Revealing Kitumba

The first day in January was set as the premiere day for the latest of the Star Trek: Phase II stories but being the good souls that they are, we got it a little earlier on New Year's Eve.

Dutifully we dropped it around our networks as many other blogs and site did and I slotted in some time to sit down and watch this hour and a bit long episode. After all, this episode has been in Development Hell for what, four years? Jeez. That's a long time to wait for some new material but let's avoid all the background rumbles and focus on what we get to see.

As always please be aware that the following MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS so don't say we haven't warned you. See, we just have. In Bold RED text too so it's unmissable...

Oh and just for the record, this week I was talking to one of my co-contributors and here's the conversation (abridged):

Mark: So, well, I tried to watch that new episode of Phase II the other day...

Clive: Cool! What did you think? I've still got to watch it.

Mark: Erm...I kinda started watching it and then, erm, gave up after about two minutes. I was never the greatest fan of The Original Series....

Clive: Oh. Right....

As you can see I wasn't getting a good vibe. Mark only managed two minutes? Uh oh. This was not looking at all good. Nevertheless I persevered and, securing an hour to stick YouTube through the TV I knuckled down.

So Mark - you should've stuck with it and I'm going to use this post to prove just why your two minutes wasn't enough.

Kitumba is one of THE mythical Star Trek stories that never made it from the page alongside Blood and Fire. We all know it was among the first 12 scripts for Phase II back in the 1970's and would have been a two part story. In fact it would have been one of the highlights of the never-made first season. Here, most likely due to budget and time, it's trimmed back into a one hour and five minute episode and they've done it justice.

The Phase II crew really are mashing up the realms of the motion pictures and The Original Series with both "types" of Klingons along with their different dress styles. Managing to reference back to the Augment virus is a big help as the series begins to make transitions towards the feel of the six classic bigger screen outings yet retaining a wonderful feel of the 23rd Century as envisaged in the 1960's.

The Klingons themselves receive an immense amount of flesh on their backstory here. The concept of honour, the House system and the political makeup of the Empire are all addressed here and you can see how it effectively bridges the generations by taking the Enterprise to Qo'noS. At the heart of the story is a potential attempt to cause a coup which focuses on several key members of the race, the Sacred Leader, the Kitumba, his teacher K'Sia and rallying against them most dishonourably of course, General Malkthon. It's excellently paced from start to finish and I would have had trouble seeing it in it's original two part form. It works very well being slightly extended just over that hour mark.

For anyone familiar with the world of The Next Generation and The Undiscovered Country this actually answers a few questions - but not as many as you might be asking about ten minutes in around the Klingon hierarchy. Bear with it because it all gets unravelled and makes total sense by the time the strains of the closing credits theme are running through your speakers. The costumes particularly for the well-meaning Klingon defector Kali are wonderful (if a little baggy!) and you'll have this nagging feeling you've seen something like it before. Yes - you have. 

The Kitumba is a bit of a spoiled brat role which is nicely played by Kario Pereria Bailey and certainly shows a progression of growth through the story. Malkthon though is a almost a pantomime villain at times and I did expect some mustache twirling at times. However, saying that it is a wonderful role to chew out everything around him although some fans might be more familiar with actor Vic Mignogna as Captain Kirk in Star Trek Continues.

I have to commend the team working on Kitumba because the sets are simply magnificent, transcending time almost with updated computer displays dotted in among the distinctly retro-feel technology of the classic Enterprise bridge or briefing room. At times I genuinely couldn't believe I was watching a fan-made production because the set-up was so good. Yes, there's some slightly hammy accents in there (Scotty for one) but luckily that's outweighed by some great performances elsewhere. 

James Cawley, in his final appearance as Kirk, seems to have channelled just a smattering of Shatner in there for good measure but still keeps this Kirk as his own interpretation and I think makes the captain a touch stronger and more believable than before. Spock and McCoy aren't around that much if I'm honest and both actors, Brandon Stacey and John M Kelley respectively do fine jobs of the parts. Personally I think Stacey is a much better fit for Spock than Jeffrey Quinn. Nothing against Quinn but the nuances of the Vulcan seem to suit the "newer" Spock just that little more comfortably.

