually, given who Gary Mitchell was supposed to be, I don’t think the notion that he has self-healing abilities and so makes a comeback, when everyone thought he was dead, is necessarily any more of a “crap” idea as anything else. It is just not your preferred “crap” idea. Oh dear…what to do?

Anyway, I am thinking of Benedict Cumberbatch playing a ridgeless Klingon or a young Sybok, Spock’s half-brother, or even Kirk’s older brother, George Samuel Kirk. Both brothers were, or felt as if they were, outcasts. It’s all about *right* time, place, circumstance.

#1433 – What you wrote made me think of what appears to be going on within the Fringe series so far, as at the end of the fourth season, which I have just seen on DVD.

I know you never mentioned who Alice Eve might be playing or anything like that. I was getting carried away with my own speculation and saw a role that Alice Eve could play. That’s all.

I have absolutely no idea what STID is about, other than what the synopsis suggests, which is pretty general in nature.
—————————————————————————————————-
Most of our society’s laws at present are based on Judeo-Christian principles, among the most important being what is contained within the Ten Commandments. What I was wondering is whether these same moral values are as important to the 23rd century people and to Starfleet as they are supposed to be for people now (or are they?) and how they are upheld.

There are other moral codes, very similar, to what is contained within the Ten Commandments, eg Buddhist precepts (and their counterparts).

Is there any real clarity as to what it is that Starfleet stands for, at its core? I suspect not, just as there is little clarity today – just a lot of misunderstanding and cynicism.

Basic Buddhist Precepts (my understanding)
Abstain from killing, causing harm
Abstain from taking the not given
Abstain from false speech
Abstain from sexual misconduct
Abstain from taking intoxicants

Counterparts –
Development of (universal) loving kindness
Development of open handed generosity
Development of truthful communication
Development of contentment
Development of mindfulness, awareness.

Interestingly, when the Five Precepts get expanded to 10, four of those are connected with speech/communication.

Please do not become all pissy about this post. It is just something to think about, given the words in the synopsis… It is about understanding what Starfleet “stands for”, what it is based on and why. The ideas above (quoting precepts etc) are not new, nor are they totally exclusive.

1477. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1476 “I don’t think the notion that he has self-healing abilities and so makes a comeback, when everyone thought he was dead, is necessarily any more of a “crap” idea as anything else.”

Yes it is — because the back-story that nearly kills him and requires resurrection is, as far as the movie-going public is concerned, an obscure comic that over 99.9% of the people seeing the movie won’t be familiar with. So why would the writers back themselves into a corner like this to explain the entire WNMHGB comic story and Mitchell’s death, and then have to further include an astonishing resurrection to get him to be the villain for this movie??? This is a dumb-ass idea., and I’ll repeat — I guarantee you that a Mitchell resurrection scenario will not be in this movie…period!

1478. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1477. Again, my view is backed by Anthony’s confirmed story that it is Khan. So I am very confident. And let’s face it, the Mitchel scenario crowd does not have a similar confirmed story to back up their theory. So I am confident, yes.

1479. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

meant @1475

1480. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1478. MJ (The Original)

Anthony’s story is NOT confirmed!!! That’s the thing you don’t see. It hasn’t been confirmed and is just a rumour from an inside source that Anthony reported on.

It holds no more credence that the Jeff biscuit guy saying the Enterprise is seen underwater in a trailer.

Hearsay and rumour, my friend. NOTHING has been confirmed, MJ.

I put more faith is JJ Abrams denying it is Khan. I put more faith in Urban saying it is Mitchell. I put more faith in Pegg saying that it isn’t Khan. Anthony’s story is still a rumour… never been confirmed. He stands by his story like you stand by your belief. But that doesn’t make it any less a rumour.

1481. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

Lets just look at the comics, which Orci has said are canon (which may be a lie), for clues and potential.

1. WNMHGB — Gary Mitchell, must be resurrected a la Spock in ST III (Yawn)
2. Galileo 7 — nothing new here to be used in the movie
3. Operation: Annihilate! — Kirk’s Brother George and the mind controlling creatures
4. Vulcan’s Vengence — Romulans once again the villains (YAWN)
5. Return of the Archons — Deep, dark, sinister plot within the Federation possibly involving mind control
6. Tribbles — Tribbles run amok and are stopped yet again (Let’s hope not)
7. The Apple — one word: Vaal (again, lets hope not)
8. Delta Vega — the one around Vulcan (again). Nothing to see here folks …
9. Mirror Mirror — doubtful to have anything to do with this time line
10. Countdown — ??

So basically, its Mitchell, George Kirk, Romulans, and/or some unseen sinister Starfleet conspiracy, or has absolutely nothing to do with the comics.

1482. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

There is something else people are forgetting. Bob Orci said that the ongoing comics will have clues in them for the sequel.

http://trekmovie.com/2011/12/27/writer-clues-to-sequel-in-star-trek-ongoing-comics-preview-of-issue-4/

1483. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1481. Yes, but the first issue of the “Countdown” comics 4-issue set won’t be out until January. Given that comic set is to be the prequel story, why is everyone so worked up over the WNMHGB comic being the prequel? I mean, come on, if that were the case, then they would have waited and released that story in the prequel comics set.

Or perhaps Mitchell will be resurrected in the Countdown series, and will be killed again, thus setting up a 2nd resurrection story for Trek 2013. And yes, they could handle that in an inception style flashback within a flashback, right? LOL

1484. Mark James Tucker a man and his dream - December 2, 2012

Um MJ you do realize that Johnny Depp is part Cherokee right?
And part of the whole reason he wanted to play Tonto, was so that there would be a accurate representation and not a sterotype of a Native American.

As for Starbuck, it was accepted cause they did a complete reboot of the original series, they didnt say everything that came before this still exsist cause its a different timeline or alt universe.

1485. Mark James Tucker a man and his dream - December 2, 2012

Or perhaps Countdown tells a story that is woven around Kirk, Mitchell, Mcoy, Denher’s academy years. just a possibilty

1486. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 2, 2012

Chris Pine definitely is in Tokyo… for What???… my guess STID!

http://www.wireimage.com/search/#events?q=157697605&s=3

:-) ;-)

1487. The Sinfonian - December 2, 2012

Boborci has disappeared again, yes. And he curiously doesn’t answer the question “When Del Toro turned the offered role down, was the script revised to reflect his not being cast?”
.
That’s the money question. Clearly, rewriting the villain Khan, to the villain Phil-Inthee-Blanc… must have been that final delay. This means essentially, yes, Cumby is playing Khan… but not in the final script. The character that would have been nuKhan is instead this Starfleet insider who has “detonated the fleet”.

On the bright side, as soon as we find out this is an almost-Khan character, it means the threequel can be the one to actually use Khan. Ending the sequel with a shot of a ship marked Botany Bay thus becomes that perfect sneaky tag ending again, that was almost used on Star Trek 2009.

1488. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

1487, Disapeared? You ever think that oh I dont know perhaps he has a life, and doesn’t spend all day on the web?
Just a thought, I mean I know thats a pretty big stretch lol/
Just be glad he even posts at all.

1489. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“That’s the money question. Clearly, rewriting the villain Khan, to the villain Phil-Inthee-Blanc… must have been that final delay. This means essentially, yes, Cumby is playing Khan… but not in the final script. The character that would have been nuKhan is instead this Starfleet insider who has “detonated the fleet”.”

I could buy into this. This fits a lof of info we have right now. But it still requires Anthony being duped by his sources, but I guess that could be Orci’s lie.

A lot of if, ans or buts here, but it certainly is more compelling than that crazed resurrection of Mitchell nonsensical theory.

1490. Craiger - December 2, 2012

MJ, whats the point in having Anthony run Trekmovie if his sources can’t even be trusted and are using him to feed disinformation? Didn’t Anthony create this site to get Trek fans closer to the people that are involved with Trek?

1491. Anthony Thompson - December 2, 2012

1489. MJ

It looks to me like you and all the other Khan promoters are readying your excuses for why it won’t be Khan afrer all. You’ve been trumpeting Khan for months now (against all evidence). Now you don’t want to be made to eat humble pie when you’re proven wrong.

1492. AJ - December 2, 2012

Looks like most of the Interwebs have moved over to favoring Gary Mitchell over Khan.

“A one-man weapon of mass-destruction” Khan is not, nor is he “an unstoppable force of terror.” A phaser on heavy stun and some sedatives, and you take him out.

TWOK already established that he is a legend in his own mind only, and not really as smart as he thinks he is.

1493. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

I disagree. I still am confident it is going to be Khan. The only thing that I am concerned about is this Orci statement that he lied about something big. I mean, if the Supreme Court guys deliberately lied and duped Anthony on his groundbreaking story that confirmed it was Khan, well then all bets are off at that point. That would be borderline unethical behavior by Orci and company if that happened. But if it did happen, then I certainly can’t be held responsible for the Trek producers deliberately lying and creating disinformation.

You know though, I’ve noticed something here as well. It seems as though the Mitchell resurrection talk has died down now, and instead a number of you are now instead focusing just on “its not Khan” instead. So I see you all as hedging your bets on Mitchell now that several of us have made a credible case that largely discredits the Mitchell scenario. Can’t say that I blame you backing off Mitchell though.

1494. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

“TWOK already established that he is a legend in his own mind only, and not really as smart as he thinks he is.”

Yet Mitchell was subdued in a week by Kirk and Spock with just some trickery and a nerve pinch.

WHOOPS, I guess you conveniently forgot that little detail? :-)

1495. Jack - December 2, 2012

1490. Craiger, why do you come here? You constantly complain, and now you’re saying Anthony shouldn’t run his own site if his sources were inccrrect on the Khan thing?

Criticism is one thing, but this, combined with trying to get everyone to jump ship a few weeks back is, well, kind of lousy…

1496. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

And Khan was taken out by kirk with little more than a platic paper towel holder in space seed.
Whoops

1497. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

I dont think Anthony was wrong, I just think he was informed on a much earlier in the production story treatment, that ultimately was changed.

1498. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

Dont forget JJ also flat out told Drew Mcweeny at hitfix, “NOT True” when he was asked if the character Del Toro was being considered for was Khan as the Latino review report suggested.

