STID tidbits – Alternate Klingon Makeup ideas, STID in Motion Pictures! webcomic, Blu-ray retailer exclusives info, and more |
jump to navigation

STID tidbits – Alternate Klingon Makeup ideas, STID in Motion Pictures! webcomic, Blu-ray retailer exclusives info, and more August 29, 2013

by Matt Wright , Filed under: DVD/Blu-ray,Humor,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Creature creator Neville Page has posted new design work from Into Darkness with alternate Klingon looks. Web comic Motion Pictures! has been exploring STID over the last number of weeks, concluding this week. Forbes says Star Trek Into Darkness is one of the worst marketed movies of the summer. We also have a list of which retailers will have exclusives with their Into Darkness Blu-ray copies.

Klingon Makeup Designs

Creature creator Neville Page posted 16 variations on the Klingons of Into Darkness on his personal portfolio site, there are some rather interesting versions, some pretty cool (check out the one with a missing eye and a scarred over eye socket), some look like Klingons bred with the Predator race…

np_makeup_1 np_makeup_2

Check out all the designs in high resolution on Neville Page’s website.

STID in Motion Pictures! Web comic strip

A boy and his robot mysteriously gain the power to jump in and out of movies.  Hilarity ensues.
Every day in this strip our characters will find themselves trapped in a different movie, and, well, let’s just say that those movies will be mocked.  But with love!


Check out the whole series of STID comic strips over at

Forbes names best and worst marketed movies of Summer 2013
STID is one of the worst marketed summer movies this year, Man of Steel one of the best.

For the record, with $457 million worldwide, Star Trek Into Darkness is no flop and will eventually make money once Trekkies buy the Blu Rays. But neither was it the kind of sequel that explodes out of the gate due to the goodwill of its predecessor. Much of the extra $68 million earned over Star Trek is due to inflation and the 3D price bump, making this sequel closer to G.I. Joe: Retaliation than Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest. So what happened? Well, J.J. Abrams and company shoehorned a major villain from the original series for little reason other than marketability and then spent the next year or so lying to everyone and claiming said villain wasn’t in the picture. Bad Robot wrecked their own movie by inserting a “in name only” variation on a classic Trek villain seemingly for fan service only to kneecap the marketing department by disallowing them to market said fan service.

Read the full list on

STID Blu-ray retailer exclusives information

IGN has compiled a list of what you’ll get from each retailer offering exclusives when you buy the Blu-ray of Into Darkness.

Target: “Collector’s Set with Special Features Bonus Disc” Exclusively at Target, a collector’s set that includes unique package art and a Blu-ray bonus disc with over 70 minutes of special features including 30 minutes of exclusive content.


Best Buy: “30 Minutes of Exclusive Never-Before-Seen Content” A Best Buy Exclusive, delve into the creation of the film’s unique alien creatures, get a first-hand look at one of the locations used for the U.S.S. Enterprise’s Engine Room and more.


Walmart: “Limited Edition Gift Set with Steelbook & Villain Ship” Only at Walmart, this Limited Edition Gift Set includes the Blu-ray Combo Pack in collectible Steelbook packaging and a replica of the U.S.S. Vengeance.


Amazon: Starfleet Phaser Limited Edition Gift Set An Amazon exclusive, the Starfleet Phaser Gift Set includes a 1:1 scale authentic Starfleet phaser replica, gloss black display stand, brass plaque and the Blu-ray 3D Combo Pack.


— Source: IGN


1. Riker's Mailbox - August 29, 2013

How about this?

2. i'mpaul - August 29, 2013

The box seriously says:

Star Trek

That’s ridiculous.

I loved this movie the first time I saw it, the further away we get from that the more the bothersome parts bother me.

3. Danya - August 29, 2013

It somehow did not occur to me until now that the Klingon that you see in the film has no facial hair whatsoever. I don’t really like that choice. I think of all the alternate options I would choose either 6 or 14. The long goatee thing looks pretty cool but a lot of these are a little too close to Ming the Merciless style Asian villain stereotypes. 14 does a pretty good job of the general idea without it looking too much like that. 6 is kind of brilliant for maintaining that basic shape but doing it with a full beard, which would be pretty different. I feel like I might have chosen that one if it was up to me.

4. John W. - August 29, 2013

Does that make Kahn the “Dark Ness Monster” then?

5. Melllvar - August 29, 2013

I don’t necessarily dislike the new films for all these obvious things people keep pointing to —

I remember when I was young, I used to get paid out by my buddies for liking Star Trek over Star Wars. And I honestly couldn’t blame them — Star Wars is a hell of a ride! Even if it is fairly ridiculous and doesn’t really contain much in the way of greater message / meaning. Star Trek wins in this regard every time.

I used to kinda wish however that they would just make an epic movie / a few epic movies to give all the people incapable of watching something that speaks to those who value intelligence over flashy lights and special effects. I always knew Star Trek had the capacity to be ‘mainstream awesome’ due to the wicked concepts etc etc.

It may not be the Trek that we all know and love but let’s face it, that’s been done. 700+ episodes and 10 movies done. I don’t hate the new stuff. Hell at least I can now convince people to come and see them with me!

I loved Into Darkness and for all of these reasons, I’m looking forward to getting the dvd and watching the hell out of it.

Nothing is perfect my friends :)

6. Elias Javalis - August 29, 2013

Forbes First mistake : Movie will eventually make money from the Blu-Ray

– The Movie is already a big success and the Blu/DVD will add 100-150 mil.

Forbes Second Mistake : Worst Marketing, Trek??? Overseas??? Really!!

And for the Record, Trek was a lot better. Marketing doesnt make a Good Movie!

7. Phil - August 29, 2013

RE: Forbes. Ouch, but spot on. People here were saying that 18 months ago.

Sadly, if O & K have been asked to shoehorn in another script, it would appear they have not learned from their mistake. Whales for Sha Ka Ree, anyone?

8. Buzz Cagney - August 29, 2013

Been saying it all alone. They should have got a proper Khan, one that resembled Ricardo, and they should have embraced him in the advertising and made him central to the story, not this secondary type role he had here.
I guess they were too embarrassed given the poor job they made of it.

Such a wasted opportunity. This missed open goal will surely haunt the Bad Robot team for years to come.

9. Smike - August 29, 2013

The Klingon make-up design ideas are pointless. Why even bother designing new Klingons? It’s an alternate TIMELINE caused by the destruction of the Kelvin and Vulcan. None of this affects Klingon make-up… This is one of the details that really bothers me with this new movie series. Apart from that, lots of the other sketches look a lot better than the final outcome in the movie. At least some of then had the TOS Klingon vibe…

10. Smike - August 29, 2013

The rest of them look like Predators and Uruk’Hai…Why?

