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

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!

MP_StarTrekIntoDarkness_17_re-lettered_flattened_sm_

Check out the whole series of STID comic strips over at MotionPicturesComics.com

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 Forbes.com

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.

stid-bd-target

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.

stid-bd-bestbuy

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.

stid-bd-walmart

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.

stid-bd-amazon

— Source: IGN

Sort by:   newest | oldest

How about this?

comment image

The box seriously says:

Star Trek
Into
Dark
ness

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.

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.

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

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 :)

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!

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?

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.

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…

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

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.

#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.

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! ;-)

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.

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.

@ 12

Patrick Shirley, you really thought someone was going to assault Alice Eve at the Vegas Con? I read the report from Star Trek.com 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.
http://www.startrek.com/article/star-trek-las-vegas-2013-day-2-recap

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… Read more »

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.

@1
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.

Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire

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.

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.

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.

“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.

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.

@ #13.

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

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…

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.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/08/20/trek-news-catch-up-rip-ansara-breaking-bad-does-trek-new-in-depth-tos-book-series/

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.

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.

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).

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.

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..

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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!!!!!”

@6

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.

@12

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

#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.

42. star trackie

Yeah, Like this guy…

http://www.ur.umich.edu/update/archives/090423/31

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.

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.

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…

@ 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 Trek.com 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,… Read more »
wpDiscuz