Jonathan Zungre as Chekov, Kim Stinger as Uhura and Bobby Quinn Rice as Peter Kirk actually share a lot more of the limelight with Kirk especially during the away mission to the Klingon homeworld as the story develops and hold the show together very well. I found their scenes very easy to watch and certainly it's a group that has developed over time and through several key personnel changes.

While we're talking of cast it's not only a pleasure to see Kirk's nephew Peter on the ship as part of security (yep a redshirt), but also the full Vulcan Xon on the bridge. While it's definitely showing the tip of continuity it's a shame we all know where this character is going to end up. Talking of cast - guest stars - wow. These guys can pull them in. In the past they're featured many legends of sci-fi and Star Trek most notably both George Takei and Walter Koenig (and that's only two). Here we get both franchise design master Andrew Probert and Buck Rogers himself Gil Gerrard early on as Starfleet admirals.. How Phase II got them I'll never kno The quality clearly speaks volumes that means these types of reverred actors want to be involved. It's a big bonus that shows the calibre of fans this show has garnered since its premiere. Take a look at their site for the full list!

The only thing that I could really quibble with is one fight scene towards the conclusion. Everything goes really well to this point; theres great dialogue, tightly directed scenes, mind-blowingly big crowd scenes (those Klingons ain't CGI my friends) and a captured essence of The Original Series of which Roddenberry would be proud. So why oh why is such an important sequence at such a late stage in Kitumba, which has been totally serious and played straight since the first second played slightly for laughs reminiscent of The Trouble with Tribbles?! Fortunately the rest of the episode kept me so glued that I'm almost happy to overlook it but for some it might tip them the other direction. Perhaps a slight misstep in an otherwise brilliant outing.

So we can nail on about great performances but there's more to Kitumba than that. At times I was reminded of Babylon 5 in the way it was filmed and the feel of the sets to some degree (it too had somewhat limited funds) but also the way in which CGI is so magnificantly utilised. I was expecting some form of sets by Bacofoil and starships by Kelloggs but this almost made me lick the TV in Enterprise Envy. The work here by Tobias Richter is staggering by any standard. No more is the Klingon fleet a series of blips on a sensor screen; they are there to be seen whether Birds-of-Prey or battle cruisers, all are immaculately rendered and just lift this production to another level. Seeing a firefight between the Klingons and the TV Enterprise cannot but make your day once you've seen it - and that's not even halfway through. There's more after that. Perhaps some of the more clever moments are the starships in the Qo'noS sky that are occasionally glimpsed or perhaps it's the recreation of a slightly-busier-than-we-remember K-7 space station as the titles roll. Whatever it is, you have to see them.

The music too adds a ton of weight to the experience. Drawing on the classic incidental score and theme there is no doubt where this series is throwing it's weight. It adds to the sense that this is fully in keeping with the feel of the 1960's show. Remember those end of act dah dah daaaaahs? Yep, they're here for you and a total pleasure it is to hear them over the fade out.

I have to say that having watched some of the earlier episodes, watching Kitumba, even for the music was such a dramatic difference. It's not as light nor is the "comedic" music from The Original Series used quite as heavily - nor do we have the occasional swing into the tones of The Next Generation as I noticed in the pilot episode recently. Indeed, Come What May is a slightly prophetic title now in hindsight as this is a show which has definitely come of age, matured and honed its brand if you will. 

The acting, effects and stories are much tighter and exceptional considering the restraints that the Phase II team must be under. It's a marvellous experience and ten years is like chalk and cheese. With the remastering that took place a few years back on The Original Series the mix of '60's style uniforms and sets doesn't seem out of place with the gorgeous CGI starships and scenes. Seemless. What's even nicer is that the stories themselves are getting better with this being a real tour de force for the Phase II production team. It has soul, adds background to the franchise and could easily fit into the canon universe - and that's probably the biggest issue. It never will be and that's a shame. We have JJ Abrams ramping up the big guns and the action heroes in the latest movies while attempts to bring back the essence of the Roddenberry vision have to skrimp and scrape a few dollars to make an hour of TV. That's not justice if you ask me.