11. Basement Blogger - August 30, 2013

I agree with the assessment that Star Trek Into Darkness was badly marketed. The readers of this site who are mostly hardcore Trekkers, knew the release date and some details. But if you were a casual Trekker, you didn’t know a whole lot one year before the release.

The publicity machine took off just six months before the film opened. Contrast that with the upcoming Avengers sequel. STID had the crew deny Khan was in the picture. Okay. But Avengers comes out in 2015. We already know the villain. It’s Ultron. What does that do? It leads to us geeks looking the guy up. And just because we know he’s in the movie doesn’t make us not want to see the movie. The point is that the Avengers is getting you excited nearly two years away.

Paramount and Bad Robot could have done more in terms of publicity way before Star Trek Into Darkness was released. Attend conventions. Sponsor viewings of Star Trek films with guest commentary say on YouTube. Make your money with commercials. Do what Peter Jackson did with the Hobbitt. And it’s simply incompetent to have no presence at Comic Con San Diego the year before you open. I mean all the major entertainment news outlets are there.

12. Patrick Shirley - August 30, 2013

#11. Why would J.J. Abrams or anyone involved in his Trek movies go to Comic-Con? If I was running the convention center I wouldn’t allow anybody from those films anywhere near the building because of all the comments people make on all these threads. I’d be afraid of some Trekkie murdering them. I don’t want anybody from the reboot going to any sci-fi convention. I was convinced Alice Eve was going to be assaulted at the Las Vegas con.

Paramount is never going to send any Star Trek material to Comic-Con again because they’re not willing to risk the lives of the people involved.

13. Paul - August 30, 2013

Yea, Khan is not Sikh anymore. Why?

In the original timeline, Kirk and Spock visited 1960s twice. Their interference unwittingly caused one of the scientists from eugenics program, certain Harold Ericsson, to be late at work. As a result, different decision was passed, and his Indian colleague Noonian Singh became the gene donor instead.

In this timeline, Kirk never went back to the 60s, Ericsson was at his office in time, and as a result, the eugenic superman is a Nordic type (just as planned in the original project, stolen by Allied forces in Germany back in 1945). No more questions! ;-)

14. Toonloon - August 30, 2013

I like that the kept Harrison’s identity a secret. When I saw the movie on the first day it had an impact on me that I wasn’t certain who he was. In fact, lots of the movie had an impact on me because of the secrecy.

Whether or not they could have marketed the movie better… I’ll leave that to the experts.

If I had to point at something that hurt the box office (and I’m not getting into the film itself because I loved it and still do), is the time between movies. Chris Pine was smoking hot after the first movie and they should have capitalised on his momentum. 4 years between films killed the inertia, but then again, it might not have been as good as it was if it arrived earlier.

15. Christopher D - August 30, 2013

An easy way around the inconsistencies would be to call it an alternate UNIVERSE instead of an alternate TIMELINE.

We already know alternate universes exist in Trek lore and it would be easy to explain why things are different, Klingons evolved slightly differently in this universe, etc.

16. Basement Blogger - August 30, 2013

@ 12

Patrick Shirley, you really thought someone was going to assault Alice Eve at the Vegas Con? I read the report from Star on Eve’s appearance and there was nothing about fans about ready to assault her. The picture of her had a big smile on her face. Link. And you think that because of the comments on these threads, some Trekker is going to kill a Trek actor at Comic Con? Look I know some of the posters can be mean but murderous? Come on. You’re not on drugs? :-)

Link. According to Shirley, Alice Eve was about to get assaulted at Vegas Con. . Got to give it to her. She”s smiling broadly during her appearance. I knew she was a good actress but I didn’t know she was that good.

17. Thomas - August 30, 2013

It’s amazing how much intolerance and hatred is spread by a lot of the Star Trek community as of late. It seems like anyone who likes the new series is some kind of idiot or “not a real Star Trek fan” or some other nonsense. If people are going to brag about how long they’ve been Star Trek fans or whatever, then they should probably respect what the series represents a little bit more. Gene Roddenberry wouldn’t approve of us all fighting and bickering over such petty dribble. Let people have their opinions. Some will like the new series for what it is and some will not. But I’m saddened by this odd superiority complex some classic fans have in this day and age.

Star Trek Into Darkness is by no means a “perfect” film, but it doesn’t deserve such nasty treatment by the “fans”. It is one thing to dislike a film for whatever personal reason because you have the right to your own opinion, but why do you insist on attacking anyone who disagrees with you? Stop being a cry baby and go watch the Wrath of Khan if you think it’s a better film. Hell, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan isn’t exactly a perfect movie either. It too is filled with plot holes, like the entire beginning of the movie.

So the USS Reliant travels to the Ceti Alpha system, which the Enterprise visited years before. You would think the Enterprise being in system would mean they also charted it. That includes the number of planets and the like. Yet years later the Reliant enters this system and moves towards what they think is Ceti Alpha VI. So I guess no one in Starfleet knows how to count? Ceti Alpha VI exploded and they didn’t notice the missing planet?

That system should have been charted, which they then should have been able to access. How did they miss this and for that matter, how do you mistake the fifth planet for the sixth anyway? Last time I checked, five comes before six so the loss of the sixth planet should not have affected the order of the fifth planet. That would be like Mars exploding and scientists saying Earth is now the fourth planet in the system. NO, Jupiter is now the fourth planet, Earth remains number three.

I suppose it was said the planet’s orbit had shifted, but that doesn’t change the fact they didn’t notice a missing planet at all. You would think there would be a massive debris field where the sixth planet used to be and they should have noticed the orbit of the fifth planet has changed. It’s now either closer to the sun, or further away. Which ever directed it ended up going, it’s clearly not in the same orbit it was the last time the Enterprise visited it. Again this could have been entirely avoided had they simply checked their sensors and compared it to charts in the Starfleet database.

Had the Reliant crew been a little more competent they would have never landed on the wrong stinking planet and Khan would have never escaped. Does this ruin the rest of the movie? In my opinion it does not and I think the Wrath of Khan is a really good movie. I just don’t think it deserves to be treated like some Holy Grail of Star Trek. People treat it like it’s absolutely perfect when it most certainly is not. It too has its flaws.

Then of course there is the whole “they ripped off TWOK” argument. You know new fans of the series, who never saw TWOK, probably didn’t know that. It was supposed to be a new experience for a new generation of fans. Yes the old fans know it’s the same, but I think that’s ok. It was role reversal and it was interesting to see how it played out with Spock losing his friend instead of the other way around. I enjoyed it.

I just don’t think we should attack each other simply because someone liked a film you didn’t like. People need to grow up and realize their negative attitude goes against the very thing they claim to love.

18. marty - August 30, 2013

so which retailer has deleted scenes? i don’t care for commentary or looking at still photos on bonus features. i like the ALL the trailers, the outtakes, deleted scenes, and featurettes.

