J.J. Abrams' Star Trek Into Darkness

[Sachiel]

Abrams on the plot and themes.

So this movie doesn’t require you have seen the first movie. The characters are a group of people who have recently come together and find themselves up against this incredibly terrifying force. His name is John Harrison and he is sort of an average – that is what makes him so scary – he is just an average guy who works in an organization called Starfleet, and he turns against the group because he has got this back-story and this kind of amazing secret agenda. After two very violent attacks, one in London and one in the US, our characters have to go after this guy and apprehend him. And it is a far more complicated and difficult thing then they ever anticipated. "Into Darkness" is very much about how intense it gets and really what they are up against.

I love movies that are big and unabashedly a huge fan of big pop mass appeal movies. I do love that. I love being in a theater packed with people and everyone gasping at the same time and having that communal experience. I don’t like going to the movies to feel bad. I don’t like going to the movies to feel depressed and feel diminished. The reason you go to the movies is to feel bigger and stronger and happier. So this is a movie that they certainly go ‘Into Darkness,’ but I would be the wrong director if it was about characters staying there. This is very much a movie about hope, about love, about romance, and about facing something that is truly terrifying and finding a way through the connection of your family and surviving and being stronger afterwards.

Benedict Cumberbatch's John Harrison a mixture of Hannibal Lector, Jack Torrance, and The Joker.

JJ described the role in movie terms as a mixture of Hannibal Lector, Jack in the Shining and The Joker in Batman. There are sorts of levels to pitch in amongst quite a high bar as well to succeed in comparison to. It was a framework to understand this character before I saw the whole script.

I would say he is three dimensional in a way that he has a purpose, unlike the villains can sometimes go in franchises where it is just the obstacle – just this immovable thing this entity in the way or destroying what the good guys do. This person has real purpose behind his actions – his intention. It doesn’t mean I condone them, but I can empathize with the reasons. So there is a degree of leaning in and understanding and caring about him as well as being terrified about what he is doing.

 

[a-dev]

London in Star Trek? Does that sound wierd to anyone?

 

[Khonsu70]

London in Star Trek? Does that sound wierd to anyone?

Nah, it wasn't established until ST:TMP that Starfleet HQ and Starfleet Academy were based in San Francisco. That didn't seem particularly strange. In ST:VI, Paris was revealed to be the city where the office of the President of the UFP (and presumably other important governing bodies of the UFP) was located. Both of these locales were easily integrated into cannon and repeatedly referred to in various incarnations of Trek. So who knows what may be located in London during the TOS era? I'm sure it will make perfect sense when the movie is released.

 

[Wanderer]

^^ good post.
Sounds like he'll be quite a memorable villain. Most are when. Their motivations are not purely governed by totally one dimensional evil intent.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Will be great to see a Futuristic London

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

 

[a-dev]

Those look about as un-Star Trek as you can get.

 

[jnmx2000]

Those look about as un-Star Trek as you can get.

I do agree, the advertising for the first film was spot on for me, I loved the posters of the close up in the trek symbol, you knew what it was when you looked it. If star trek wasn't on the actual cover you probably wouldn't know what movie that was from.

 

[Sachiel]

Those look about as un-Star Trek as you can get.

I think that's the point.

 

[a-dev]

I think that's the point.

K. Well heres hoping the actual film will be a Star Trek film.

 

[Matt S]

London in Star Trek? Does that sound wierd to anyone?

Glad to see London included, and no weirder to me than hearing about San Francisco in Star Fleet myself. To no one in general: what's with all the 'fear' that this isn't a Star Trek film? Just cause the marketing is going in a different approach for once? Me not get it

 

[dsokyra]

Yeah I hope it's a "Star Trek" film like when they were on earth trying to save the whales in IV

 

[hunnipot85]

Some new pics:

 

[Khonsu70]

Those look about as un-Star Trek as you can get.

J.J. says they are going to go "Into Darkness" in the film (hence those pics), but the crew are going to come back out because darkness is not a direction that J.J. wants to go for good. I take that to mean by the end of the film, we will be back on the bridge where everything is flashy and bright, on a quest for the next strange new world. The tone of this one particular film just gets very dark for the second/early third act...that's why I still think Section 31 could be involved?

 

[Sachiel]

Collider Interview with Damon Lindelof (2 pages)

Are we going to see or talk about the long term impact of destruction of Vulcan? You mentioned earlier that that’s obviously a major thing, is that something you guys address? Or was that lets kick it down to another one?

Lindelof: It’s too specific of a plot question to answer, suffice to say we understood when we did it in the first movie that it was going to have a 9-11 level impact on that universe. In the same way that 9-11 happened over ten years ago, but we’re still talking about it and it still influences everything about our daily lives. Anytime you want to fly on a plane and you take your shoes off we’re still reliving that experience in a certain way. Anything that happens in our new timeline has to walk in lockstep with Vulcan was destroyed and what is the impact of that on the federation? And what is the impact of that on Spock? What is the impact of that on Kirk? What is the impact of that on the geo-politics of the galaxy itself? We had to enter in to it. How directly this movie relates to the destruction of Vulcan is not anything that we’re willing to talk about.

About 6 mouths have passed between the end of the ST'09 and the opening mission of Into Darkness.

 

[CelticPredator]

K. Well heres hoping the actual film will be a Star Trek film.

Please god no.

 

[DiFabio]

I heard Abrams turned down Stah Wahs.

Would have been interesting to see a filmmaker have their hands in not only the Star Trek franchise, but Star Wars as well. It'd be cool considering the little "feud" (I wouldn't even call it that) between the two worlds.

 

[a-dev]

Please god no.

Then why call it Star Trek? The first film was acceptable, but I hope they don't stray too far away. I don't think they will. I'm just saying.

 

[CelticPredator]

Money.

Simple as that. Star Trek will never work as a film again. They spent 20 years trying to make the series into action schlock. Now they finally hit that right mark. And now it's better then the current Star Wars films/

 

[a-dev]

So terribly blunt