1499. AJ - December 2, 2012

MJ:

The potential of Mitchell was much greater. Every time he was shot, he was weakened, but his strengthening always resumed at an accelerated rate. And they had 46 minutes to set it all up and then finally bring a massive piece of mountain down onto him to kill him, and this was only after he had been severely weakened by his lightning-fingers fight with Dr. Dehner.

You forgot about the lightning fight. ;-) And what Mark said in 1496

1500. (the real) Montreal_Paul - December 2, 2012

1493. MJ (The Original)

MJ, you really are reaching buddy! LoL. No, people have not died down talking about Mitchell. And I think the resurrection thing was misinterpreted by you. I believe what people are saying is that he wasn’t really dead.

Do you remember the TOS episode where he apparently died in sickbay? I believe that is what people are trying to say.

As for Khan… do you remember how easy it was for Kirk to “beat up” Khan in engineering? Something tells me that is Kirk could beat up Spock… I highly doubt that he would be able to get out of a neck pinch. I mean, he’s strong… but not that strong.

It really is amazing how you refuse to bend from a theory. I commend you on your conviction…but it may be fruitless. You stick to you guns on one vision based on a reported RUMOUR from AP’s source… a few typos from Orci… and the assumption that Del Toro was being offered a Khan role.

I’m very open to other ideas. At first when news came out, I was thinking Khan too. But as new info came out… my thoughts immediately went to Gary Seven… then Mitchell. I have no strong convictions about any of those theories because, frankly, I don’t know who it is. Unlike you, who speaks as though you know it is Khan.

But you are right, we’ll see shortly… or rather, YOU and other posters will see. I will be waiting until May (I hope!).

Clues to the sequel are supposed to me in issue 1 and issue 4 of the ongoing comics… have you checked them out for clues?

1501. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

on a side note MJ perhaps if you want since I altered my name further, you can drop the (the orginal) from your screen name now

1502. AJ - December 2, 2012

“With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.”

It’s obviously Finnegan.

1503. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

Mr Orci,
Is Gary Mitchell, Dead Dead at the end of issue 2?

I cant believe no one hasnt just flat out asked this allready.

1504. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

I find it interesting how everyone assumes that Gary Mitchell was killed after being buried under a rock (who’s to say he couldn’t lift the rock up), yet they believe he couldn’t be killed by a phaser blast to the chest after being weakened by a neck pinch by Spock.

Also, its possible that Bob has told us more than one lie concerning the sequel.

1505. Jack - December 2, 2012

I’m hoping not Mitchell. He’s just not that interesting this time around. He’s a buddy from Krk’s academy days — they have three years of history, tops. And Mitchell likely wasn’t part of a Starfleet conspiracy.

So did Bob say he lied HERE? That the lie was made here? Because the ‘it’s not Mitchell’ thing wasn’t said originally here. Although be did say here that he doesn’t lie. Which could be the lie. which would make it ond lid here and pne on aicn radio. But he also said here that Cumberbatch’s character is canon. Which could be a lie. Although, the lie could be that he’s lying.

1506. Jack - December 2, 2012

Well, the clue in comic one could be Mitchell… or Dehner. Where’d they say which issues these clues are in, anyway?

1507. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

#1505.

Yeah, awhile ago he said that he lied about something, and that after the movie comes out, he’ll tell us what he lied about.

1508. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

I think the clues are mostly about the Kirk/Spock romance, Keenser, Cupcake, etc. I’m not sure anything about the villain was intended to be revealed in the comics.

Not counting the upcoming “Countdown” series tie-in, of course.

1509. MJ (The Original) - December 2, 2012

@1500 “MJ, you really are reaching buddy! LoL. No, people have not died down talking about Mitchell. And I think the resurrection thing was misinterpreted by you. I believe what people are saying is that he wasn’t really dead.”

Hmm, who posted these following statements then – Santa Claus perhaps?

@102 “the comic left a pretty big window open for Mitchell to be resurected from his “Death””

@635 ” If they fired him out a photon torpedo tube, that was probably intentional. Photon torpedoes can go a long way (plus it’s a “dark” callback to “Search for Spock”‘s Spock “rebirth.”

@700 “So in this universe, does Gary Mitchell’s tube hit the ‘great barrier’ from WNMHGB and return as a superhuman?”

@746 “A godlike entity got shot out of a photon torpedo tube so he’s dead?”

@754 “Still thinking the villain could be Gary Mitchell (the IDW comic leaves his body floating in space; he could be regenerating in that photon tube.”

@791 “For people saying Mitchell is “dead” via the comics, 1)he’s fired out a photon torpedo tube for convenient, Spocklike rebirth,”

@844 “At most the guy was stuck floating in a tube for a year or two. ”

@1078 “Instead of bring left on the planet, torpedo tubes are shown floating in space with Mitchell and Kelso’s names, respectively, on each — while Kirk in a voice(write)over talk about how the hardest part of command is seeing friends die/knowing he’ll have to send more to their deaths.”

@1104 “He was regenerating in the photon tube, and wasn’t fully dead.”

@1367 “And inside the tube? An injured Mitchell, playing possum, is slowly regenerating… growing stronger….”

So much for your attempt to rewrite history, Montreal Paul. Get back to me when you have your facts straight — this was way to easy to prove wrong. WHOOPS !!! LOL

1510. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

MJ – Mitchell was shot in the chest. He appeared to die but in actual fact, may not have died at all…Anything is possible. To keep repeating something you don’t agree with as being crap is well…really crappy.

And no, MJ, it is no more “crap” than you constantly stating a rumour is anything but a rumour.

#1486 – Dee. Nice pictures of Chris Pine. He’s got his guitar with him. I wonder what that’s about… I just wish Chris would let his hair grow. Much nicer.

My guess is that he is promoting STID along with Benedict Cumberbatch, JJ Abrams and Bryan Burk, as the Hobbit is being released there and the preview and trailer are no doubt preceding various versions of the Hobbit. Chris may also be promoting Rise of the Guardians (there is no release date noted for Japan for ROTG – curious?).

Benedict has three projects of his to promote – BBC Sherlock TV series, the Hobbit and STID.

If you can do it with others, all the better.

I hope we find out more.

Dominique looks good. She and Chris look a happy couple…

1511. MJ - December 2, 2012

@1503 “on a side note MJ perhaps if you want since I altered my name further, you can drop the (the orginal) from your screen name now”

Thanks Mark, I really appreciate it. You are good people!

1512. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

And comparing the torpedo “burial” in the WNMHGB remake to Spock’s burial in TWOK is stretching things a bit. I don’t think floating through space is going to wake up a dead man.

On the other hand, Spock was “reborn” (physically) on the Genesis planet after his torpedo soft-landed, and was exposed to the life-creating forces of the Genesis matrix.

Two different scenarios here.

Also, one would assume that McCoy would have made sure to do a scan on Mitchell to make sure he was absolutely dead before they fired him off into space.

1513. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@1500 Paul,

Where was it said that issue 1 & 4 held the clues?

That said, there is something interesting in issue 1 that did not happen in the original WNMHGB — Spock mind melds with Mitchell, and announces that there is no consciousness, or sentience of any kind … That something possesses Mitchell’s body — that’s a big change from the original.

If that’s a clue, then it suggests that whatever happened to Mitchell was a possession, not a transformation, and it is the entity that survives Mitchell (sort of like Mr. Hengist from Wolf In The Fold which entity needed a living organism to inhabit), perhaps in another member of the crew, or some future crew who comes across the burial tubes in space.

In which case, the new villain can be virtually anybody from canon imbued with Gary Mitchell’s powers.

1514. MJ - December 2, 2012

@1510. So he had a special photon tube with an air supply and emergency food pack, etc. etc. That is not credible. It is a real technicality in my opinion to not say he was as good as dead at the end of the comic. Come on, now you are all saying that they will have to explain this us too in the movie? This just gets sillier all the time, people. More and more reasons behind assumptions and complex back stories…this is not going to be in the movie…no way!!!

1515. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

Um MJ if you notice, I had Quotations around “Death” when i said that, implying that he was really dead.

1516. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 2, 2012

I don’t want the villain to be either Khan or Gary Mitchell. I would rather that he be a new character. I really hate Khan and Gary Mitchell. I didn’t before I came here and had these two characters argued over and generally shoved down our necks over months, years…

Talk about bloody *spoiler sports, if indeed, one of these two characters is in fact STID’s actual villain.

1517. Well Of Souls - December 2, 2012

http://trekweb.com/articles/2012/12/03/NEWS-ALERT-Special-Footage-Presentation-of-Star-Trek-Into-Darkness-In-Japan-on-December-4th.shtml

1518. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

#1516.

And yet, you always throw in your two cents whenever a discussion about who the villain is pops up, LOL!

1519. K-7 - December 2, 2012

You Mitchell folks have got to be messing with us all, right? How would he survive vacuum and live without food, etc. etc.? It’s not exactly like the Federation left a cell-phone-sized Genesis device for Mitchell in his tube.

This is ridiculous and riddled with so many assumptions and explanations that need to be in place for it to work that no sane writer would put this story in a major sf motion picture.

1520. Jack - December 2, 2012

Thanks, RDR.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the trailer and the clip shone no light on the ‘who is he?’ mystery.

Finally saw Life of Pi today. Remarkable film. And, astonishingly, made better by 3D.

1521. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

I meant that for Keachick.

Damn shifting numbers!

1522. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

was not really dead*

1523. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

“Life Of Pi” was great. Beautifully done. I recommend everyone see it.

1524. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

Mr Orci, go ahead and have Khan in the third movie, but cast Alexander Sidig in the part, and I will be a happy camper.

1525. K-7 - December 2, 2012

Even if it isn’t Khan, it’s not going to be Mitchell either. That is why we are now seeing some of the formerly pro-Mitchell folks distancing themselves now and pretending that, all of a sudden, that they are just anti-Khan and never really believed fully in the Mitchell deal. They are covering their asses.

1526. DeShonn Steinblatt - December 2, 2012

1487.

