Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
forst

General Star Trek Beyond Discussion (NO SPOILERS)

Recommended Posts

NOTE: This thread is for spoiler-free discussion of Star Trek Beyond, which will be released in the United States/Canada on July 7th, 2016. Please confine the discussion to speculation as well as official plot descriptions, promotional images, teasers and trailers. Use this thread to discuss spoilers.

So, production on the next Star Trek movie started late last month and the title has officially be unveiled: Star Trek Beyond. I am not thrilled with it but it is marginally better than Star Trek Into Darkness.

Edited by forst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was surprised to read at CBR that production has wrapped on Star Trek Beyond. I know there are photos out there from various locations/shoots but I guess I was not really paying attention because I thought production had just started.

Edited by forst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the first trailer:

 

 

Personally, I do not like it. The music reeks of an attempt to mimic Guardians of the Galaxy. None of it feels like Star Trek. It could be any generic sci-fi action blockbuster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The music is the Beastie Boys, which also played in the 2009 Trek, FWIW. Not that I don't hate it, it's just not without precedence.

 

That being said, my expectation for this film just dropped through the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now there's this quote regarding the trailer from Simon Pegg: (as reported by Dark Horizons)

 

"I didn't love it because I know there's a lot more to the film. There's a lot more story and a lot more character stuff and a lot more what I would call 'Star Trek stuff.'

 

I found it to be surprising. I found it to be the marketing people sort of saying, 'Everybody come and see this film, it's full of action and fun,' when there's a lot more to it than that. …

 

You know, they've got to bring a big audience in, they've got to bang a drum. To the Star Trek fans out there, I'd say, 'Hang in there, be patient.'"

 

 

So there's at least that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not convinced. Of course he is going to say that after the reaction to the trailer. But everything in the trailer is still in the movie, even if there are also character moments.

 

I never thought I would be this ambivalent about a Star Trek movie. I was a little apprehensive about Star Trek Into Darkness. I am disturbed thus far by Star Trek Beyond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not convinced. Of course he is going to say that after the reaction to the trailer. But everything in the trailer is still in the movie, even if there are also character moments.

 

For the most part, that's true. Still, editing matters. A montage of scenes taken out of context doesn't tell the story. I'm sure you've seen the YouTube videos where people have taken, say, Toy Story and created horror movie trailers from the footage. Someone in marketing definitely wanted to target the Fast and Furious crowd. That being said, Pegg's take on the trailer has only improved my outlook a little. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I know. I guess Star Trek Into Darkness left such a bad taste in my mouth I am having a hard time believing Star Trek Beyond will be any better. I suppose I should be willing to keep an open mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is old news at this point, but Pegg & Company apparently made use of Memory Alpha while writing STB.

Quote

We had the entirety of ‘Star Trek’ history at our disposal and it’s always there online. There’s an amazing Wikipedia online called Memory Alpha. It became Doug [Jung] and my resource, and the place that we’d turn to whenever we wanted to know, ‘What kind of weapons does an NX vessel carry?’ Memory Alpha has it. We actually wrote to the Memory Alpha guys and got them to name a certain device in the movie. I sent them a letter saying, ‘Can you come up with this for me?’ In two hours, they came back with an entire etymological history of what the thing was. It’s beautiful. It’s fantastic to have that support network.

 
 

Via io9.

Edited by Diesel Micky Dolenz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched it. I still don't know what the movie is about other than explosions and aliens attacking. I'm not sure "promising" is the right word to describe it when compared to the first trailer. Maybe "less bad" fits, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the press viewing of Beyond was last night. Reaction so far has been all positive. I'm not sure when I'll get a chance to see it, but I'll be staying away from spoilers as much as possible until I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A forum of two. Wow.

If anyone else sees this and is considering seeing Star Trek Beyond, your decision should be made based on how you feel about about action movies. The only "Star Trek" to be found in STB are the obvious visual elements, character, setting, etc. But JJ Abrams has abandoned the true heart of Star Trek: issues and ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bo, Star Trek has always featured action.  That's why Kirk makes the crack about ripping another shirt in Beyond, why the score features music inspired by action scenes in the original series.  The core of this movie wasn't the action, but the conflict Kirk was having with himself (why is he even doing this? to make a difference, which has kind of been the character's mission statement all along), and with Krall/Edison, who represented the notion that positive developments like the Federation can still provoke negative responses.  Like Into Darkness before it, Beyond was about the current state of the United States, as well as its history.  Krall's thought process could be viewed as an analogy for westward expansion (and the resulting impact on Native American populations) or the reaction of radical Islam to the West.  In sum, Beyond was about as pure Trek as you could possibly get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waterloo, I didn't pick up on any of that. I plan to watch it again and I will try to keep my eyes open for it. Obviously I was aware of the Kirk and Spock separate story lines regarding their respective struggle with staying in star fleet, but I thought neither was very well developed. As far as any parallels to the current state of the United States, and its history, could you elaborate? I'm not saying I don't believe its there, I just didn't see it (but easily could have missed it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ace, westward expansion was accomplished by pioneers like Daniel Boone, who like Edison/Krall felt left behind when the future became the present.  (That's the 2016 election results right there, too.)  We tend to think of expansion merely in terms of settlers or clashes between the army and various native tribes, but most of it was done by civilians who ended up being pushed into lives they didn't really anticipate.  That's Kirk, too, who can't quite understand how Pike convincing him to join Starfleet ended up like this, both the monotony of it and the challenges he can never really anticipate. 

I think the movie is a little difficult to understand because Krall's backstory literally waits until the very end to stand revealed.  By that time most viewers will probably have already dismissed him as a generic crackpot straight out of the Star Trek movie playbook (or, James Bond's).  But once we learn he used to be a MACO named Edison, and how he was somewhat forcibly drafted into the emerging Starfleet, despite little to no inclination for the life...It's a warrior being told he can't be a warrior anymore.  It's kind of like Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country in that regard, with humans and Klingons being incapable of putting their past differences behind them.  I think Beyond accomplishes this artfully, with all of Krall's previous comments about how the Federation is an act of aggression (the one thing we all knew before heading into the movie) suddenly taking on an entirely personal aspect.

For Spock he's worrying about the same stuff he was worried about in 2009's movie, and in that respect most of his arc was more implied, for people who'd seen the previous two movies, than spelled out.  I could see if someone had forgotten some of the specifics they'd get a little confused.  Even his attitude toward the breakup with Uhura might seem baffling, unless you understand that Spock is falling back on logic in order to avoid the messy emotions he's begun to form over the years.  It's the reverse of what Kirk goes through, being forced to experience too much (like Krall).  All three characters, basically, are overwhelmed and trying to take the easy way out by simply not trying to process what's bothering them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×