19. The Keeper - August 30, 2013

Least frightening Klingon design ever. That undefined mess of a crest was the resulting trade mark of TNG series.
They were completely unlike the spinal bone continuations crest seen in STTMP. We might be able to trace that crest mess look starting with STTSFS.
The Romulans were even worst looking like Neanderthal Frankenstein creations.

20. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - August 30, 2013

Star Trek Into Darkness was a good movie. But not worth a 2nd look at the Theater for me.. The first in all Star Trek Movies from Tmp on that i did not see it more then once at the Theater. I’ll get the Blu-Rey of course
The Court did a bad job on this movie. It was decent. But not great. Khan should not have been used.

21. Arpanet - August 30, 2013

Love the quote from Forbes saying the movie will make money once fans but the BluRays. Well, it seems like Paramount may get such a backlash from fans that there won’t be many BluRays sold.

22. Mad Mann - August 30, 2013

Yes, the Klingons should have had faccial hair. They looked stupid without it.

I totally agree with the marketing discussion from Forbes. Marketing was piss-poor for STiD. And not just because of the whole “secrecy” about Khan, but because the lack of awareness of the movie. There was no fast-food tie-in, no action figure line to create a display at retail stores, no little kid books, no grocery item tie-in, and not much of anything else, really. I know this is due to the JJ/CBS fight over merchandise, but it really affected the movie. Man of Steel got it right: it was everywhere!

I also believe that the inclusion of Khan (in-name-only) in the movie affected ticket sales negatively. The casual Trek fan does not want to see Khan, and neither did the hard-core fans.

23. BatlethInTheGroin - August 30, 2013

“Creature creator Neville Page posted 16 variations on the Klingons of Into Darkness on his personal portfolio site, there are some rather interesting versions, some pretty cool (check out the one with a missing eye and a scarred over eye socket), some look like Klingons bred with the Predator race…”

Editing, guys. Editing.

24. BatlethInTheGroin - August 30, 2013

Those of you complaining about facial are overlooking something: When we first met the Klingons, many of them had no facial hair.

That said… yeah, these new Klingon designs look stupid.

25. Mr. Anonymous - August 30, 2013

@ #13.

Hahaha, love it! That’s right up there with Walter Koenig’s explanation on how Khan recognized Chekov in Wrath of Khan. =)

26. Duncan MacLeod - August 30, 2013

We all know that Sikh is not racially dependent, right?

From Wikipedia:

According to Article I of the “Rehat Maryada” (the Sikh code of conduct and conventions), a Sikh is defined as “any human being who faithfully believes in One Immortal Being; ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh; Guru Granth Sahib; the teachings of the ten Gurus and the baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru; and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion”.[31] Sikhs believe in the equality of humankind, the concept of universal brotherhood and One Supreme transcendent and immanent God (Ik Onkar).

Ricardo Montalban was Mexican…

27. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 30, 2013

Trek was supposed to be about characters and story.
Why do we need to mess with the Klingons and supercharge all the FX?

My apologies #1, but here is what a real Klingon should look like.

28. Horatio - August 30, 2013

Marketing? What marketing?

Seriously, Paramount shells out 190 MILLION and doesn’t properly market the damn thing?

The Zombies have taken over Hollywood… its the only explanation for the brain dead decisions that are consistently made.

29. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 30, 2013

16. Thomas

I think its a matter of fans wanting to be very vocal so they can affect the direction of our great Enterprise.

It seems there are quite a few of us that love the original and still want more.

30. Bird of Prey - August 30, 2013

Interesting how Neville’s Klingon designs are ranging from rather conservative (by which I mean pretty close to TNG Klingons) to relatively smooth (perhaps reminding us that TOS era Klingons are supposed to have certain Augment-DNA-related troubles regarding their forehead ridges, that they don’t discuss with outsiders) to quite daring (like the design that was ultimately seen in the movie).

31. Spock Out - August 30, 2013

Visual effects were amazing. I loved the actors and directing. The story was by far the worst of all the films :( Abrams and cast carried this film.

Admiral Marcus acting unilaterally was a juvenile/pseudo intellectual attempt at story telling.

I’m a fan of Cumberbatch and his role was as believable as it could of been. Having an Anglo play someone from India was a bit of a miscast but not his fault.

Final Frontier would of been epic by comparison if it had the same budget.

This is the only Star Trek film I only saw once in the theater. I will buy it on BluRay for the CGI eye candy and complete the collection….ugh.

32. Phil - August 30, 2013

The news flash here isn’t that the marketing sucked. The question that needs to be asked is why, and I suspect the roots run a lot deeper then that. When it came time to start production to meet the initial release date and Paramount found out they were not even close to having a script. Further, the studio had to know the potential for blowback because of the whitewashing of Khan, the gratuitous skin shot, and numerous other mistakes. How it was marketed basically reflected the studios attitude they at some level, they knew they didn’t get Bad Robot’s best effort on this one, and they were not going to put any more money into this then they had to.

I remain hopeful they will learn from their mistakes and return Trek to the form they hit in 2009..

33. ME!! - August 30, 2013

I liked the film and enjoyed it even more the second viewing.

However, I must say the writer at Forbes nailed it.

34. Casey4147 - August 30, 2013

Hate to say it but when they announced they were going after del Toro for a part and he declined, I KNEW they were going to do Khan. What a waste of Benedict Cumberbatch, Khan was never played so melodramatically. They should have made him Joachim or another Lieutenant, and not only would he have been trying to get back to his “family” he would have been trying to rescue his still-frozen leader.

35. Eprom - August 30, 2013

I loved Harrison being simply a new character/multi faceted villain.
When he revealed himself as Khan, I was shouting in my head. ‘Noooooooooooooo!’
Harrison was a good villain, then he’s suddenly he’s Khan? I realize why Benecio Del Torro was first choice, he matched.
One of the film remakes that didn’t work for me and didn’t need remaking ’cause you can’t top a classic.

36. Nony - August 30, 2013

Hmmm. I don’t mind different ridge styles, but Klingons look odd to me without facial hair. It’s part of their…Klingon-y…ness. Without beards they look too reptilian.

I like my Klingon men with beards and honour, y’all. Beards and honour.

37. Yanks - August 30, 2013

The question is…. why hide “Khan”? Why not market it!! Star Trek’d most famous villian,,, and you keep(and fail) is a secret?

…oh, they knew fans would go … “WTF!!!!!”

38. Dennis C - August 30, 2013


No, good marketing sells a good movie (and a even a bad one). Domestic efforts fell short.

Also, the film has not been released on DVD or Blu-ray yet so there’s no way to know how much it will actually pull in just yet.

39. Dennis C - August 30, 2013


Comic Con is the fan friendliest of all conventions. Fans are always on their best behavior there, it isn’t until after the convention when they start to unleash their anxiety about projects that were announced or teased (the Man of Steel sequal announcement comes to mind).