Yeah, well I think you’ll find they have no intention of welcoming Khan into Star Trek 3, either. For them, it’s not about the villain. It’s about the canon.

It’s always about the canon.

1527. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1514
MJ
No it’s not credible, and no one suggested that.

Maybe (and I say MAYBE) it’s because Mitchell wasn’t really dead in the first place. Mitchell could FAKE his own death, remember?!? He could be in that photon tube breathing mountain spring air and making himself a four course meal for all we know (also remember; he had the ability to spontaneously make something from nothing… kind of like you with your case for Khan. ;-D ).

I’m not locked in on Mitchell (I’d really like a new character, as Keachick suggested) but between Mitchell and Khan? Well, I don’t see Khan being a ‘one man weapon of mass destruction’ who can ‘detonate’ an entire starfleet.

All fleet command needs to do is get someone to sneak up behind Khan with a plastic paper towel rack…

1528. Mark James Tucker a Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

who is distancing themselves from Mitchell? I know as heck I am not, I still 99.8% believe it will be him.
But as long as its not Khan, I will totally be happy if I am wrong.

1529. Mark James Tucker a Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

1527 “kind of like you with your case for Khan. ;-D ).”

That was F@#king Awesome!

1530. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

Mitchell also aptly fits the description “one man weapon of mass destruction” that we get from the synopsis above. It sounds like the man himself is a weapon, and “mass destruction” implies a power beyond that of an ordinary mortal. Mitchell has that power.

So here’s a thought. What if military-industrial type forces within Starfleet thought of Gary Mitchell’s powers as the ultimate weapon? What if they thought they could duplicate those powers by studying his corpse? What if, after he is given his space burial, other forces in Starfleet secretly locate his pod and discover that he isn’t really dead, but is slowly rejuvenating. And when he awakens to the purpose Starfleet has in store for him, he goes nuclear, wiping out the fleet, with Kirk’s family among the casualties, and then he escapes to the jungle of some wartorn world where a vengeful Kirk must go all the way in — dragging his crew along and testing their loyalties — to find him.

1531. Mark James Tucker a Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

Sebastian If its khan i hope that Paramount Licenses out a Plastic Paper Towel Rack to Hasbro :)

1532. MJ - December 2, 2012

@1527 “Mitchell could FAKE his own death, remember?!? He could be in that photon tube breathing mountain spring air and making himself a four course meal for all we know”

(groan)

Are you serious? Really???

1533. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

I LIKE that.

1534. Mark James Tucker a Man And His Dream - December 2, 2012

MJ, K-7 etc,
can you give me an example as to how you think Khan is a one man weapon of mass destruction?

I mean really truly make your case, as to why and how you see him to be that way?

Also when has Khan ever engaged in a game of intergalatic chess with Kirk and or Spock?

1535. Jack - December 2, 2012

I’ve never been pro-Mitchell. Or pro-Khan. Of the two, I’d rather it be Khan. But I’d prefer neither. Again, why couldn’t it be someone else? And the character needn’t have to have been a villain on TOS, if it is indeed a TOS character.

I think Bob’s lying about being a conspiracy nut. ;)

1536. K-7 - December 2, 2012

#1530. God I hope this isn’t DOD and X-Men versus the Enterprise. That is not the Star Trek movie I want to see.

1537. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

#1530.

Your theory does sound plausible, I’ll admit.

I wonder if Section 31 fits into the sequel? I know that organization was only established on “Deep Space Nine” and “Enterprise”, with no mention of it during “The Original Series”, but it might be the type of thing that could have drawn the attention of Bob Orci.

1538. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

It’s entirely possible that the plot synopsis was written with a lot of hyperbole, so maybe we’re taking the whole “one man weapon of mass destruction” description too literally.

1539. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

1537

Isn’t Bob a fan of all the series? It’s possible that Section 31 may make an appearance here.

1540. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

Well, if any real soldier had Gary Mitchell powers, he’d be disappeared 5 levels deeper than Bradley Manning while DARPA tried to figure out how to make more soldiers like that who could be controlled.

1541. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@1530 dmduncan

How about since we now know that Mitchell was possessed and not merely transformed that, as you suggest Starfleet security goes looking for Mitchell’s tube and finds nothing but a dead body, meanwhile the entity that possessed Mitchell finds another appropriate body with the ESP ratings it needs to thrive within Starfleet as they conduct their experiments.

Considering the comic’s re-telling of Return of the Archons put a shadow organization within Starfleet firmly in charge of the mind control exerted by Landru, they probably have the perfect foundation to support Mitchell’s entity, and then some.

1542. K-7 - December 2, 2012

#1535. That is like asking what detonating the fleet means? If Mitchell is godlike, he could just wreck starships at will and would not need to use explosives. However, Khan and his party, if they have infiltrated Starfleet under the control of the Weller “CEO”, could blow up the fleet. So the detonation piece fits Khan better than Mitchell.

The problem is that the synopsis is so vague and strange that many possible scenarios are possible.

1543. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

I would argue that Khan, with his “superior” intellect, and heightened physical strength and senses, could be a one man wrecking crew if written well.

I think that was the one flaw of the character in TOS and TWOK, that his supposed superiority was more bluster and exaggeration rather than living up to the premise and hype.

I think if Khan was reimagined to his full potential (which we never got to see if you think about it) I think he’d prove a much more formidable foe than he was before.

1544. Jack - December 2, 2012

So here’s a thought. What if military-industrial type forces within Starfleet thought of Gary Mitchell’s powers as the ultimate weapon? What if they thought they could duplicate those powers by studying his corpse

Yeah, exactly. And/or by sending someone else to the barrier…

The comic is clearly pointing to weird shit happening in the fleet. Condoned mind-control experiments lasting for decades, star fleet intelligence taking over a task usually handled by a science department. And pike’s at least aware of this stuff, if not directly involved. Remember, Bob digs shadowy conspiracy and Insanely complicated master plans.

1545. K-7 - December 2, 2012

@1541. I agree, like in Stephen King’s excellent novel, Firestarter.

1546. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

1542

Mitchell doesn’t need to use explosives. Starships already contain them: matter and anti matter.

All Mitchell has to do is reach out with his mind and cause a fleet wide containment failure.

Poof! Starfleet go boom.

1547. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Yeah, I do seem to recall that Bob was a fan of most, if not all, of the series. He did enjoy DS9, and I’ll bet he was a big fan of the Section 31 episodes.

1548. Jack - December 2, 2012

1538. Agreed. It applies to every action movie villain ever.

1541. Interesting idea about the possession. But again, I still think unlimited mind powers make for a lame villain (hint: overconfidence and under appreciation of human weaknesses like liove and compassion will be his/her undoing).

1549. K-7 - December 2, 2012

#1546. Then why specifically pick the word, “detonate” for the synopsis? Detonate better fits setting up explosives by a team or bomb-maker. I think they would have used a different word if Mitchell simply destroyed the fleet as you are saying.

1550. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

1549

Detonate is what you do to bombs. Detonate the fleet sounds odd — unless you consider the starships themselves as the bombs, which is what they become to Gary Mitchell if he causes containment failures. He could turn starfleet’s ships into matter/antimatter bombs.

1551. Sebastian S. - December 2, 2012

# 1546 dmduncan

Beautiful post! Also brings to mind how Charlie X destroyed the Antares; by removing a shield on their energy pile….

# 1529 Mark

Thanks. ;-)
And yes, if Khan were the villain, Hasbro could repurpose paper towel holders as “Anti-Khan kits.” ;-D

# 1532 MJ~

“(groan)
Are you serious? Really??? ”
________________________

Um… no; I was kidding on that the mountain air and the meal, but yes. I do believe Mitchell’s ‘resurrection’ would be no less implausible than Spock’s. Or red matter. Or Genesis Devices. Or anything else ST throws out there… it’s scifi fantasy. Gary Mitchell coming back from the dead (in a Spock-like photon tube coffin, no less) would be no less implausible.

Again; I’d love for the villain to be an all-new one, but of the ‘canon’ villains? Mitchell (IMHO) fits best. Both the pictures from set, and the current synopsis seem to point in this direction (Cumberbatch looks a hell of a lot more like Gary Mitchell than Khan Noonian Singh; he’s even got a starfleet uniform with a hole where he was shot in the IDW book). And I don’t give a flying, fried-green f**k about some anonymous cloak & dagger ‘source’ who won’t go on the record, or a typo, or hispanic actors on a cattle call (that last one really baffles the bejeezus out of me; it’s both implicitly racist AND stupid). NONE of that is any kind of ‘evidence.’

Simon Pegg says no Khan (pretty straightforward there). And Karl Urban let Gary Mitchell slip (even took heat for it). Not saying either are conclusive proof, but at least they not anonymous and on the record…

1552. Peter Loader - December 2, 2012

In my opinion “unstoppable force of terror” should not be viewed as a singular entity.

1553. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@1500 Montreal_Paul

Again, I’m not sure where you are getting that issue 1 & 4 held the clues, but going back to issue one lead to the discovery that Spock mind-melded with Mitchell and discovered he was possessed by an entity.

So I went back and looked at issue 4, and don’t see as obvious a change that might point to anything in the movie, except one: Yeoman Rand pilots the shuttle. Therefore, Alice Eve could be playing Rand. A much more likely scenario than involving Dr. Dehner who was left out of the comic and therefore has little to contribute to the story now, despite the matching hairdo. The only other thing that’s significantly different is that Uhura steals and pilots a shuttle and rescues Spock, but that doesn’t really tell us much here. Of course, Dehner could have been recruited by Starfleet to investigate the Mitchell death, and because she was spared her original fate by not being on the ship, she’s free to do it. I just don’t know how much is gained by bringing her in though.

1554. Jack - December 2, 2012

I’ll have to read the thing again, but The fleet could be starfleet, as an entire organization. We use ‘explode’ and ‘explosive’ as a figure of speech all the time. To me, detonate suggests setting off something that has been building.

Sure, the ships all could literally have blown up… but Starfleet as an organization unravelling, exploding… well, it’s interesting.

1555. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

Disembodied evil forces appear in a number of Star Trek episodes: Day of the Dove, Wolf in the Fold.

