Star Trek Into Darkness

The thing about the spoiler is the fact that the film plays heavily on wether or not this character is a friend or a foe, and tries to build sympathy for him. If you know that shit going in, it all becomes pointless.

if you know that the villain is named 'Khan' instead of 'John Harrison'? The trailer makes it fairly obvious that the character is a villain. Are you suggesting that by knowing he's 'Khan' and not 'Jon Harrison' going in will spoil some of the nuances of 'friends or foe' for the audience? I'm not asking to be a dick, I'm just trying to understand.

Yes. One is a well known bad guy, the other isn't. I can't see how that doesn't make sense to you.

but he's not 'well known' in the new universe, and they can't possibly utilize the original botany bay story the way it was written in the show or the alpha seti alpha exile plot, since this is a much younger Kirk and Khan. In all the marketing materials for the movie they make very clear that this movie is all about it's villain, and he's not masked or in disguise. I guess I'm still just confused on how making him Khan vs some random guy would 'spoil' anything having to do with the plot. If I spoiled anything with the idea of them killing off Spock like they did in Wrath of Khan, I didn't read anything specifically saying that I'm just connecting together what I saw in one of the early trailers as well as the opening 10 minutes of it previewed before the Hobbit where Spock in the volcano says 'the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few'. If I read a full plot synopsis and just spilled it here, that would be a spoiler.
I don't even know the plot, i just know the villain is Khan instead of Jon Harrison.

if he's khan, why hasn't he got a mullet with a fringe?

and some kick ass exposed chest pecs

and a seemingly inflatable collar

he kinda looks like he's belting out an 80s hair metal balad in this one:

the point is that the movie's marketing has made a point to keep certain aspects of the film a secret, to be revealed to each person as they watch the movie. simple as that. how important or actually revelatory said hidden information is doesn't factor in so much; in fact, i can see where that argument is coming from. however, to know that the general consensus on the internet and on ALL marketing is 'this piece of information is a secret' and still give it out is spoiling the surprise.

i'm still quite excited to see the film as soon as it's out around here. i've heard nothing but good things!

i think it was obvious from the marketing that he's khan. it was obvious that this would be a wrath of khan "homage". if you've seen khan, you know this. if you haven't, it's a meaningless development and it isn't a spoiler. i'm really not trying to be a dick about this, but i'm bothered by how gimmicky these films are and how willing people are to lap it up. it shows a cynicism and contempt for a potential audience from abrams and co.

  On 5/12/2013 at 5:37 PM, zaphod said:

i think it was obvious from the marketing that he's khan. it was obvious that this would be a wrath of khan "homage". if you've seen khan, you know this. if you haven't, it's a meaningless development and it isn't a spoiler. i'm really not trying to be a dick about this, but i'm bothered by how gimmicky these films are and how willing people are to lap it up. it shows a cynicism and contempt for a potential audience from abrams and co.

nope. show me one piece of official marketing where it's obvious that the villain is Khan.

you can argue it's a gimmick all day, and in some sense there may be some truth in that, but that's irrelevant and i couldn't really care less honestly. giving out that sort of heavily guarded information is considered a spoiler, whether you think it's a gimmick or whatever. be respectful of the general community, that's what we do here on WATMM right? right.

  On 5/12/2013 at 6:24 PM, auxien said:

 

  On 5/12/2013 at 5:37 PM, zaphod said:

i think it was obvious from the marketing that he's khan. it was obvious that this would be a wrath of khan "homage". if you've seen khan, you know this. if you haven't, it's a meaningless development and it isn't a spoiler. i'm really not trying to be a dick about this, but i'm bothered by how gimmicky these films are and how willing people are to lap it up. it shows a cynicism and contempt for a potential audience from abrams and co.

 

nope. show me one piece of official marketing where it's obvious that the villain is Khan.

 

you can argue it's a gimmick all day, and in some sense there may be some truth in that, but that's irrelevant and i couldn't really care less honestly. giving out that sort of heavily guarded information is considered a spoiler, whether you think it's a gimmick or whatever. be respectful of the general community, that's what we do here on WATMM right? right.

 

Aye, I'd quite like to see how W-R-A-T-H O-F K-H-A-N H-O-M-A-G-E was spelt out in the one trailer I actually saw for Into Darkness.

Was brought up on the OG series in the 70s and like (most of) the movies. I'd go II>IV>First Contact>Can't be arsed sorting the rest.

I remember someone blabbing on this board ages ago about how they'd 'heard' there was a smidge of Wrath of Khan in ST:ID (STD?), but I put it down to 'whatevs' and (fortunately) forgot about it by the time I saw the actual film on Thursday.

Anyway *shrugs* and stuff, it's just like opinions and that.