Not having a presence at Comic Con is what set fans off last year.

40. star trackie - August 30, 2013

The Forbes story is bullshit. Khan could have been named Hucklebberry and the outcome of the marketing would not have been any different. The marketing in the states sucked, period. It had nothing to do with keeping the lid on Khan. The movie could have been promoted a number of ways, it just wasn’t promoted at all. All attention was on the foreign market. And to be fair, it worked. But the point the writer of the article tries to make, that Khan being the villain somehow impeded their marketing ability, is irrelevant not to mention patently absurd.

41. star trackie - August 30, 2013

Comic con is a shadow of its former glory. Too much hype at Comic Con in San Diego and little payoff at the theaters (see Scott Pilgrim, Snakes on a Plane etc) has deflated that whole mindset that an appearance at a San Diego panel is a sure fire recipe for success.

42. star trackie - August 30, 2013

8 “Been saying it all alone. They should have got a proper Khan, one that resembled Ricardo, and they should have embraced him in the advertising and made him central to the story, not this secondary type role he had here.”

To please you and some other big-bang fanboys perhaps. The rest of the world, that pumped 400 plus million bucks into this movie and loved it, doesn’t really give a shit.

43. miketen - August 30, 2013

I’d rather have the ship over the phaser so I guess I’m going to Walmart for the Blu-ray.

44. Trek Stud - August 30, 2013

At this point it seems very clear that the decision to keep Khan’s identity hidden was a huge mistake. Worse than letting Shatner direct “Final Frontier”. I liked STID. I saw it the first day in IMAX with a lot of other Trekkers (IMAX is a great way to see Star Trek) and the Khan revel was so anticlimactic. The reaction was more like, come on really… I mean why? Who likes a surprise that doesn’t make you feel good.

Like I said I really liked Star Trek Into Darkness but after the long wait for it I expected it to be great. It was only good. And the huge lie to fans about Khan didn’t help at all. I still think it was one of the best summer movies of 2013 even though Man of Steel was better and clearly better marketed.

Other mistakes:
• Transwarp beaming to the Klingon home world. Who needs starships when you can beam that far.
• The U.S.S. Vengeance being bigger than the U.S.S. Enterprise 1701-D. That just seemed so off. I know it was for dramatic effect but the ship seemed out of place and out of time.
• Spock’s Khan outburst (I heard people laughing at that). The original one was too iconic to be touched and ended up just being whack.

45. Patrick Shirley - August 30, 2013

#16 It looked at first like you understood what I said but then you masterfully corrupted my words into something easier for you to attack. Well done. Have you considered working in politics?

I wrote that I was convinced someone was going to assault Alice Eve. Perhaps I should have added that I was relieved nothing like that happened. I still say its an extremely bad idea to put people who worked on the last to Star Trek movies in the same room as Star Trek’s unhinged fans.

46. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 30, 2013

42. star trackie

Yeah, Like this guy…

47. TonyD - August 30, 2013

That blurb from Forbes really hits the nail on the head and further highlights that stupidity behind Abram’s “secret box” fetish. Why revive one of the most memorable villains from Trek only to then deny his existence until the film premiers, and then have him be Khan pretty much in name only. Here’s an audacious thought: if he’s Kirk’s most formidable foe, why not advertise him as such? The “Supreme Court” really shot themselves in the foot this time; hopefully we’ll get some smarter people in charge for the next one.

As for the DVD, I’ll be going with the Best Buy version; idiotic “Darkness” spelling notwithstanding, I’ve got a $10 certificate sitting around so the 3D version should cost me only about $15; my way of getting back at Paramount for all their sleazy marketing ploys.

48. Picard, Jean-Luc - August 30, 2013

I’d like to see an Art of Into Darkness BOOK (you know items with pages, made from paper? Something that looks lovely on a coffee table)

But I’m guessing each chapter will be a retailer exclusive and we’ll have to buy all the chapters to complete one book.

49. Keachick - August 30, 2013

Wow – Before I started reading the latest thread and comments, I felt quite happy. Now, not so much. Talk about spoiled misery hounds…

I am saddened but not all that surprised that there are no deleted scenes shown on the DVD/Blu-ray copies. So much was/is made of the deleted scenes of the Special Features in the Star Trek (2009) DVDs, that it seems that this time round, there would not be any deleted scenes. So many people automatically concluded that deleted scenes were part of the main movie and what was shown of a character’s behaviour in the DELETED scenes was totally relevant to what was on the actual movie, the UNdeleted Director’s Cut. The worst example was/is how Kirk’s character has been (mis)understood by so many idiotic people because they think that the deleted scenes define the character of Kirk, which they DO NOT. Scenes get deleted for a REASON – Doofusses!

People have gotten what they deserve…

50. Basement Blogger - August 30, 2013

@ 44

Patrick Shirley,

Why don’t we post you words and look at them, okay? At post 12.

Shirley says,

“If I was running the convention center I wouldn’t allow anybody from those films anywhere near the building because of all the comments people make on all these threads. I’d be afraid of some Trekkie murdering them.”

” I was convinced Alice Eve was going to be assaulted at the Las Vegas con.”

And the last sentence which indicates you were serious about the above.

Shirley says,

“Paramount is never going to send any Star Trek material to Comic-Con again because they’re not willing to risk the lives of the people involved.”

So based on the last sentence without any emoticon or comment in 44 that you were joking, , you seriously think that anyone who participated in the last two Trek movies would be in danger at Comic-Con. And these are your words, you would be “afraid of some Trekkie murdering them.” Again, you make no comment in 44 that you were joking.

Then you say ” I was convinced Alice Eve was going to be assaulted at the Las Vegas con..” Okay. I take it you were there. Were fans throwing threats at her? Because seriously, Star did a bad job reporting her appearance at the Las Vegas con if she was in danger from Trekkies.

So let’s get this straight. You believe that people (cast or crew) from the last two Trek movies would be unsafe, possibly in danger of losing their lives if they attended Comic Con. That’s based on some of the posters here. Two, you were convinced that Alice Eve “was going to be assaulted at the Las Vegas con.” (I’m not going to make any commentary here, just try to clarify your beliefs.) Is that what you belief?

51. Sebastian S. - August 30, 2013

That bit from the Forbes article said it best; it was an ‘in name only’ villain.

A villain that could just as easily had been a Section 31 created augment named John Harrison. Calling him Khan (and then lying about it) was not only insulting to the fans, but hurt the movie creatively. It was pandering fan service; and was just one more unoriginal idea shoehorned into a movie already chock full of them…

What could’ve been an original gourmet meal but was big, warmed-up trough of leftovers, dressed up as a Dark Knight happy meal.