The Day of the Dove entity, who thrived on conflict, fits the wartorn world theme.

1556. dmduncan - December 2, 2012

1554

The synopsis reads like BOTH get destroyed. The fleet AND it’s principles.

1557. MJ - December 2, 2012

@1551 “Um… no; I was kidding on that the mountain air and the meal, but yes. I do believe Mitchell’s ‘resurrection’ would be no less implausible than Spock’s. Or red matter. Or Genesis Devices. Or anything else ST throws out there… it’s scifi fantasy. Gary Mitchell coming back from the dead (in a Spock-like photon tube coffin, no less) would be no less implausible.”

You kind of missed my whole point again. Why kill him off in the first place then in some comic than virtually nobody in the movie-going public will have read, and then force yourself into the resurrection and back-story deal in the movie? It does not make any common sense?

If you know Mitchell is going to be the villain in the movie, then you don’t need to artificially create a scenario from some minor comic that the public is unfamiliar with that forces you in the movie to have to spend time resurrecting him; instead, he appears “fresh” in the movie and the story begins there without this unnecessary baggage. This is why I find this scenario completely bogus. Orci and company are better writers than what you are all suggesting….at least, I hope so!

1558. AJ - December 2, 2012

1552:

To me an “unstoppable force of terror,” or “one man weapon of mass destruction” is a ‘General Zod’ (Terence Stamp) type with unspeakable ambition/hatred, and huge amounts of destructive power he can wield himself.

If it’s just Khan and a bunch of minions, well, maybe that’s why the planet where Kirk finds him is a ‘war-zone,’ as he tries to assume rule.

Also, I feel sorry for the Fleet. They should just stay in the Laurentian system for every film, or they’ll just keep getting pulverized.

1559. MJ - December 2, 2012

“or hispanic actors on a cattle call (that last one really baffles the bejeezus out of me; it’s both implicitly racist AND stupid)”

Just to make it clear to me, these are YOUR WORD’s, not mine. I never said anything remotely like this. ANd I don’t care for your implication here that I am somehow implying racial stuff here, dude. wtf???

1560. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

“Detonate” is often used hyperbolicly to evoke intense, and especially violent, emotional and philosophical reactions in literature and journalism.

I am really hoping it is not a literal destruction of the fleet, considering that is more or less the exact plot from the last movie. And honestly, what is to be gained after the entire fleet has been destroyed? Where does that leave Star Trek for the 3rd movie — one starship on the run from anybody who wishes to invade the Federation?

1561. MJ - December 2, 2012

@1555. Wouldn’t we all be shocked they’re remaking and vastly improving “And the Children Shall Lead” here. LOL

1562. AJ - December 2, 2012

1560:

How often has the Big E always been “the only ship in the quadrant!?”

Our world “in a state of crisis” could imply a markedly reduced lack of defenses due to that ‘detonation.’

1563. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Well, to use an example from another film series, one could argue that Bane from “The Dark Knight Rises” is a perfect example of a “one man weapon of mass destruction”.

On his first try, Batman could not stop Bane. Bane broke his back. Bane, for about two thirds of the movie, was virtually unstoppable. He was able to steal the Tumblers and the microwave emitter he would later rig as a nuclear device. The cops couldn’t stop him. Neither could the military.

Bane very nearly destroyed Gotham City, until Batman (with the help of Catwoman and Comissioner Gordon, finally managed to defeat him at the last minute.

Bane had no superpowers. Just superstrength and a “superior intellect”.

1564. MJ - December 2, 2012

“How often has the Big E always been “the only ship in the quadrant!?”

Yea, it seems that Starfleet has really poor logistics in general. Earth is never defended properly, the Enterprise is the only ship in the quadrant. Etc. Etc.

1565. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Well, going by what we have seen in prior Trek movies, if a bad guy wants to defeat the Federation, all he has to do is destroy the Enterprise, while keeping the rest of the fleet occupied with something else far from Earth. :-)

1566. K-7 - December 2, 2012

Sebastian S, that was an unnecessary and unfair cheap shot on MJ.

1567. Mark James Tucker a Man and His Dream - December 2, 2012

So now we are comparing Khan to Bane?
what happend to the joker comparisons?

1568. AJ - December 2, 2012

Thing is, the JJverse hasn’t given us a full technical manual, and summarily destroyed every other ship we see in the film.

This young mind bought the TOS Technical Manual upon release, and after eps like “Doomsday Machine,” “Ultimate Computer,” “Tholian Web,” and the one with the USS Exeter, we had an idea that there was a fleet out there as busy as can be. TNG and DS9 had ships everywhere.

Though the “Starfleet is a peacekeeping armada line” from ST09 is technically incorrect in lore, you simply can’t have an ‘armada’ if all your ships are getting destroyed regularly. I hope they have Geico, or something.

1569. Jack - December 2, 2012

1563. Although Bane wasn’t the brains.

Just a thought. But could Pike be bad, or, at least, wrong? Okay, and I don’t think Jose I. Menendez is likely either. But Throne had a big part in early Trek history (he’d been considered for Doctor McCoy and the voiced one of the Talosians). And, the first time around, we only met a Talosian-projected illusion of Mendez. He’s in Starfleet… and he’s apparently Latino.

My only point is that there were a lot of characters in TOS who could be developed… not just Khan and Gary Mitchell.

Khan’s power wasn’t physical (despite the engineered should strength) — he was smart, ruthless and he had all those damned followers…

And, again, when does physical strength really matter in Trek?. And villains need to be beaten.

1570. MJ - December 2, 2012

dontcare,

I’m still eagerly awaiting your response to your requested math calculations that I provided you. ;-)

1571. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Well, its interesting how some of the pro-Mitchell folks are lashing out at MJ with angry posts and false accusations of racism. Sheesh!

As for Khan=Joker, that comparison was really only based on the fact that Khan is Trek’s best known villain, just like the Joker is Batman’s best known foe. In other areas of comparison with Khan, Bane is much better example. At least the Bane from TDKR as opposed to the mucho libre mindless brute from “Batman & Robin”.

As for the fleet, we did see a large portion of it floating as wreckage above Vulcan. We did see some of those ships intact a few minutes before as they were leaving Spacedock.

Also check out “Star Trek: The Art Of The Film” book. There are several drawings of Starfleet ships in it.

1572. Curious Cadet - December 2, 2012

@1557 MJ

“Why kill him off in the first place then in some comic than virtually nobody in the movie-going public will have read”

Exactly, most of the audience has not read the story. They killed off Mitchell for the hard core fans. Immediately. Doing so as a smoke screen is not beyond the lying Mr. Orci.

Bringing him back is key then isn’t it? And the audience unaware that he was ever killed in the first place doesn’t have to even know he was ever brought back. Just like ST09 was halfway over before the audience knew how Nero and Spock got there and why Nero was so pissed off at Spock, with the events of the comic neatly summarized at that time in a :30 flashback. Mitchell just opens the film killing new people then.

The way I look at it is they did it once, they can do it again. However, I think the much more logical approach here, assuming Orci can be trusted, is to take the clue in the comic that Mitchell was possessed and it’s that entity that survives his death. No resurrection necessary. Not that he couldn’t be rejuvenated, just that it isn’t the most interesting story they could tell.

Explaining where the superhuman entity came from is going to be no easier to explain than how Mitchell fooled Kirk that he was dead. Or, how Khan managed to get rescued from a sleeper ship, where he came from and how he got there in the first place, and how he ended up infiltrating Starfleet, for that matter.

1573. Disinvited - December 2, 2012

First, the socially redeeming part of this message: trekmovie.com occasionally has to resort to deleting messages for totally in appropriate content. When this occurs this creates a void in this message system which is filled by the message that followed the deleted one which creates a void where it once was that is filled by the one that followed that one, etc. until it ripples down to the last message posted when the process was begun. In this manner all the message numbers after the deleted one get decrimented by one.

Now, as their posted dates never change and keeping the above in mind, I am responding to messages, all of which were posted on December 2, 2012:

#1351. Mark Lynch
On water ? ;)

#1369. Sebastian S.
Mitchell didn’t stop his heart for longer than a few seconds. There are non-superpowered humans alive right now who can best that.

#1381 Curious Cadet
The scriptwriter was actually quoting Sir Arthur Conan Doyle via the character Spock. In a way, Doyle wrote that for Cumberbatch.

#1384. dmduncan
“conjure” being the operative word. I think you would give the skeptic, The Amazing Randi, pause at the rapidity with which you appear to impy that if something looks miraculous, it therefore must be. But to be fair, and as a Sir was quoted above, another Sir, Sir Arthur C. Clarke did say something akin to “Any science more sufficiently advanced than our own is indistinguishable from magic.”

The following are for MJ:
#1398.
Now you’ve done it! JJ and crew are holding an emergency meeting just to add that scene to the print in your “honor”.

#1409.
Your Freudian slips are killing me!

#1448.
In a sold-out theater on opening night?!!
#1398.

1574. Red Dead Ryan - December 2, 2012

Yeah, I guess that Talia al-Ghul was technically the brains behind the operation, but Bane at least was intelligent enough to believably carry out it out. I mean, he did figure out how to steal and operate the Tumblers.

MJ,

Dontcare is probably too embarrassed. Either that, or he dontcare enough to acknowledge your disproving of his claims.

1575. Jack - December 2, 2012

1559. Again, the idea that a Latino actor = only Khan ( just because Montalban was Latino…) could be called, er, unimaginative.

If Anthony hadn’t confirmed it — would you be as adamant that it’s Khan?

I think this ‘you’re wrong/no, you’re wrong” back and forth from all sides isn’t doing much to help world peace. None of us really has any clue. We alk have the same information. We’re all seeing the same stuff and reaching different conclusions.

But, even if it’s kidding, this “you’re wrong” (about Mitchelk, about Khan, about whatever) stuff is just annoying everyone.