[youtubehd]r5gdbUC9mWU[/youtubehd]

if you can't figure out from the hands scene in this trailer that this is khan, i don't know what to tell you.

  On 5/12/2013 at 6:39 PM, zaphod said:

[youtubehd]r5gdbUC9mWU[/youtubehd]

 

if you can't figure out from the hands scene in this trailer that this is khan, i don't know what to tell you.

Well, that's one I didn't see...so, ye know. There's a lot to be said for just....waiting.

that is not obviously Khan. it's a pretty obvious reference to the movie Wrath of Khan, but it's not like the scene they're referencing is a direct parallel. the original is of course Spock and Kirk, not Khan and Kirk. it's another hint, at most.

it's not about if me or anyone else guessed that it was...it was that we didn't KNOW. they've been and still are officially saying that the villain's name is John Harrison. that's what i wanted to walk into the movie knowing. simple as that. yeah, me and most everyone else on the internet figured it probably was Khan. but i didn't want to find out for sure on here or elsewhere, i wanted to find out when i was watching the movie. i just don't understand how anyone wouldn't see that this is the sort of thing that necessitates a spoiler.

i'm getting really sick of see JJ go on every media outlet and shit on Star Trek, "i never really liked Trek", "i'm more of a Star Wars fan", grrr dude just shut the fuck up and move onto the next franchise!

from the lame twist storyline, i say good riddance JJ to Trek, and please don't fuck up SW with a bunch of lame goddamn jokes, or hot interracial love, bc that's soooo taboo these days.

just watched the first one again. It has some really great moments in it. Parts that are totally inexcusable though is the middle school non sensical romance between Uhura and spock. It's just badly shoehorned into the movie. Funnily enough though it also lifts lines from Wrath of Khan. 'You are and will always be my friend' says Spock when he encounters a young kirk on the ice planet. There were probably more but didn't notice them.

  On 5/12/2013 at 7:14 PM, auxien said:

that is not obviously Khan. it's a pretty obvious reference to the movie Wrath of Khan, but it's not like the scene they're referencing is a direct parallel. the original is of course Spock and Kirk, not Khan and Kirk. it's another hint, at most.

 

it's not about if me or anyone else guessed that it was...it was that we didn't KNOW. they've been and still are officially saying that the villain's name is John Harrison. that's what i wanted to walk into the movie knowing. simple as that. yeah, me and most everyone else on the internet figured it probably was Khan. but i didn't want to find out for sure on here or elsewhere, i wanted to find out when i was watching the movie. i just don't understand how anyone wouldn't see that this is the sort of thing that necessitates a spoiler.

i'm quite confused about why you're reading this thread then. if you want to go into a film knowing only what official info is provided by the filmakers definitely do not go on the internet and read discussions about said film before you've seen it.

i saw the trailer, i have no idea wtf kahn is, and i'll see this movie and probably not care one way or the other lol

Saw it yesterday. Great flick.

9/10

This new CHATMM bro told me it was better than the previous one and very good, and that his non-trekkie girlfriend cried. Needless to say, I'm excited.

i don't agree it's better than the previous one, but it's a top notch adventure/action film. Better for the genre than anything I've seen for a long time. Beautiful special effects too, probably the best looking (technically speaking) cgi heavy film I've ever seen.

I saw it this weekend, and I was very impressed - better than the first movie (which I thought was very good), and had some truly jaw-dropping special effects/set pieces. Benedict Cumberbatch was a perfect villain, and has an amazing voice. I want to watch the BBC Sherlock starring him now. The storyline was good, and the pacing was spot on.

am i being blind? how do i wrap stuff in spoiler tags?

i enjoyed it, i loved the opening scene, i thought that world was beautiful. it also took me a while to realise it was robocop playing the bad guy. i thought the scene where the hot english girl was in her bra was totally unnecessary & made me cringe. i didn't like the bit where old spock turned up and was all "but with out great loss" i felt the film slightly fell apart there but i liked spock losing it but maybe it was would been more emotional if it was spock who died (like in wrath of kahn) and kirk losing it but maybe not as spock losing it was him being human and letting his emotions run riot. i wanted more arguments between spock & kahn, it made sense as they're both supposed to be hyper intelligent so it was like spock finding his intellectual rival. oh and robocop being the actual bad guy was a good touch as well i thought but his daughter character seemed really tacked on.

it just ultimately seemed like a huge cop out to reference Wrath so heavily but without the same stakes. I know they brought back Spock in Part 3, but at the end of Wrath we all rightly believed spok was dead. The movie had real impact. Ultimately Darkness has none. At least in the first movie we watched Vulcan get blown up, those stakes seemed pretty ridiculous in comparison.

utter bullshit, this isn't Star Trek anymore. it's become generic JJ Abrams sci-fi franchise full of plot holes. i'm really getting worried for Star Wars now.