Again, this will most likely be the first ST movie I’ll pass on buying…

52. Patrick Shirley - August 30, 2013


My previous comment was addressing what you said about my Alice Eve post. You completely understood what I meant about Comic-Con. I absolutely believe that anyone involved in making the last two Star Trek movies would be in danger at Comic-Con or especially at a Star Trek convention. As far as I can see there is no miscommunication about that aspect of my comment. That part you’ve got right.

As for the part where I said “I was convinced Alice Eve was going to be assaulted at the Las Vegas con.”, you seem to be under the impression I was reporting on what actually happened. I was expressing what my thoughts were when she was announced as a guest at the con. I never claimed to know what actually went on there.

53. Bob Tompkins - August 30, 2013

The best gift Paramount could give us for Star Trek’s 50th birthday would be to jettison JJ Abrams and Company out the photon tubes, hire someone who is willing to devote a chunk of his/her career exclusively to Star Trek, and produce a truncated new series for CBS or Showtime, ditching the movie franchise for a few more years.
Paramount is in the same position as it was after Star Trek: Insurrection with a modestly successful movie with weak merchandising tie- ins that are leaving the series on a precipice. One misstep takes the Franchise down again, and they do seem poised to do exactly that.
Unfortunately, in order to meet the deadline of the 50th Anniversary, Paramount needed to start preproduction on a truncated series like yesterday.
So it appears we are stuck, and we are in deep trouble.
Counting on foreign grosses is a crapshoot; Star Trek is still not immensely popular overseas, even though 50% of its gross this time generated from overseas. Overseas gross is highly dependent upon eye candy with simple, action- filled plots and 3D. Collecting the gross from overseas is another matter entirely, with studios at the mercy of the government where the theaters are located.
The crazy yoyo state of the dollar and tariffs imposed on imports by foreign governments muddle the situation even more. It is rumored that China has not cut a check to a studio in over a year.
Welcome to the precipice!

54. Keachick - August 30, 2013

So I guess those who will pass on buying the DVD or Blu-ray did not like the movie to start with. I think I even read someone saying that, even though they did not like STID, they were still prepared to pay good money for a Blu-ray copy when they thought it contained all the extra goodies. Wow – some people clearly have more money than goodwill or common sense.

I, on the other hand, do not have so much money, nor even the equipment to play a Blu-ray on with all its supposed extra features, will buy, PAY for the DVD which gives me a copy of the movie that I do like (minus, unfortunately, the extra features) because, fundamentally, it is the movie that I want to see again (at my own leisure). The rest might be interesting etc but not necessary. I want to watch the MOVIE again – the film called Star Trek Into Darkness!

Yes, I am pissed off that the DVD version won’t contain even what ST09 version contained but to pass on buying a disc that contains just the movie, because you can’t get everything else, is just – so – not real.

Good grief.

55. Basement Blogger - August 30, 2013

@ 51

Patrick Shirley,

Okay, now that we got it straight. Time for some commentary. Don’t read this if you don’t like people to disagree with you.

1. It’s paranoia that you believe the cast or crew from the first two Trek movies would be in danger of great bodily harm or death at Comic Con.. (Your post 12.) You cite no evidence of any threats to the cast or crew from Trekkies at Comic Con. We can assume they have security. But regardless, where’s the evidence? I think Spock would say you were being illogical. Second, Star Trek Into Darkness is the highest grossing Trek film. Star Trek 2009 was a critical and finacial success. That’s a lot more love than minority of haters.

2. Alice Eve in danger. Okay, you now indicate that you weren’t reporting what happened at the Vegas con regarding your concerns about Ms. Eve. And I’ll concede this. Ms. Eve has received some angry posts on this website and one “Trekkie” has wished her harm but he didn’t say that he would do the harm. Regardless, people go to Trek conventions because they love Star Trek. Watch the recent “Get a Life” documentary by William Shatner. (it’s on Netflix now.) Do those people look like they want to harm the cast or crew of Star Trek? John Cho looked very content to be there.

If you’re concerned about Ms. Eve, then defend her when she comes under attack by some of the angry posters around here. From her picture,at the Con, she looks very happy, Star reported no threats. I would say there’s a lot more love for her than the one hater here.

56. Matt Wright - August 30, 2013

FYI: TrekCore has more information about the STID bonus content. It looks like all the content was made in-house at Bad Robot, not at Paramount Home Video, and Bad Robot got to dictate the terms of use over the bonus content. So they seem to be the ones who purposefully (or otherwise) screwed consumers over.

“Bad Robot had 100% control [over the VAM production], it was all produced in-house, which is new – and they delivered the content to Paramount, who had basically no say.

I’ve updated the bonus material article with the information.

57. Kaleb - August 30, 2013

What a sub par film. Sigh.

58. Michael Li - August 30, 2013

I really don’t give a shit about how movies are marketed whether I am a fan of a franchise, or not. STID marketing was lied about, but in the end they made a great film for both audiences -fans and not. After you get past the butthurt of them lying, if you are mad they recycled many story things from past trek movies and shows and let that get in your way of seeing the art and message, whether intentional or not, I do not respect your ability to critique film, not do I recognize your interpretation of Roddenberry’s philosophy.

59. Vultan - August 30, 2013

Casting Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan Singh was the most brilliant casting decision since John Wayne played Genghis Khan. Absolutely spot on.

60. Jonboc - August 30, 2013

What does the production of the content, probably content contracted to produce way ahead of time…in order to have access to actors, cameras on set, etc…have to do with the way said content was distributed on the discs after it was delivered to Paramount? So Bad Robot cooked and delivered the food? Unless I’m missing something…the studio would be the ones to decide whose plates to place it on.

61. Chingatchkook - August 30, 2013

#59 – lol

62. Mad Mannnnnnnnn - August 30, 2013

@ 56 Matt Wright:

So you are saying Bad Robot screwed over the fans on purpose? Ya know, I believe it. There is very little about the movies that play like they respect the fans, it’s all what is popular in the public awareness of Star Trek.

I think that Orci knows this, and yet he continually comes on here and other sites to defend it. I think he is just trying to save face. I give him credit for trying, though.

But anyway, even though I can easily see that Bad Robot (and therefore JJ) has no respect for Star Trek fans, what is the logic in screwing us over? Will they really make more money? To me, it seems like they will make LESS money since it would turn fans off from buying it. The casual fan wouldn’t care about “exclusive content” and just buy the disc no matter where it’s from, not more discs from additional stores.

I wish we had a film-maker like Peter Jackson in charge of Star Trek. He seems to REALLY care about Tolkein fans and bends over backwards for them. It is to dream….

63. - August 30, 2013

Put one of those Klingon variants in the next Star Wars.

64. drum-van - August 30, 2013


if j.j. and co really did orchestrate the multiple retailer bonus content fiasco then i’m glad he’s gone from the directors chair. that’s just deplorable to treat fans that way. unfortunately bad robot will still be part of trek 13 so i guess we can expect more of the same in a few years.