1576. Jack - December 2, 2012

And the ‘Cumberbatch has a hole in his shirt and that means he’s Mitchell!’ stuff = also unimaginative.;)

1577. Tom - December 3, 2012

So… Cumberbatch has just arrived in Tokyo. Quite a rock star arrival, I may add. Pine arrived hours before. Burke and Abrams must be there as well. People on Twitter saying a poster will be revealed hours from now. THE MADNESS BEGINS…

1578. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

1577 I am wondering perhaps they are planning on doing a Bond style press conference, and will be announcing exactly who is playing who.

1579. AJ - December 3, 2012

Here it is.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-trek-into-darkness/23678/teaser-poster-for-star-trek-into-darkness

1580. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

He is not Khan, I will bet the farm on it.

1581. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

That poster is really cool and he is not Khan.
I am really thinking we are going to find out some point today who exactly he is.

1582. AJ - December 3, 2012

Quite “Dark Knight”-ish with the Delta logo made of smashed buildings behind his cape.

1583. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

wow still no thread for the poster yet?
come on everyone else is reporting on it now since it was posted on star treks face book page.

1584. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

You are right about that AJ it does have a Dark Knight feel to it.

1585. MJ - December 3, 2012

I am not sure that poster is legit??? I mean, I get that the poster is suppose to be like the Dark Knight, but it even goes so far as to have Kirk wearing a cape? A cape? Huh?

1586. AJ - December 3, 2012

I don’t think that’s Kirk…

1587. camerond - December 3, 2012

Is that gray hair on his sideburns?

Gaaaary Mitchell…?

1588. MJ - December 3, 2012

On the other hand, perhaps that is BC’s character?

1589. AJ - December 3, 2012

Anthony? You there?

“That’s what you get for missing staff meetings….”

1590. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

MJ the poster is on the official website,
Paramount debuted it on the official face book page
Its LEGIT
And thats not kirk in the trench coat

1591. MJ - December 3, 2012

Not getting a great vibe from this. I’m not sure I am going to like this take on Trek. Doesn’t feel quite right to me. Just my initial emotional reaction to this very un-Treklike poster.

1592. AyanEva - December 3, 2012

@MJ I think that figure is Benedict’s character.

1593. AJ - December 3, 2012

It’s a teaser.

1594. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

MJ he is wearing a trenchcoat, in the spy pics, BC is wearing a trenchcoat/
I am really thinking we have official confirmation of whos who in terms of unknown characters by the end of today

1595. Mark James Tucker A Man and His Dream - December 3, 2012

And still no thread for the poster, come on anthony its just after midnight in So-cal surely someone who posts on the site is awake here to start a thread on this

1596. MJ - December 3, 2012

Agreed.

1597. AJ - December 3, 2012

Me three

1598. AJ - December 3, 2012

That is NOT San Francisco. It’s the “war-zone world.”

I wonder if it’s one we know?

1599. AJ - December 3, 2012

UK site. Widescreen, with falling debris:

http://www.startrekthemovie.co.uk/

1600. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

I am thinking its Qo’noS

1601. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

Does anyone know what time the press conference with JJ Chris and BC takes place? (local Japan time obviously)

1602. AJ - December 3, 2012

Almost 6pm there..Probably already happened.

1603. El Chup - December 3, 2012

Meh, that poster is a bit rubbish if you ask me. I don’t like the fact that the words “Star Trek” are tiny, as if to distance itself from the franchise. Cumberbatch, for some reason, looks like John Barrowman as Captain Jack from behind and the poster, all over, feels like a cross between one from Bay’s Transformer’s franchise and a Nolan bat film.

1604. MJ - December 3, 2012

@1603. Agreed, El Chup. Doesn’t feel like Star Trek at all. Still, I don’t want to overreact. I will hold my opinion in check until I see the 9 min IMAX preview in two weeks.

1605. TrekTech - December 3, 2012

Poster is a lazy blatant rip off of the Dark Knight artwork. up to and including the crumbling buildings forming an iconic emblem. How freaking lazy and uninspired can you be???? Even the color palette is the same. R U kidding me? My theory: BC is playing Lord Garth in a Heart of Darkness/Apocalypse Now revamp. Kirk goes in to get him out. Hence: Spockalypse Now. This poster is genuinely galling in its ripping off of the Dark Knight franchise. Fail.

1606. MJ - December 3, 2012

“That is NOT San Francisco. It’s the “war-zone world.” ”

How do you know it isn’t a city on Earth? I had assumed the war zone world was the volcano world? Do either of us really know?

1607. MJ - December 3, 2012

@1605. Yep!

1608. MJ - December 3, 2012

…regarding the poster, not Lord Garth.

1609. Watermelon - December 3, 2012

It’s London. Gherkin, Shard, London Eye…

1610. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

I just found the time listed on trek web it says 9:50
doesnt indicate AM or PM.
I dont think its allready happened though cause surely there would be info coming out from it, or confirming that it was screened.

9:50 Am on the 4th of december would be 4:50pm today the 3rd in L.A.

1611. El Chup - December 3, 2012

@1604

Agreed. I’m worried that this picture is going to go to far towards pleasing the masses with a shallow, and tiresomely “dark”, action film. I will reserve judgment though until I have seen the thing in it’s entirety. It may still be a good movie, but I fear it will not be a Star Trek movie.

@1605 Agree with absolutely everything you say about the poster (don’t think ithe the villan will be Garth though).

What I had hoped this movie did, which the last one, in my view failed on, despite it’s entertainment value, was to have a message or commentary on the human condition, like all the TOS movies had. Thegenral feel of what we have seen so far suggests the opposite. I can only hope this is intentional for marketing purposes and I will be pleasantly surprised when I sit down to watch the actual film.

1612. El Chup - December 3, 2012

Anyone notice Cumberbatch has the same pose as Tom Hardy on the Nemesis posters? As he should I suppose. After all, it seems the movie rehashes the ever original “villain out for revenge plot” that is entirely new and hasn’t been seen before. lol

1613. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

Intresting to note is that the cast is once more listed alphabetical order, with John Cho first followed by Bendedict and then Alice Eve, and Bruce etc etc with Peter Weller and Anton last

1614. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

Ok so we know the Klingons are involved with this movie and the only two male actors on the posters credits we dont have confirmation of is CUmby and Weller.

Are we certain that Peter Weller isnt in fact a Klingon?We have seen no photos of him yet, and you know they are going to have some sort of a name actor in what is probably a pretty sizeable role
Just spitballing here,

1615. El Chup - December 3, 2012

@1613, Where is the cast list? I don’t see it.

1616. MJ - December 3, 2012

@1614. Weller or his agent said he wasn’t playing an alien. The term “CEO-like character” was used as I recall.

1617. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

did he specificly say not playing an alien?
cause C.O could easily be mis spoken as CEO
again just throwing stuff out. cause no one else on that site cast list is playing a Klingon unless Cumbey turns out to be Arne Darvin or something? and I am pretty confident whoever they have cast as the primary Klingon character is going to have enough screen time to warrant being listed as part of the main cast on the film credits

1618. MJ - December 3, 2012

@1617 just found the original article:

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/12/05/peter-weller-star-trek/

1619. MJ - December 3, 2012

There was another story on him where he said he wasn’t and alien, but I can’t find it.

1620. MJ - December 3, 2012

Ah, here we go:

http://trekmovie.com/2012/05/12/exclusive-peter-weller-drops-hints-about-his-star-trek-sequel-character/

1621. joe1306 - December 3, 2012

Nice! First Poster! http://www.startrek.com/article/star-trek-into-darkness-poster-revealed

1622. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

joe your a bit late to the game lol scroll up through the posts of the last 90 mins

1623. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

Ok thanks MJ for that, well it was a fun trying guess for me lol

1624. joe1306 - December 3, 2012

@Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream, ooops, sry about that. just was so excited :D

1625. Dennis Sisterson - December 3, 2012

Yet again, it looks like we get a Star Trek film that treads a conventional action movie path instead of being anything to do with exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and new civilizations or boldly going where no man has gone before – a brief that even the original series seldom lived up to but it would be nice to see them try, just once, with one of these films.
Anyway, speaking too soon. Not much to go on yet.

1626. PaulB - December 3, 2012

#1613 – Where is the cast listed in alphabetical order? I don’t see any list on the poster, and the only cast list I see on the StarTrek.com story isn’t in alphabetical order.

We already know the major players, but I’m curious to see whatever it is that you are looking at.

1627. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

I can see the shard and the gherkin which are both landmark buildings in London on this poster…

Does anyone recognise any of the other buildings?

I would not be surprised if there are structures from all over the Earth represented in the poster. An interesting touch if I am correct.

Although on the other hand, I would like to see some originality and have an artist actually draw a future, earth or alien landscape from their imagination.

1628. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

sorry for the additional post it appeared as though my earlier one was erased.

1629. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

Hmmmmm,
According to http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35902

There are other London buildings in the picture, the London Eye, Lloyd’s, Tower 42. I didn’t notice these. I need a higher resolution image.

So I guess that 23rd Century London is going to have a bad day in STID.

Is London going to be the new New York in terms of cinematic destruction? ;-)

After all, GI Joe 2 is going to decimate my capital too…

1630. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

In his episode didn’t Garth favor a cape after his “coronation”? I seem to recall he was still wearing a black cape in his “cure” and introduction to Kirk at the end.

I’ll those who’ve seen the episode more recently clarify my fuzzy recall.

1631. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

why are posts disapearing seriously my last post was number 1636, now it shows as 1628 and 2 of my posts are no longer there

1632. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

Its not a cape its a trench coat, same as in the spy pics.

1633. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

I found a bigger image which I have posted on my own forum

http://forum.starplex.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=102

Feel free to take a look if you want to scrutinise the fine details. I know I will!
I’d be even happier if you leave a comment there on anything you spot. Thanks.

1634. shran - December 3, 2012

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151164885843716&set=a.104963698715.94026.7774903715&type=1

first poster.

1635. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

1634 Do people not read recent posts before they post a link, lol
we have been discussing this poster for 2 hours now.
little late

1636. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

well i am off to bed, fingers crossed that we will know definitively who Cumby is playing shortly after 9:50am Japan time/ 4:50pm L.A. /7:50pm NY time today after the press conference/opening footage screening.

1637. Aurore - December 3, 2012

Hey !!!