So, Mark, if you are still reading and didn't give up after two minutes (!) I hope you'll take an hour our, plug YouTube through your tellybox and watch this story. As I've noted, it's a different ballgame to where New Voyages started and there are more than a few cringeworthy moments in those early shows but time and experience has ironed out the issues to make this a great fan-made series.

Best of all? We only have to wait for February for episode nine, The Holiest Thing, and not another near-five years and the trailer is already very tempting with the introduction of one Carol Marcus.....

You can follow the voyages by dropping by the Phase II website right now and learning more about the show. While you're there, watch an episode or eight...

All images reproduced by kind permission of Phase II

Did you know you can now join up with us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter or even +1 us on Google+? If you didn't why not drop over there now!

Star Trek (2009): On the Page

To misquote Kirk in The Undiscovered Country; I've never trusted Star Trek movies and I never will. I can never forgive them for omitting chunks of narrative.

With all the excitement over the arrival of Star Trek Into Darkness I thought it was a good opportunity to look back over the reboot that revitalised the franchise and dragged it brutally into the 21st century. The book of the sequel was a good read - but would the same be said of it's predecessor?

Previously I've only read four of the movie novelisations; The Wrath of Khan,  The Search for Spock,  The Undiscovered Country and 1993's Generations. What's always struck me is the goldmine of extra information that you can glean from these publications. Generations is a must for fans, returning the movie story to its preview audience version complete with skydiving Kirk and Soran shooting the Enterprise captain in the back. The Wrath of Khan novel opens up the story of Saavik and Peter Preston much more than you ever experience in the movie with the former getting even greater exposition within the following novel of Star Trek III.

The 2009 Star Trek movie is also indicative of this trend and was a real eye opener. For starters the opening of the book is as Abrams originally envisaged,  with the birth of Spock followed by Nero's arrival and subsequent destruction of the USS Kelvin/birth of Kirk. For pacing and understanding purposes,  I believe,  these were  switched. Logically it works better in the book to have Spock arrive first but it doesn't detract from the storyline in any way although it does provide you with a feeling that this is more of a directors cut.

There are a lot of scenes where there is additional dialogue and on occasion exposition narrative is shifted between scenes and characters. Notably references to Nero's Romulan heritage missing from the screened version are prevalent here on numerous pages while I felt this was played down in the movie.

Uhura's comments around the 47 lost Klingon ships while at Starfleet Academy are also slotted back in here.  While not a massive addition or loss it's when you look at the bigger picture that it is apparent how this all fits in with a line of dialogue here or a look there. The dame goes for the deleted scene featuring Kirk's step father and brother before he takes the car for a joyride at the mine. The page certainly offers a lot more insight (I won't say depth) to these characters and even goes to note why the Vulcans have retreated to a certain cave in a homage to the classic series and,  to a degree,  the short-lived Enterprise. I'm guessing the reason some of those exposition sections were passed over in the book and/or moved in the final screen cut was purely a matter of time and pacing. There's a whole section on Delta Vega for instance where Prime Spock wants to talk about the crew although this never made it off the page - which makes more sense when you consider the whole concept that Spock preaches about pollution of the timeline.

There were two things however that really shocked me considering how much was made of at least one of them back in 2009. There are no Klingons. As with the movie,  the book cuts out Nero's incarceration on Rura Penthe completely and I was expecting it to be there (it's there in the deleted scenes on the DVD); so much so I went back and reread a whole chunk of the book just to make sure. I can assure you it's not there even on a second pass through. The second bit that surprised me was the ending. Pretty much as with Where No Man Has Gone Before, it ended with Kirk in a fistful against his seemingly invincible opponent. In the book this has been completely altered meaning that there is no effective final confrontation and some of the thrill is lost.

