[starbase63]

Originally Posted by tannerwaterbury

Its more than likely they will have us transfer to the startrekintodarkness.com website and have us post on the forums there.

No, more than likely THAT addy will redirect HERE.

Note on the bottom of the poster, it gives the StarTrekMovie.com addy.

[horatio]

Originally Posted by Enterprise Captain

It's a blatant rip off of The Dark Knight Rises poster. They even managed to work "Dark" in to the title. I'm not a fan:

Indeed.
Ever since Cloverfield Abrams has been engaged in what you could label 9/11-exploitation. While being totally apolitical (that's the difference between him and Nolan in Dickens mode (The Dark Knight Rises was heavily influenced by A Tale of Two Cities), JJA might be stupid but he is not conservative) he uses images of destruction, terrorists, an atmosphere of fear and so on.
I think it is safe to predict that Star Trek 12 will be similar to its predecessor (remember that Nero was motivated only by personal grief and wrath whereas in the comics they did show how he became Praetor) and Abrams' oeuvre in general, i.e. the story will not feature any TNG-esque "there is something wrong with us" vibes but go down the same "oh my god, a madman wants to destroy us" road of the previous movie.
To compare it again with Nolan, this will just play on post 9/11 fears (Nero the crazy Tattoomulan terrorist wants to kill everybody) and not be a political (the democratic populist is dangerous and Batman has to protect the ruling class) but of course this form of political apathy is, whether it wants or not to, quite political, especially in a political sci-fi franchise like Trek. We already witnessed the undoing of everything Starfleet and the Federation stands for, namely discipline and principles, when a bunch of insecure and immature adolescents could realize their dreams in STXI.

And yes, it is not just possible but actually extremely easy and riskless to predict all this based upon Paramount's strategy and the previous work of the involved people. Anybody who expects something with more substance than an extremely well-done yet fluffy action movie fools himself.

[omegaman]

Love the poster. Either Mitchell or Garth of Izar. Another action flick following the formula set in The Wrath of Khan.

[Enterprise Captain]

Originally Posted by horatio

And yes, it is not just possible but actually extremely easy and riskless to predict all this based upon Paramount's strategy and the previous work of the involved people. Anybody who expects something with more substance than an extremely well-done yet fluffy action movie fools himself.

I'm hoping you're wrong but sadly I believe you are correct.

[kevin]

The film will be like any other regardless of people's good or bad preconceptions going in (or not going in). If they (the makers) have had greater ambitions for it and made conscious effort then either it'll work or it won't. I suppose I do have a set of 'hopes' for it because naturally I want it to work, but Trek has disappointed in the past (not talking about Abrams I might add) so it would be dealt with if it happens again.

[kevin]

It appears though, that some are finding other familiarities in the poster - which are a little more interesting than merely TDKR.

http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2012/12...oster-revealed

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wande..._Fog#section_3

[Captain Tom Coughlin]

It may be a bit derivative of The Dark Knight Rises posters, but I like it. They say there is nothing new under the sun................

[DNA-1842]

Originally Posted by kevin

It appears though, that some are finding other familiarities in the poster - which are a little more interesting than merely TDKR.

http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2012/12...oster-revealed

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wande..._Fog#section_3

With that, my opinion goes from: "Well, it's quite cool even if I do recognise the similarities to Batman." to "I love it."

I don't mind the similarity with the Batman thing because where that one used the destruction as the poster itself, in this one it is merely a framing device for our character. It gives us a feel for who this guy is, even if all we get is that he his brooding, dark, and dangerous. We are being told he is a cool villain.

It's stylish.

[horatio]

That's what I have been saying for years, style without substance. Before I get lynched I might have to add that I am a good liberal, i.e. this is a descriptive and not a normative statement. Whether "best dumb action flick of the summer" sounds good or bad depends on your preferences.

[DNA-1842]

Originally Posted by horatio

That's what I have been saying for years, style without substance. Before I get lynched I might have to add that I am a good liberal, i.e. this is a descriptive and not a normative statement. Whether "best dumb action flick of the summer" sounds good or bad depends on your preferences.

But you make it sound awful, and you present everything you say about in that skewed manner which sounds confrontational.

Emotional substance counts, surely?

Style over substance, I would agree. I love watching the 2009 movie in the same way I love listening to a piece of music; I still don't like the bridge design or the Big-E exterior, but they fit so well with the directing and the cinematography and the music in the same way that the humble trumpet works in an orchestra. The film has a beauty to it that lends substance to the end result.