Mr. Bad Guy, what are you wearing?

Is that Corinthian leather ???

:))

1638. JRT! - December 3, 2012

Well,I missed that discussion so I’m happy there’s a lot of links. Not everyone is on here at the same time. I don’t go online on Sundays so it’s been awhile since I was here,so keep them links coming. Two hours is a very short time anyways.

J-R!

1639. El Chup - December 3, 2012

Yeah, that’s London alright. Although the Shard is in the wrong place, judging by the position of the the Thames (look below the London Eye) and the Gherkin.

1640. El Chup - December 3, 2012

The dome of St Paul’s is also just about visable next to the Gherkin and is in roughly the right place.

Helps to be a Londoner. lol

1641. El Chup - December 3, 2012

The trailer rumour above had Cumberbatch using an English accent….and the poster shows London. Maybe it’s not Gary Micthell after all. Perhaps it is actually Trelane? Or a Talosian in disguise? After all those were options given out by Orci.

1642. PaulB - December 3, 2012

#1641 Why would the English accent and the images of London make you think of Trelane or Talosians? None of them had English accents, so…

1643. El Chup - December 3, 2012

@1642

Because neither originate from North America or India like Micthell and Khan do. Both Trelane and Talosians are alien and therefore the accent would be less of an issue.

1644. Spock Jenkins - December 3, 2012

Poster is great. Hate people saying it ripped off the TDKR poster as if Batman was the first poster to use someone standing in front of buildings?

Besides, The trek poster has our character staring out from the wreckage of a building. That is not what is shown in ANY of the TDKR posters.

Love the text layout of the title. As I said ages ago, I imagined that the emphasis would be on ‘Into Darkness’, and ‘Star Trek’ would be in small. This is NOT because they are embarrassed by Trek as some fans have said – it is to differentiate it from the TNG and Original Movie titles.

Also, it harks back to ‘Empire Strikes Back’, ‘Return of the Jedi’ ( and possibly other movies ) where the emphasis was on the title of the latest chapter, with the overarching saga title, smaller.

1645. PaulB - December 3, 2012

#1644 – If you can’t see the massive, obvious similarity between this poster and the Dark Knight Returns poster, you’re not paying attention. Here’s a side-by-side comparison that makes it pretty frakkin’ clear:
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-trek-into-darkness/23679/the-dark-knight-influence-on-the-new-star-trek-poster

I don’t hate this new Trek poster the way many people here seem to, but I think it’s ludicrous to deny the obvious similarity to the TDKR poster.

1646. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

#1635. Mark Lynch

Thanks, Mark.

1647. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

You’re welcome… :-)

1648. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

@Aurore December 3 2012 (not trusting post numbers!)

I would have thought you knew, it is the law for bad guys to be wearing Corinthian leather…’Tis how we tell them from the good guys ;-)

1649. JamesTucker - December 3, 2012

JJ is one original unique visionary pioneering ground breaking dude.

1650. JamesTucker - December 3, 2012

No Space: Check
No New Words: Check
No Aliens: Check
Poster ripped directly from TDK: Check
Earth faced with destruction: Check
Plot ripped from Skyfall: Check

JJ is one original unique visionary pioneering ground breaking dude.

1651. Eminiar7 - December 3, 2012

@1650 JamesTuckerTroll:

I’ll give you that the poster appears TDK inspired, but you know none of what you assert beyond that.

The movie makers have said that a significant part of the movie happens in space and that Klingons are involved. Part of the movie at least takes place on a “war ravaged world”, possibly somewhere involved in a Federation-Klingon dispute.

1652. Jemie - December 3, 2012

Why is ‘Star Trek’ in the poster in such a small dark font. Almost hidden. Are they that ashamed of it?

1653. Killamarshtrek - December 3, 2012

So the bad guy is in London. All this time we were thinking it’s Gary Mitchel, it’s actually GRANT Mitchell from ‘Eastenders”!

1654. Killamarshtrek - December 3, 2012

I know the ‘Destination London’ Convention was supposed to be a rip off but there’s no need to destroy the city!

1655. jeanniespock - December 3, 2012

Surprised no-one seems to have posted a link to the new film poster.
It is here

http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y149/jeanniethegrinch/?action=view&current=255171_10151164885843716_970285203_n-1.jpg

Yes it is genuine.

1656. trekmaster - December 3, 2012

Hm, if it’s London…maybe we’ll get a chance to see Patrick Stewart!? :)

1657. Spock Jenkins - December 3, 2012

@1652 – LOOL! How did I foresee your question??

Please see my answer at 1644…

1658. PaulB - December 3, 2012

#1655 – You’re joking, right? The poster was posted here hours ago, and the last 90 comments or so are all about the poster. You’re late to the game, and you didn’t even bother to look at previous comments before posting.

1659. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

IMHO, the Paramount artists just copy and pasted some futuristic buildings as the geographical relationship between the London buildings is completely off so it’s not the UK but SF. The wall (again IMHO) is Starfleet HQ.

1660. Spock Jenkins - December 3, 2012

I meant @Jemie, 1657: ( the posts keep changing place as soon as I write something! )

LOOL! How did I foresee your question??

Please see my answer at 1644…

1661. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 3, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch is in Tokyo now and apparently he has confirmed that he is there to promote ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’…

I told you… ;-) :-)

1662. Jonboc - December 3, 2012

I hope it’s just a teaser poster…my inner Trekkie was not awakened. But it will be in 13 days! :)

1663. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

Not really too much of a surprise why JJ, boborci and co. went for this:

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2009/04/16/igns-top-10-classic-star-trek-episodes?page=5

“Trek’s second pilot is the stuff of perfect sci-fi: Compelling action mixed with heady, effective, and at times emotional, drama. It finds a perfect balance between delivering on Gene Roddenberry’s “Wagon Train to the Stars” premise and the ethically challenging landscape of the morality play.”

Keeps the Trekkies happy and gives them a pallet where they can go all Dark Knight on. That’s not MY Trek but I’m a freakin’ dinosaur so what do I know. I’m still going to go see it and likely love it…

1664. Max - December 3, 2012

First of all, that is definitly London, I’ve never been there but with the shard and the gherkin its as obvious as if they put the harbour bridge and opera house in the shot and we had a debate over whether or not it was Sydney.
Second, is that a pointy ear I see on that guy?

1665. CJS - December 3, 2012

About the poster:

1. An unimaginative ripoff of The Dark Knight Rises. Paramount’s substandard PR department strikes again.

2. That is San Francisco. Which would indicate that it is not a bunch of ships in orbit or out in space that get “detonated” but Starfleet Headquarters/Academy.

3. This villain seems very un-Khan-like. But the whole Columbine Trenchcoat Mafia look is ridiculous.

Between Abrams obsessive secrecy, that horribly written synopsis and this uninspired poster, my enthusiasm for a movie that I really wanted to see has dropped to an all time low.

1666. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1664: I’ve blown up the image as big as Photoshop will go right to pixel level. Very round ear. And it’s not London as the buildings are in the wrong places. IMHO it’s a Paramount copy and paste job since the artists aren’t original enough to devise their own futuristic buildings.

1667. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1665: Your #1 & #2, absolutely yes. #3, there is noooooooo way it’s Khan. It’s Gary. No doubt left in my mind.

I can hardly wait for boborci to solve the enigma:

On what planet (in or out of the Alpha Quadrant) would a long list of Hispanic actors including Del Toro be set to play Gary?

Methinks that there was some very serious last minute script juggling when Del Toro backed out.

1668. Wendy2066 - December 3, 2012

Trek into darkness?? Kirk settling a personal score??? That is not Star Trek! It might be an exciting movie, but I’m getting depressed reading about a force of terror from within, sacrifices made. Star Trek is about hope and amazing heroism, about a dependable interglalactic organisation with structure (Star Fleet). I dont want any more wrath of Khan dark smokey ships with everyone dieing. Kirk was always able to avoid everyone dieing through his and Spock’s and McCoy’s cleverness and risking of their own lives. Kirk doesn’t go on personal vendettas, he goes on missions that risk his life to save others. I hope this movie is slanted more appropiately than this synopsis makes it sound!

1669. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1668: +1. However, I think we’d all better get used to the new Trek as old Trek is as gone forever as its century. We’re in an age where everything is dark and depressing… I despise movies like that… but I’m neither JJ nor Brad Grey.

1670. Max - December 3, 2012

Oh yeah, not to mention the Thames and Eye. BTW did you notice that the City looks perfectly in tact? It seems to be just the general area the guy is standing in that seems destroyed. Anyone in London have any idea where that could be from this perpective? Houses of Parliament maybe?

1671. Aurore - December 3, 2012

“I would have thought you knew, it is the law for bad guys to be wearing Corinthian leather…’Tis how we tell them from the good guys ;-)”
_______

I Khan’t believe it!
…’So good to know…. I like it!

Makes me wanna Singh !

1672. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1670: IT’S NOT LONDON! PERIOD. Go to Google Maps and look at where The Gherkin is in relationship to the London Eye. That’s nooooooooooooowhere near where it is in the poster. THIS IS LAZY COPY AND PASTE PARAMOUNT PR ARTISTS… not a “revelation” that Starfleet HQ is now in the UK!

1673. El Chup - December 3, 2012

@1670 Save for the wrong position of the Shard (the Gherkin, Thames, London Eye & Lloyds of London are roughly in the right place, if not exact) it would be in the east end of London looking west towards the City of London (the financial district) and beyond that in the direction of Waterloo Station.

1674. Max - December 3, 2012

1666 You must be kidding me! You can clearly see 4 distinctive land marks identifying it as London. Maybe you could put the gherkin & shard down to lazy cut & paste but the Thames and London Eye in the finer detail? There is just no question to it!! Although I accept your conclusion that the ear is not pointy.

1675. The Professor - December 3, 2012

I just saw the poster on Facebook. Very Dark Knight Rises-esque.
But very cool!!!!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151164885843716&set=a.104963698715.94026.7774903715&type=1&theater

1676. Jack - December 3, 2012

1664. I’ve been there. I don’t see London. But I haven’t blown it up yet.

1677. The Professor - December 3, 2012

Man… I am so far behind.