In fact the whole ending seems to have been chopped and changed a lot. On screen it appears that Scotty beams Kirk and Spock into the heart of the Narada accidentlally while the book clearly mutes that it's a cargo hold although not empty of aggressive Romulans. Kirk's battle with Nero and therefore exposition over his future which is revealed during combat never comes and it's as though the book just doesn't quite pay off at then end after having provided so much more information about the characters on the whole, even down to when Chekov went to school. You can understand why the filmed version is the way it is (time and attention span) and having the absence of this confrontation is the biggest loss to the novelisation by a country mile.

Now the movie itself has been reviewed to death so anything I say about it, good or bad has more than likely been spoken, written or videoed before. The novel however is a much more thorough affair than you see on the screen. For apparent reasons the novel has to be more descriptive than it's cinematic relative. For one, the relationship between Spock and Uhura is more evident earlier on during deployment to Vulcan rather than while on the Enterprise. Prime Spock's introduction is played out more from Kirk's perspective than you would appreciate from the movie. One thing that does carry from the screen is that this is a story which does not give much in the way of characterisation. It is much stronger in the action and event department than anything else. Alan Dean Foster has captured the essence of the film and even in the style of the book it is distinctively a JJ-verse than a Roddenberry-verse.While  the character backgrounds of Spock and Kirk are explored from their birth, the other s seem more as background roles than they did within the film because the focus is much more on the perspective from the two most senior officers on the ship. I've probably been unfair on the characters in reflection. Kirk's growth from Iowa farm-boy reprobate to starship captain  is played out well and illustrated as well as it is in the film. The scene with older Spock though has more resonance perhaps in the book as you can see how his attitudes and understanding take a leap forward and he sees the potential that he has and that Pike saw reinforced by the aged Vulcan. Alan Dean Foster has retained the essence of Chris Pine's performance here and the dialogue makes it very hard to try and see a young Shatner in the role or anyone else (but that could just be cinematic influence on the grey cells).

In regards to Nero, he seems even more reclusive and almost mute save for his conversation with Spock on the viewscreen. While some could say that this adds mystery to his character I find it means he becomes inaccessible and one of the many rather than the lead protagonist. The addition of the one-on-one fight with Kirk at the end does give him much more to do but as the story is from the point of view of Kirk and Spock, he gets sidelined without notice in the novel. While his threat is ever present to the story and the crew, he is not the centre of the show here.  Sadly the one thing that does seem to be mislaid along the way is the depth of character even within Kirk and Spock. 

Events are played out but the emotional impact seems to be left behind and this is where the "failings" of rebooted Star Trek is perhaps more evident than it is on the screen. The themes are less important and debated than they were on the smaller screen. The one thing you can never replicate in the novel however is the visual spectacle of the movie experience. While the page will never give that visual or auditory jaw dropping explosion, Foster's novelisation has described events in the most detailed way possible. Not only does this allow some degree of imagination to be employed by the reader, it also give chance to offer insight into events and characters. 

For instance, Kirk's first look at the Enterprise in the Iowa desert is breathtaking on the screen if not in line with classic Star Trek lore. But what Foster emphasises is the size of the vessel Kirk is viewing and the activity surrounding her which is not necessarily the focal point of that moment. In fact Foster is more keen to have Kirk think of the Enterprise as a woman than a starship. Of course we know in the Prime timeline he thinks of her as nothing less but it demonstrates that Foster has perhaps interpreted certain points differently or conveyed the depth that Abrams wished to portray more prominently. I, for example, had always seen this moment as Kirk realising his potential ambition could be in space and being simply in awe of the mammoth spacecraft and drinking in the moment. 

Talking of Foster's attention to addition and interpretation, the later sequence on Delta Vega and Kirk's escape from the predatory locals is well described, even down to naming the beasts which is something pretty much impossible on the screen. The frantic nature of Kirk's escape also captures the slightly comedic escape as his situation becomes perilous and this could have come off badly in comparison to the movie but still manages to convey both conflicting emotions at the same time. Perhaps the emphasis is increased due to the warnings from the escape pod which echo out through Kirk's first moments of awakening on the frozen world.