65. MikeMCP - August 30, 2013


Do you sniff excessive amounts of gasoline in your spare time?

66. Zip - August 31, 2013

Star Trek Into Darkness in Theatres Today until Sept 5th, Gotta see it one more time on the big screen. Thanks Paramount

67. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 31, 2013


I guess it’s time to write off Star Wars, too. Past due, actually. Way past for the Wars.

68. Lore - August 31, 2013

I already have the movie on Xbox Glass. I don’t really see a reason to buy another copy on Blu-Ray.

For all of you who are disappointed at current Trek. As the comedians say to an unresponsive audience: “These are the jokes folks”.

This is the Trek folks.

69. Spock's Bangs - August 31, 2013

#64. ” that’s just deplorable to treat fans that way. ”

Boy some fans are so full of themselves. News flash, we KNOW a small fraction of the fan base didn’t like the movie, those squeaky wheels turn here on trekmovie every day. but the NEW fans, the ones that made it the highest grossing trek movie…EVER…really REALLY liked it. Star Trek has a New fan base and doesn’t need to pander to the former fan base. Period. In fact, I wish those fans would go back to their DVDs and cry in their raktajino and come to terms with the situation. It’s so tiring to read the same merit-less rants over and over, just get on board or be left behind, Star Trek will continue with or without you.

70. LizardGirl - August 31, 2013

I don’t have a blu-ray player so, unfortunately, I was going to miss out on bonus material anyway.

Maybe we’re spoiled for wanting a little more bang for our buck instead of just the movie, but I am a little disappointed (not angry). I was looking foreward to watching the special features.

I wanted to see the work/effort that went into making the movie. I wanted the cast interviews that was kind of lacking in the promotion of the movie. There were some interviews but for the most part, every person involved with the movie dropped off the face of the earth for months.

I’ll buy the DVD I guess. But it’s nothing to brag about to my geek friends. -_-

71. Trekbilly - August 31, 2013

All you whiners complaining about this movie…sheesh!! I remember when there WAS NO NEW TREK!! 1969-1979!!!

Quit your crying and enjoy it for what it is!!!

Good lord, you are bunch of spoiled BABIES!!!

Waa waa!!

72. Jack - August 31, 2013

9″. The Klingon make-up design ideas are pointless. Why even bother designing new Klingons? It’s an alternate TIMELINE caused by the destruction of the Kelvin and Vulcan. None of this affects Klingon make-up… This is one of the details that really bothers me with this new movie series. Apart from that, lots of the other sketches look a lot better than the final outcome in the movie. At least some of then had the TOS Klingon vibe…”

Yep, the TNG Klingons were a redesign of the Trek III Klingons, which were a redesign of the TMP Klingons, which were a redesign of the TOS Klingons. The Trek VI Klingons were different again. It was all the same timeline. It’s a movie. Why would we want to see the same thing we’ve already seen?

73. Jack - August 31, 2013

BTW, loved that Klingon. Definitely a KiLF.

74. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 31, 2013

69. Spock’s Bangs

Illogical. Star Trek on any outing is a huge movie. Star Trek into Darkness, if it were any good, should have made Avengers money, or at least Iron-Man III money. But even as Iron-Man III had similar problems, it made more cash cause it got better word of mouth and still carried Avengers fan support.

If this last Trek was any good, It would have cracked a billion in the first month.

Indeed, Spock’s Bangs. There appears to be little merit in your post, as well.

75. Ahmed - August 31, 2013

@71. Trekbilly

“Waa waa!!”

Do you need help getting back to the daycare center ?

76. JohnRambo - August 31, 2013

@1. Riker’s Mailbox


77. Phil - August 31, 2013

Wow. There’s no reality where a Trek movie makes a billion. The difference between good STID and bad STID was 100MM, tops.

78. Spock's Bangs - August 31, 2013

74 “Star Trek into Darkness, if it were any good, should have made Avengers money, or at least Iron-Man III money.”

Okaaay. Not much i can say in response to that bit of wishful thinking. You’re just plain delusional!

79. TrekMadeMeWonder - August 31, 2013

Yes, Spock’s Bangs.

Based on my opinion that I as a Trekkie would have seen it easily two or three more times at the B.O., if I was not so put off by the awful writing.
The rest of the production was pretty good. But in the end a $200 million badly written half-baked-conspiracy-khan plot is just awful entertainment.

Seriously, Why do you defend STiD?

80. Curious Cadet - August 31, 2013

@32. Phil,
“How it was marketed basically reflected the studios attitude they at some level, they knew they didn’t get Bad Robot’s best effort on this one, and they were not going to put any more money into this then they had to.”

Here’s a question … now that we know what we know about Bad Robot’s involvement in the BluRay debacle, I recall several mentions of how Bad Robot was controlling the trailer content back in the Winter and Spring. Indeed it seems like Bad Robot has quite a sweetheart deal over at Paramount. Ultimately it was Abrams’ mystery box that did the most damage, and I’m pretty sure Paramount had little to say about that aspect of marketing. Might Bad Robot have been calling most of the shots, and Paramount just had to go along for the ride, with Abrams approving their efforts and not vice-versa, thanks to the all-encompasing deal Gail Berman made with him?

Is it possible Paramount’s hands were tied either waiting for Abrams to approve their efforts and not getting it in a timely manner, or simply rejecting their efforts, sometimes late in the planning? It seems like Abrams may be much more the culprit here than Paramount.

81. Basement Blogger - August 31, 2013

@ 70

Lizard Girl,

First, hello!!! Second, get a Blu-Ray player with a HDMI cord for your HD TV. Prices have gone down for the Blu-Ray players. So much so, I heard an ad for HH Gregg that they would give you a Blu-Ray player for free with the purchase of a HDTV. I don’t even think you can buy a SDTV anymore.

Third, once you get a HDTV, you’re going to want to see what a Blu-Ray player can do. Buy the documentary Planet Earth and prepare to be blown away. With Netflix, who by the way have the Lowry remastered Bond films, you may never leave the house for the the theater.

82. Victor Hugo - August 31, 2013

@ 70

Lizard Girl, i agree with Basement Blogger.

Buy a playstation 3, you´ll be amazed with the state of the art games, and even silly things as movies will look magnificent.

83. Lancelot Narayan - August 31, 2013

And for the record, ‘Into Darkness’ is a RUBBISH title.

84. Ahmed - August 31, 2013

@ 83. Lancelot Narayan – August 31, 2013

“And for the record, ‘Into Darkness’ is a RUBBISH title.”


85. drum-van - August 31, 2013

@69 spock’s bangs

thanks for totally misunderstanding my post and attacking me lol.

i enjoyed stid and st09 as well. what i’m opposed to is bad robot trying to gouge the loyal fan base by trying to get them to buy multiple disk copies just to get all the bonus material. that just smells like a cash grab.