1678. Jack - December 3, 2012

My apologies — I’d looked at a tiny image on my phone. Just saw a bigger one — it’s absolutely London, without a doubt.

There’s the eye, St. Paul’s, the Gherkin. It’s not a Paramount cut and past job. It’s London.

1679. Max - December 3, 2012

In regards to placement of the buildings, it’s called artistic licence. Please explain why a giant fairground wheel next to a big dirty river would be there if it’s not London.

1680. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1679: Artistic incompetence, maybe. First Paramount comes up with a release that was written by a grammar school dropout, and then they plunk London buildings into a skyline without any geographical reality. Is there ANYONE with their hands on the wheel at Paramount, or is Brad Grey just as much of a hack as I’ve always thought he was?

1681. Sebastian S. - December 3, 2012

Responding to this quote:

“Mitchell didn’t stop his heart for longer than a few seconds. There are non-superpowered humans alive right now who can best that.”
_________________________________________

Voluntarily, and for 22 seconds?!? You’d be dead. Not too mention that was right after Mitchell was afflicted. His powers were growing (if you recall Sulu’s example) exponentially. By the end of the hour he could survive a phaser to the heart (hint hint; IDW version) and he could make vegetation from nothing. Watch the entire episode (and read the IDW comic for good measure). Your post is moot, really.

And I just saw the teaser poster this morning; looks like a Dark Knight movie (fire that ad agency ASAP; call Don Draper….). It doesn’t feel Star Trek AT ALL.

But on the plus side, as someone on another site pointed out? Look VERY closely and you’ll see gray sideburns…. ;-)

1682. Jack - December 3, 2012

Yeah, it does look like the wrong side of the Thames, but… It’s still possible. We don’t know where Cumberbatch is, exactly…

From HitFix, btw.

“Most people will not have a complicated relationship with this image. They’ll see it in a movie theater at some point and either say, “Oh, wow, that’s a ‘Star Trek’ movie!” or “Oh, ‘Star Trek’? Yeah, that’s not for me.” Fans are going to tie themselves in figurative knots for months now trying to parse every single bit of meaning out of this, reading the tea leaves that will basically always say, “THEY ARE GOING TO RUIN THIS THING THAT YOU LOVE BECAUSE THEY ARE FOOLS! THEY ARE ALL FOOLS!” For most normal audience members and ticket buyers, this is something they’ll see once or twice that will remind them that it exists.”

1683. Sebastian S. - December 3, 2012

Bigger version of the Batman—er, Into Darkness teaser poster here:

http://cdn.mos.totalfilm.com/images/s/star-trek-into-darkness-teaser-poster-revealed-122622-00-1000-100.jpg

1684. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1681, yup, my pixel-visible Photoshop magnification shows white on the sideburns. All non-Garyers can now give up their quest and accept it.

As for the skyline, here was the conversation in the Paramount Art Dept.:

“I gotta do a 23rd century skyline… but I’ll be all week designing futuristic buildings…”
“Hey, here’s a way to save you lots of time… SimCity British Edition…”

:)

1685. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1683: Same size as the previously posted

http://forum.starplex.co.uk/download/file.php?id=23&mode=view

1686. Legend of Link - December 3, 2012

Anyone see the new poster on IGN right now? pretty epic. Check it out!

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/12/03/star-trek-into-darkness-teaser-poster-revealed

1687. STEMBOB - December 3, 2012

Why is it taking so long for Trekmovie.com to write article on this NEW poster …. ill look for my breaking news elsewhere!

It is now quite obviously Gary Mitchell Kinetic powers etc… controlling peoples minds and destroying things with a single thought?

1688. Legend of Link - December 3, 2012

Though I kind of feel like they are copying The Dark Knight saga a little much here. haha. The shape of the destruction in the shape of the Star Fleet insignia. Still pretty cool though.

1689. Max - December 3, 2012

Good it’s settled, it’s London. Well my pommy friends, there are some ashes you can keep! :-) Sorry Americans, inside joke between English and Aussies

1690. Trekzilla - December 3, 2012

Cool teaser poster — even though it is like a Batman poster.

Cumby is either Mitchell or a new character entirely.

He’s not Khan.

1691. T'Cal - December 3, 2012

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/12/03/star-trek-into-darkness-poster/

1692. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

@1689:

IT’S

NOT

LONDON

Let’s just agree to disagree, ok? :)

@1690

IT’S

GARY

There is nooooooooooooooo further doubt about that.

And if one more commenter comes on this thread and says: Wow Look! The Poster Is Up! I’m gonna go get drunk… and it’s 6:45 am here. :)

1693. disgruntled - December 3, 2012

@1692

Er, yes it is?! – I can see Gherkin, The Shard, Canary Wharf, The London Eye…..

It IS London…. Duh

1694. STEMBOB - December 3, 2012

I dont care where it is London etc… Id prefer Space battles!!!!!!! In Space!!!!!

1695. Trekzilla - December 3, 2012

I’m sure most of this takes place in space. The issue I have is with this taking place on Earth at all. As others pointed out — TOS hardly ever went to Earth and when it did, it was a time travel story.

I’ll withhold judgement until I see it though. If done right, this could be a scary film in the mold of TNG’s The Best of Both Worlds! So, an opportunity for a great movie here.

Hope it turns out to be a classic!

1696. Nony - December 3, 2012

Huh. I was expecting a poster rollout today, but I wasn’t expecting another Nolan sequel. Really hitting us over the head with the GUYS LOOK THIS IS COOL LIKE THE DARK KNIGHT marketing from the get-go…

So, anyway, might this poster imply that Cumberbatch has come from (the movie’s) past? Because there’s no air traffic in the sky at all – unless all the ships are already gone because he appears to have blown up two buildings already – and there are a few skyscrapers but no hugely futuristic infrastructure. This could be, like, 2050.

1697. Nony - December 3, 2012

Also, for some reason, this poster really sends me back to my early ‘Cumby’s an Augment’ theory. Not Khan, but another Augment, one who knew him and who has perhaps been biding his time in Starfleet…

1698. STEMBOB - December 3, 2012

Gaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyy

Dont have quite the same impact?– Khhhhhaaaaaaaaannnnn

1699. AJ - December 3, 2012

I see some symbolism in that Cumby’s back is turned to the delta, as if he’s turned his back on Starfleet and all that it represents.

1700. EM - December 3, 2012

Has anyone here actually read the 1700 comments?
Gary Mitchell is my karl Urban inspired guess.

1701. Trekzilla - December 3, 2012

#1697 — That, I could see. Maybe the equivalent of one of Bin Ladens Lieutenants…seeking revenge for his death…

There is that line in Star Trek 2 where Khan briefly tells Joachim “I shall avenge you!” after the bridge ceiling collapses on him, killing him. So, that’s not out of character for an Augment.

Could be. But these Augments would have to be a lot more powerful than we saw in previous Treks…

Eh…I’m still leaning towards Gary Mitchell.

Khan was never in Starfleet and neither was Joachim…

It’s either Mitchell or a totally new character.

1702. Bird of Clay - December 3, 2012

the poster looks nice, although i hoped i would be even more excited.

i hope we are going for a totally new character and let’s just hope all this secrecy and wait are worth it.

1703. Jack - December 3, 2012

1692. It’s absolutely London. Unless there’s a colony somewhere where they rebuilt St. Paul’s, the Gherkin and the London Eye. It doesn’t just look like them — it is them. I still can’t figure out where, though — but I’ve never been in London and not been lost, on foot.

Anyway, I’m thrilled. Enough of just San Francisco already. We have a United Earth and all we ever see is San Francisco? But I also wish that drill would have hit the damned bridge in the last one. Vulcan’s collapsed but the Golden Gate bridge stays unscathed. I guess Spock would have got the blame for it, but still…

Maybe Cumberbatch wants revenge against all the London condo-developers who apparently destroy the damned skyline between now and the 2360s.

Why does future always = Coruscant.

I’m not thrilled with all the stories this morning calling it a TDKR rip off. Does carnage and greys = TDKR? Maybe. Maybe not.

1704. section9 - December 3, 2012

Where the hell is St. Paul’s in this poster?

And where the F**k is Wembley? Don’t tell me that they don’t have the Cup Final in the 23rd Century because….

…there will ALWAYS be an England, and we know that Gary Mitchell is on the rampage because QPR is still up for Relegation.

After almost three centuries. Oh, and England got bounced from the 2262 World Cup Quarterfinal by the Portugese.

Again…..

1705. The Last Vulcan - December 3, 2012

To all the people who continue to think this is London. I lived in London for almost two years so I know how RIDICULOUS this assumption is.

GOOGLE MAP DIRECTIONS FROM

30 St. Mary Axe (Gherkin)

TO

London Eye

then figure out how much terraforming is required to get to see the two in the perspective shown in the poster. These two locations are separated by an ELBOW in the Thames so unless someone picked up Southbank and turned it 180 degrees around you’re smoking the same wacky tobacky as the morons in the Paramount Art Dept.

1706. Sebastian S. - December 3, 2012

Not crazy about the Batman-ish poster, but the city is clearly London; you can see the eye.

I was thinking this could also pull double duty as an advert for BBC’s third season of Sherlock (it’s already got London and Cumberbatch). Just change the copy to this:

“HOLMES IS BACK. AND THIS TIME? HE’S A NO S**T – SHERLOCK…”

(Hee hee….) ;-D

1707. Nony - December 3, 2012

@1705 The Last Vulcan

They’re not necessarily the *same* structures that exist in London now. For instance, the Eye could have been destroyed in World War 3 and rebuilt in 2100 or something, just not in the same spot, because maybe that area was blown up by a nuclear missile.

1708. Mark Lynch - December 3, 2012

I fired up Google earth to get some perspective off of this new poster.