Foster also does an excellent job when it comes to the Narada. The epic scale and mishmash nature of the mining vessel really gets lifted from the page and you can sense the chaos and disorder it's design belays. When encountered from Pike and Kirk's perspective and no doubt in comparison to the sleek, pristine Enterprise it is this half finished design that strikes then and then suggests more about Nero and his psyche. Good thing really as he doesn't say a lot in the book and I still think the movie ending should have been reinstated.

The crew aside from Kirk and Spock are handled as aptly here as they are on the screen there is no expansion to their roles beyond the aired movie. It's not about them and you certainly feel it on the page given that there's barely an additional line or glimpse between them. They do get their moments to shine. Notably Chekov's transporter tricks take place on the bridge and lose the tension element created by his sprint to the transport room, but aside from that, it's business as expected.

Previous Star Trek movie novelisations expanded scenes and characters to give more insight to their natures, this book stays firmly in the 21st Century Star Trek mold remaining tightly focused on the action and adventure elements that JJ will no doubt be remembered for placing at the forefront of his re-imagining. Scotty probably suffers the most in the book, really giving nothing more to do than he has on the screen but vitally the last line of the whole book is just superb and is one of the great homages of the reboot era. While I get why it wouldn't have worked on the screen (post/mid titles per Avengers perhaps?) it is a cheeky little smile that just...works and I felt a little warmer inside. That's a bit twee but yeah, I liked it.

So, overall? The film is OK and the book is better. I would recommend reading it wholeheartedly even if just to take stock of the first reboot movie at a time when its sequel is getting a significant amount of limelight. It's what 21st Century Star Trek needed to get booted back into the mainstream and attempt to shed its talk-not-action image. Reading the Alan Dean Foster novelisation gives you time to absorb the events of the movie and then some more (but without the Klingons!!!!), appreciate the stupidity of Chief Engineer Olson, wead (yes, I spelt it like that on purpose) Chekhov's few lines, manage to avoid the razor-sharp whiteness of Nimoy's teeth and see the formation of a new chapter in the life of the franchise. It's an excellent companion to the film, fills in some of the blanks and helps with some of the head-scratch moments you might have had - and you can do it all at our own pace too.

Star Trek (2009) is available from Simon and Schuster priced £12.99. ISBN 9781439158869

Seven Times the Darkness Coupled with a Splash of Vengeance

Seems like there's something new everyday at the moment with Star Trek Into Darkness.

Now some of you might have already seen one or two of these images around your local bus-stop  but did you know that the shady image of Kirk or Spock is part of a series of seven that are being released as part of the lead up to Star Trek Into Darkness?

For those of you who've missed them, here are all seven (above) in one bite-size piccie. These look great, very arty and featuring Sulu, Uhura, Spock, McCoy, Kirk, Harrison and in her first promo shot, Alice Eve's Carol Marcus. Interesting that they're mainly going for the phaser-totting action pose which would have been massively out of place in the Roddenberry universe wouldn't you say? Still pushing that action-adventure theme to the limit...

But, d'you notice any glaring omissions? Like Chekov and Scotty?! In fact on my last piece in regards to the trailers and the onslaught of the marketing campaign these two have been badly underused. Are they going to get any time to shine or were they just AWOL the days when Paramount did all its photocalls for the movie? Also absent so far from any form of marketing material save one photo which was featured in Empire magazine is Scotty's little engineering pal, Keenser played by Tiny Ron. Now I'm not his biggest fan, period. In fact he's the one thing that grated against me when I watched the 2009 reboot. I pray that he's not Star Trek's answer to Jar Jar Binks because I felt he was verging on that in the first movie. Note to JJ - don't make Scotty too much of a comedy character this time because it didn't do Simon Pegg justice as an actor.

Photo from Empire Magazine

While we're all in super-hyped mode, think about this one - the premiere of Star Trek Into Darkness has happened - the world premiere. There are now people in Australia who have seen this film in 2D and 3D. The internet is about to become awash with spoilers and I will be avoiding them like the plague. I will however try and keep up to date with decent teaser info and the like so as not to ruin any of the surprise for any of us who want to get the full first-time-viewing experience. I had even considered going on a Star Trek Into Darkness  ban for the next 15 days to keep away from any spoilers, information or anything to do with the movie but then I remembered I wanted to read the Star Trek magazine special out in May and...yep, that plan lasted for about ten seconds. If there is anyone who is doing a self-imposed ban, how's it going? Managed to avoid all influences? When the previous films were out it seemed easy to do but with the internet explosion it's been a bit of a nightmare. You can't move without some kind of reference hitting you smack in the face.

