Monday, December 17, 2012

Star Trek Into Darkness gets a very generic 'sequel' trailer.

Oddly enough, I did not see this trailer with my Friday afternoon showing of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.  Now that I've seen this trailer, what do I think?  Well, it looks pretty solid.  Yes it still feels like we're following the 'dark sequel' template, almost as if it's in a Mad Libs book.  Yes we get not one ponderous 'character arc in a monologue' speech but two ponderous 'character arc in a monologue' speeches.  I could say that once again the film is being marketed as "The Dark Knight but Star Trek-style", but I think that's almost too easy of a label.  But the film both looks pretty epic in scope *and* seems to involve quite a bit of, trekking across various stars.  They do seem to be teasing both references to Wrath of Khan and a major character death. 3.5 years ago, I pegged Chekov (Anton Yelchin) as the likely 'killed off halfway through character, and the fact that Yelchin's star hasn't exactly risen since only adds credence to said theory (that we see him in a red shirt when Pike is monologuing about Kirk's arrogance getting his friends killed doesn't help).  Anyway, this looks somewhat like generic sequel 101, but it still looks awfully entertaining.  As always, we'll see, in this case when Star Trek Into Darkness drops on May 17, 2013.  What are your thoughts on the above trailer?  Do share below...

Scott Mendelson


Bulldog said...

Clicked but got message that video was no longer available due to copyright infringement. I was wondering why on earth would a movie studio not want as many people as possible to see their movie trailer? Isn't that the whole point? Why have any kind of restrictions on a trailer that is your selling tool to get people to see your product? it's an honest question Scott. Do you know why?

James O'Leary said...

I did see the IMAX trailer in the theater. While I would say I'm a Trekker, I'm not "deep geek" as some. I think the franchise had diminishing returns with "Voyager" and especially "Enterprise". While some of the films were very good, I think they ultimately proved that Star Trek works best on television. Paramount overworked the franchise. Then they handed the reins to J.J. Abrams who took the old boy out to a field to dig a shallow grave. The reboot destroyed the universe lovingly created by Roddenberry and the others that followed. My opinion, Abrams is overrated as a filmmaker and storyteller. "Into Darkness" looks to be the coup de grace where Trek gets a shovel to the back of the head and tumbles in to the pit it had dug. Nine minutes and so many contrived problems...Why is the enterprise underwater (!) instead of space; why isn't the shuttle made of the same indestructible material as Spock's spacesuit; why can't they beam him out of the volcano when in the first movie they can transport from a planet's surface to a warp-speeding spaceship light years away; why does Scotty have to be comedy relief? I'll go see it, I'm a Trekker, but Abrams is really suited to the fantasy world of Star Wars. Besides, he can't screw that up any worse than Lucas and "Phantom Menace", can he?


Related Posts with Thumbnails