Quite a lot of artistic licence has been taken… ;-)

http://forum.starplex.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=102#p149

1709. Sebastian S. - December 3, 2012

# 1706

TLV~

I understand that the geography is all over the map, but at least judging by the iconic buildings squeezed into the frame? It’s supposed to be London (the Paramount ad people are smoking crack, that’s all). And maybe Mitchell DOES pick up Southbank and turn it 180 degrees around (ala “Inception”)… he IS a demigod, after all. ;-D

Same thing with the “San Francisco” skyline of ST09. They ‘futured’ it up till it was virtually unrecognizable…

1710. Slornie - December 3, 2012

Regarding the comments about certain London landmarks being out of place in the poster. With it being the 23rd century, isn’t it possible that they have developed the technology to MOVE buildings? ;)

1711. Trekzilla - December 3, 2012

Who cares?! Its a frackken POSTER!!!

1712. Curious Cadet - December 3, 2012

@1695. Trekzilla

“The issue I have is with this taking place on Earth at all. As others pointed out — TOS hardly ever went to Earth and when it did, it was a time travel story.”

Abrams likes to literally “ground” his audiences and connect them to the subject matter through something relatable, hence the Corvette scene in ST09, building the ship in an Iowa corn field, etc.

The issue I have is the tired old “shadow government conspiracy inside takeover”. As far as the audience is concerned, they haven’t seen this Kirk do any exploration, all they’ve seen him do is save the Earth. But that seems to be the plot of every Michael Bay movie, and what audiences seem to want during the Summer to accompany their popcorn. So f**k the Federation, all that matters is saving the Earth, which is a perspective most of the world expects from American filmmakers. At least this time it appears the filmmakers are not also equating the Earth with the United States by setting the primary action in a major US city.

1713. Trekzilla - December 3, 2012

Much agreed, #1712! However, I’m not sure the “shadow government thing” figures into this. As annoying as it is, the whole save the Earth thing was used in the original film series too. I’m not sure why it has to be Earth with all those planets and starbases out there.

It’s the characters that should be in jeopardy — not Earth. Everything is so dumbed down these days…and now it’s Trek’s turn to be dumbed down I guess.

So much for “boldly going where no one has gone before”.

1714. Pat - December 3, 2012

1679. Max – December 3, 2012
In regards to placement of the buildings, it’s called artistic licence. Please explain why a giant fairground wheel next to a big dirty river would be there if it’s not London.

You’ve just described Chicago….

1715. Peter Loader - December 3, 2012

Regarding the poster: Looks like someones destroyed Earth again as part of the Temporal Cold War.

1716. Peter Loader - December 3, 2012

Suspect the Guardian of Forever is somehow involved in this movie.

1717. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

1681. Sebastian S. – December 3, 2012 “Voluntarily, and for 22 seconds?!? You’d be dead.”

Brain death doesn’t happen till somewhere between minute 3 and minute 5. This is why CPR and crash carts work.

But I don’t even have to go that far to disprove your 22 seconds:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0203/08/ltm.17.html

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/4312481/Romanias-Got-Talent-won-by-Cristian-Gog-who-stopped-his-own-heart.html

1718. Phil - December 3, 2012

At somepoint someone is going to conclude that the movie will be a mash-up of every TOS episode ever made.

Also, in keeping with every other Trek movie ever made, I’ll predict that the ‘unstoppable force of terror’ will be stopped rather easily…

1719. Jonblocs - December 3, 2012

Why arent you reporting on the Japan press conference/premiere of the 9 min IMAX sequence with JJ, Cumby and Chris pine taking place in Japan in about 3 hours from now

1720. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

If people are seeing gray sideburns then it most definitely is NOT Mitchell. He sported gray temples as did movie Pike.

1721. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

#1720. Re: Gray sideburns

I just rechecked their photos. If you are seeing grey sideburns only then it is not Mitchell because his massively gray temples would be even more visible than his gray sideburns. Pike in the movie seems to have a light graying overall with it intensifying in his sideburns. THE CAGE/MENAGERIE Pike sported light graying at the bottom of is temples/top of his sideburns.

1722. Jack - December 3, 2012

1719. Why arent you reporting on the Japan press conference/premiere of the 9 min IMAX sequence with JJ, Cumby and Chris pine taking place in Japan in about 3 hours from now.

Into Darkness isn’t released in Japan until September 2013. Pine’s there now promoting his latest movie. But I wonder whether that bit about a news conference with Pine, Cumberbatch and Abrams was lost in translation…

It seems weird that they’d be releasing that IMAX bit now in Japan, but it’s possible…

“(from the Japanese into Google translate:) Scheduled for release in September 2013, “Star Trek Into Darkness (original title)” found 50 at 9:00 am on Tuesday, December 04, Theater 2 Kiba Cinemas 109 Paramount Pictures Japan is (IMAX) a special presentation of footage held. Japan also director Chris Pine Brian Burke J · J · Abrams, starring, Benedict Cumberbatch batch, the producer, the day to attend.

1723. Jack - December 3, 2012

Unless that conference is somewhere else, say London…

1724. Jack - December 3, 2012

Forget I wrote that…

1725. Jack - December 3, 2012

Last Vulcan — you’re right that the angles are all screwed up. The eye seems like it’s on the opposite side of the Thames — but could it just be a really weird angle. St. Paul’s is *behind* the Gherkin here. Isn’t it?

1726. JRT! - December 3, 2012

Probably a futuristic London,as you can see buldings that are in London TODAY! I go there every month and used to live in the UK,and I’ve walked past all these buildings at some point. And yes,it’s called artistic license,or laziness…..whatever floats your boat,lol…..,so future London could look like this,lol! It’s not the only movie who’s done this. You think everything you see in Spider-Man’s New York is always there? If you have the movies on dvd or br,watch the extras and see how much artistic license THEY use for New York! LOL!

It’s a boring poster anyways.

J-R!

1727. Disinvited - December 3, 2012

Did we make it near the record number of posts?

1728. Mark James Tucker A Man And His Dream - December 3, 2012

The press conference happend 7 hours ago well, before the article that there was going to be a press conference was finally posted on here.
And yet it is written as if the bloody thing hasnt even occured yet.

http://www.wireimage.com/search/#events?q=157822479&s=3

IN those pics we see jj talking into a mic, and Bendict walking up with a mic, come on surely the characters name had to be revealed.

1729. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 4, 2012

I have to smile looking at those pictures. Look how tall Chris and Ben are beside the producers! IMDb have Benedict Cumberbatch with bold blue eyes. Clearly they are not boldly blue – more brown/green in colouring. Chris has the bold blue eyes. I can’t get over how amazing his eyes look. Perhaps it is the contact lenses he wears, but I don’t think so.

Now, grow some hair, Chris! Please! You are not in the Marines. Actually neither was Jack Ryan at the stage when his story gets told in the Jack Ryan movie. Lovely hair is not meant to be cut off all the time.

1730. Sarah - December 4, 2012

I already smell Oscar.

1731. Phil - December 4, 2012

@1727. Nope. I think the record is still in the neighborhood of 2400.

1732. Leo R - December 4, 2012

I have one (probably bad) theory regarding the plot of the new movie. Let’s say the villain is the popular rumor, Khan. Instead of Khan being a ruthless dictator using the Eugenic Wars to further his power, like in the Prime universe, he created something else – the “unstoppable force” aka the Borg. The Star Trek Encyclopedia speculates that there could be a connection between the Borg and V’ger, the vessel encountered in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. If this is plausible, then Humanity could be the very creators of the Borg. Staying with that theory, its possible.

Look at the teaser poster again and the building the villain in standing in the middle of. Doesn’t the Trek emblem look like a tear in the hull of a Borg cube? This is an alternate universe.

1733. The Great Bird lives - December 5, 2012

Leo, I’ve said the same thing- but without the V’ger slant… that would be awesome, though

1734. Ust - December 8, 2012

I hope JJ and crew turn this franchise on its ear. I am a die hard trek fan and can only hope they pick a character the fanatics haven’t guessed. I want it to be A re-imagined ‘Q’, why shouldn’t it be?

1735. Astrophysicophile - December 8, 2012

787. I now agree with you that the villain is Redjac.

1736. Astrophysicophile - December 8, 2012

1735. So, in comparing the synopsis, poster, and trailer to Redjac and Garth, I see that:

1. “unstoppable force of terror” – Redjac

2. “from within (the crew’s) own organization” – Garth

3. “detonated the fleet and everything it stands for” – Garth is a genius and a fleet captain and might have the ingenuity and access to hack into the computers of all the ships in the fleet and setting them to self-destruct or to crash into the Starfleet and Federation institutions on Earth and then self-destruct; Redjac can control the computers of ships like the Enterprise

4. “war-zone world” – Axanar

5. “one man weapon of mass destruction” – If Garth is possessed Redjac, he will be a one man WMD

6. “epic chess game of life and death” – In “Whom Gods Destroy”, Garth played a chess game of life and death against the crew of the Enterprise; Redjac hates all that lives and thrives and feeds on death

7. The city of London on the movie’s poster – Redjac slew at will in the heart of the most populous city of old Earth

8. Cumberbatch’s character speaking with a British accent – If Garth is possessed Redjac, he might speak with this accent (but then Hengist and the Enterprise did not, although Jaris already did)

9. “your world” – Garth is from Izar; Redjac, from who knows where

10. “You think your world is safe? It is an illusion. A comforting lie told to protect you. Enjoy these final moments of peace” – In “Whom Gods Destroy”, Garth was offended when Kirk spoke of the Axanar peace mission, and called Spock truly blind for agreeing with Kirk’s statement that the humanitarians and statesmen of the mission had a dream that made Spock and him brothers, a dream that became a reality and spread throughout the stars; Redjac feeds on fear and terror

11. “I have returned” – Garth studied and is headquarted on Earth; Redjac slew at will on old Earth

12. “to have my vengeance.” – In “Whom Gods Destroy”, Garth felt betrayed and barbarically treated by his crew, Starfleet, and the Federation; Redjac feeds on fear, terror, and death, plus in “Wolf in the Fold”, it was beamed into open space by the crew of the Enterprise of the prime universe

13. Eve’s character screaming in horror – Redjac hates women, and preys on women because they are more easily and more deeply terrified, generating more sheer horror than the male of the species

1737. Astrophysicophile - December 9, 2012

1736. Sorry, “possessed Redjac” should be “possessed by Redjac.”

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.