86. Christopher Roberts - August 31, 2013

I still can’t quite believe Benedict Cumberbatch was Khan Noonien Singh. :\

87. ME!! - August 31, 2013

@13 Nice. Never thought about that…not bad. However, it’s a tad farfetched and even more so if you consider the fact he’s still named “Khan”.

88. VOODOO - August 31, 2013


Couldn’t agree more…Nobody would argue that Cumberbatch isn’t a fine actor. He clearly is, but he wasn’t right for Khan at all. In no way did I ever feel I was watching Khan Noonien Singh on screen.

The film would have worked better if:

1/ Cumberbatch was playing an all new character. He was Khan in name only. It was a waste of the character to have him shoehorned into the film. Yes, his name was Khan, but it could have just as easily been John Smith.

2/ An actor who resembled Ricardo Montalban played Khan. Again, in no way did I ever feel I was watching the Khan character.

89. Li'l Shat - August 31, 2013

Could someone explain how it is that the Enterprise and crew are just embarking on their five year mission at the end of Star Trek Into Darkness, yet the IDW comics have already had the crew rehashing several stories from that five year mission? Are the comics not in sequence with the movies or not canon? Did the new crew do a lot of the original timeline five year mission stuff without actually going on a five year mission? I’m just wondering how it’s all supposed to fit together.

90. Khan was Framed! - August 31, 2013

Forbes review nails it!

This movie was awesome, but would have been cooler if Khan was more Khan-ish.

And leaving his name out of the title was a horrible mistake. More generations of fans would have turned out at the box office to see Khan return to the big screen, had they known.

91. dswynne - September 1, 2013


1. Why keep starships w/ transwarp beaming around? What if there is a planet that has an atmosphere that inhibits the beaming process altogether? What about emergency evacuations? How about the logistics of building a colony on an alien world? Why walk when you can just move around in a mechanized wheel chair? Don’t be silly. Besides, the film DID say that transwarp beaming was confiscated by Starfleet, so it’s not going to be in common use…
2. The Nerada is the reason for building a bigger ship.
3. This one I’ll agree on, since it was pure (and unnecessary) fanservice. I would have Spock seethe in anger, as he pounds the window (you’d see the glass actually crack, but not broken).

But, that’s just me.

92. ironhyde - September 1, 2013


LOL. Wow, Star Trek is at it’s lowest right now. From a literary though-provoker to a …. put-a-big-word-in-a-font-too-large-for-the-space-er.

To the

93. Curious Cadet - September 1, 2013

@4. John W.,
“Does that make Kahn the “Dark Ness Monster” then?”

LOL Classic!!

I say we all start calling him “Nessie”

94. dswynne - September 1, 2013

@91: Overly dramatic, much?

Fact is, Star Trek is healthier than when it was when “Nemesis” came out, and when ENT was cancelled. Could things be better? Sure, but it certainly better than when Brent Spiner wanted a “Justice League of Trek” movie, and, personally, anyone that says that STitD is the worst film in the series is a moron, considering that “Nemesis” was also a retread of “Warth of Khan”, and “Final Frontier” was exceedingly bad with a cheesy premise (“Searching for God? Really…?”). But haters going to hate JJ Abrams and Bad Robot simply because they wanted to inject a more action-oriented element in the Star Trek mythos for today’s movie going audience. Oh, well…

95. Keachick - September 1, 2013

#86 – That is because Benedict Cumberbatch does NOT play that Khan Noonien Singh. Star Trek Into Darkness simply tells us that the actor plays a guy called John Harrison who wants to be known as Khan. Star Trek Canon says so. Bob, Damon and co. can say what they want but until/unless they make it CANON ON FILM, they can go blow as well…

Geez – People are so dumb…

96. Avi - September 1, 2013

What I don’t like is the way they think we’ll buy the whole ‘alternate timeline’ thing. They clearly had every intention of doing a reboot rather than an alternate timeline. They decided to make it an alternate timeline to appease the fans, but they were not willing to actually stick to the storytelling constraints that entails – such as keeping Kahn looking like Kahn and keeping Klingon physiology the same. Moreover, there should have been clues as to how the destruction of the Kelvin altered history enough to warrant the Enterprise being build 10 years later and twice as large – even if only in the comics or behind the scenes docos.

If they had simply called it a reboot, there would have been a lot less disappointment because we wouldn’t have even tried to fit the movies into existing Star Trek continuity. They did everyone a disservice by trying to have it both ways and not being willing to follow through on their premise.

97. Red Dead Ryan - September 1, 2013


For the last time, John Harrison IS Khan Noonien Singh. Spock Prime even referred to him as that. So yes, I’m afraid that it is canon.

Now stop calling other people dumb — you’re just making yourself look like a fool.

98. Phil - September 1, 2013

@94. Rose, take a peek at some of the commentary posted from interviews with Abrams. They have pretty much said that yes, it is THAT Khan, and they whitewashed him, to boot. To keep insisting otherwise is just falling on your own sword at this point if you are going to call others dumb for not towing your line.

99. Keachick - September 1, 2013

No, as far as I could tell from watching the movie, Spock Prime did NOT. So no, I’m afraid that it is not canon. All Spock did was to ask the older Spock what he knew about a man named Khan. It was prime Spock who referred to Khan Noonien Singh, the man he knew more than 130 years ago – no one else.

Time will tell who is/are the fool(s).

100. Red Dead Ryan - September 1, 2013

It is Khan Noonien Singh. Spock Prime wouldn’t mention that name had John Harrison not been Khan, would he? Spock Prime obviously knew what was going on with the Enterprise and Khan, and he called the Enterprise to tell NuSpock of the encounter he had with the Khan of the Prime Universe.

There are no other “Khans” — just Khan Noonien Singh. If there was another “Khan”, Spock Prime would’ve said so. Otherwise, he’d be a liar.
There were 73 augments on the Botany Bay, including Khan. Same as in the Prime Universe. Spock Prime would have known the names of all of them. He had knowledge from the Prime Timeline, based on the data gathered from the first encounter with Khan and his henchmen.

End of story.


101. Mitchell - September 1, 2013

Looking at those pictures i’m suddenly hungry for Shrimp. And Lobster

102. The Boss - September 2, 2013

99. RDR
Sorry, but I also agree with Keachik (98.).

So case is NOT closed. :)

At least not yet… ;)

Otherwise for me a Klingon without a hair (beard,…) is like a starship without an engine: possible (see DS9, where Sisko and Jake sail to Cardassia), but not very convincing. I would mix Worf’s look and Nevill’s Nr. 1 and add a spice of TOS Klingons. But please no Klingonaliens for me! ;)

And LLAP 2 all! :)

103. killamarshtrek - September 2, 2013

Don’t want to get involved in your argument but can i just point out that Spock prime DIDN’T call the Enterprise, it was the other way round.

104. Bill Lutz - September 2, 2013

Although really creative SFX
its just NOT the Klingons

105. Phil - September 2, 2013

Young Spock: Greetings, old Spock. How are you?
Old Spock: Well, and yourself?
YS: I have a problem. What can you tell me about Khan?
OS: Officially, nothing. What did McGivers tell you?
YS: Who?
OS. Never mind. Off the record, Khans the worst. Kill him now. Honor him with a traditional Sikh burial, though…
YS: Sikh? My Khan is white, and hails from London. His parents are accountants.
OS: Really? Must be a different Khan then. He’s harmless.
YS: All I needed to know. Spock out….

106. Michael - September 2, 2013

Ok, Target Just sent a bank charge for my Target Excl Trek movie Blu ray. They claim their 3rd disc is 90 min. 30 is exclusive. Now I see Best Buy has 30 min of excl. dics w/ never before seen stuff. So both stores each have separate exclusive footage the other doesn’t have? So I’d have to buy both????? I’m confused.

107. Keachick - September 2, 2013

Young Spock asked old Spock if he knew anything about a Khan. Old Spock recalled a Khan he knew and referred to him by his full name – Khan Noonien Singh. Old Spock said that he could not be trusted and was a very dangerous man. He was referring to the man he encountered over 130 years ago in his own prime universe.

The valuable information given, which young Spock took on board, was that it was most likely that this Harrison/Khan MIGHT well be the same person and that, even more importantly, he (young Spock) et al should be very wary of anything this Harrison/Khan (now living in their universe) might say and do.

108. weeharry - September 2, 2013

On Saturday evening I had the pleasure to attend the BBC ‘Music from the Movies’ proms concert at the Royal Albert Hall in London, where a full orchestra played a selection of pieces from film scores. The second half of the show was drawn from sci-fi movies, and included a suite comprising music from STID, which was apparently a world premiere performance of that arrangement (had the TOS theme, the john harrison music and the ‘new’ theme in it). They also played stuff from star wars, 2001, alien, independence day and finished with john williams’ theme from superman.
It was a great experience to hear such familiar pieces of music played live – I thoroughly recommend it!!
The concert was filmed by the BBC but hasn’t been shown on TV yet (apparently it will be later this year), however, it was on bbc radio 3 and is still available to listen to on the bbc iplayer – search for ‘Prom 65 part 2′, and the STID stuff starts about 14 and a half minutes or so, the conductor even gave a wee shout out to the trekkies

109. Commodore Adams - September 2, 2013

Pathetic and upsetting that the special features are split up. The 2009 blu-ray special features disc was beyond impressive. I was expecting the same for Into Darkness.

Also disappointing that the IMAX ratio was cut. Do they honestly think that it will confuse people!? It worked wonderfully in The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, the IMAX scenes looked amazing in high def on my 50″ plasma.

I am seriously questioning the sanity of Paramount. But because I love my steelbooks and I am not into the gift sets with cheap items not worth the price, the Best Buy blu-ray steelbook is what I am going with.

110. Curious Cadet - September 3, 2013

@107. Keachick,
“The valuable information given, which young Spock took on board, was that it was most likely that this Harrison/Khan MIGHT well be the same person and that, even more importantly, he (young Spock) et al should be very wary of anything this Harrison/Khan (now living in their universe) might say and do.”

Yes, because that wasn’t already abundantly clear by Khan’s actions up to that point.

It was a worthless scene included gratuitously to ‘bless’ this white-Khan, just like Prime Spock’s appearance in ST09 was intended to ‘bless’ the new timeline, just as Shatner’s appearance in Generations was intended to ‘bless’ TNG.

111. Phil - September 3, 2013

@110. Had not thought of that, though given some of the production teams recent comments I doubt there will even be an admission of such.

112. Curious Cadet - September 3, 2013

@111 Phil,
You mean an admission about ST09, and Generations? I’d say Lindelof already admitted as much for STID (thanks to Disinvited for the link):

”As for Mr. Nimoy, well… we continue to feel blessed that we get to carry the Trek torch and the best way of expressing that in story is to acknowledge the parallel world we are deviating from — a world whose sole ambassador just happens to be Mr. Spock. It would have been hubris for us to represent to the uninitiated that Khan was our idea and there was no one better to pop in briefly and say — “Hey, these guys are just doing their own spin on a bad guy that was around a long time before they came along.” The minute we stop honoring, acknowledging and representing the original Trek, we are bound to lose sight of the enormous gift we have been given in sustaining it.” – Damon Lindelof

113. Lurker - September 4, 2013

For those interested: is having a contest fo a “STID Meteorite Blu-ray Edition”

And yes it’s an actual meteorite packaged with a special case.

There’s an exclusive for you.

114. Into Darkness SUCKED - September 4, 2013

@9: Maybe it is an alternate timeline, but even so, remember how in Enterprise Season 4 the smooth headed Klingons were a result of a genetic engineering accident involving trying to adapt DNA from Khan-like people and a disease broke out as a result. and that the Klingons tried to adapt by engaging in cosmetic alterations to try to gain the ridges again. perhaps that evolved into genetic resequencing and Klingons from different regions of Qu’Onos had different preferences as to how they wanted to look. Also, this form of Klingon could be another race of Klingons. Kind of like the Aenar were to the Andorians, or the smooth-headed Romulans vs. the ridged Romulans, or the varying races of Xindi.

115. Eric Holloway - September 5, 2013

My turn to pile on! I liked the movie, saw it twice with my wife who is not a fan and my teenage daughter who fell in love with Chris Pine and admitted afterwards the movie wasn’t so bad. It wasn’t. But remaking their reboot movie seems pointless and lazy and slipping Khan in there was useless and only solidified Ricardo Montabaln’s depiction of Khan as superior. Please stop trying to make Star Trek into one of these blockbuster movies, it will never be that because it isn’t about that. Star Trek has substance and meaning, that’s why it endures. That’s why we keep coming back. These other gee-whiz movies, who will want to watch them 10-20 years from now? Please reboot the reboot and let’s get exploring.

116. Dennis Sisterson - September 6, 2013

13: So why is he still called Khan? :-)

117. Michael - September 9, 2013

Ok, we all know now that Paramount and or Bad Robot farmed out most of the extras to stores exclusives/online. I have the Target copy coming tomorrow in mail. Someone on this list is scoring me a Candian Best Buy copy. I bought a Best Buy USA copy off ebay. I also preordered the German version from Amazon. My source claims the German release SHOULD be regionless and play in my standard U.S. Blu Ray player! But the only version that has the unedited ratio of IMAX footage is the 3D combo version from Germany along with “ALL” the produced extras, featurettes/audio commentary! Now my main question is…….fingers crossed the Germany version plays in my machine…..since it’s 3D, will my standard BD player be able to read and playback the disc or not??????? is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.