Oh and today we also got our first proper shot of that Dreadnought-class behemoth called the USS Vengeance. Will Harrison have his vengeance?! Certainly if he's getting to use this for as long as he wants. Looks a bit Lego-y if you ask me but I'm not sure I'd be saying that if it was bearing down on me with all weapons armed and ready. If Shinzon's Schimitar was a predator I'd hate to fathom what you'd class this as...

It's a beast, no doubt, and I can't wait to see her in action. This is like nothing we've seen before - a cross of multiple designs and then some painted in stealth black.  From this angle it's more evident there are certainly influences of the Enterprise B, C, D and E all in there. I'm liking the cutaway saucer design around the bridge - something very radical for Star Trek there. I suspect a lot of fun was had coming up with this starship and there's something very reminiscent of the stealth planes/helicopters/boats that we have nowadays and backs up the secret agent world that surrounds John Harrison. 

So what do you think of her now we've had a closer and less fuzzy look? Good? Bad? What I also didn't appreciate was that Star Trek: Vengeance was originally considered as the title for the film or that if you see the Russian version of the movie that IS what it's called! 

Anyway. No doubt I'll be back on soon with some more up to the minute news on the movie. Until then, I'm going back under that very comfy looking rock...

Are We Warping Star Trek Into Dark(ness) Directions?

Welcome to the first EVER Some Kind of Star Trek contributor post. You've heard a lot about what's been seen in trailers and what we're about to see - but what do we want from a sequel as fans? What does Star Trek Into Darkness need to do? +JoeHardacre tackles the questions...

"You think you can't make mistakes? But the choices you make could get yourself, and everyone under your command, killed." 

The strong opening words from another stellar trailer for Star Trek Into Darkness, but it's surprising how easily those words could fall right onto the shoulders of JJ Abrams, the man spearheading one of the more pleasing franchise reboots in recent memory. Okay, maybe not the killed part, but the expectations for Star Trek Into Darkness dwarf even the weight felt when Abrams was leading us into an unknown frontier with Star Trek in 2009. 

Looking back to the build up to the Star Trek reboot, as much as I was overawed by those initial posters, screen shots, trailers and interviews leading up to the release of the film, the one thing that stands out to me is apprehension. The Trekkie in me harkened back to my childhood days; of nights watching Kirk, Picard and Janeway. I recall with fondness sitting alongside my father as they battled through seemingly impossible odds and charming the pants off of everyone they came across while they did it.

For me, a reboot, even one as promising as this, hinged on one key factor: the casting. The Kirk Vs Picard argument seems as though it has existed since time immemorial, but no matter whose corner you stand in (I’m a Picard fan personally), the recasting of James Tiberius Kirk and his beloved crew was met with more than a few raised eyebrows. Who could stand up to the role? Would it be a big name actor, overflowing with rugged charisma in a hope they could match William Shatner? This approach, however, didn't sit well with me at all. In my opinion, given the mammoth history of the Star Trek universe, as well as the fervency of its fan base, the second an established actor hit the screen, I believe our attentions would have been drawn to immediate comparisons not only between the original and the re-imagining. Not only that, but to other performances that actor has delivered over the years, rather than the character they are portraying.

This is a common issue for me with films; performances can be inconsistent. In some films, actors are accused of “mailing in” their performances, playing a slightly different version of themselves as opposed to truly losing themselves in the performance (save Daniel Day-Lewis, but he’s arguably the greatest actor of all time; but that’s for another day). As such, JJ Abrams and his team turned to the alternative, an approach I was more inclined to agree with; lesser known actors. This of course leads to its own trials and tribulations; could someone without certified pedigree handle the pressure of these roles? Kirk, Spock, Scotty and co. fresh out of Starfleet was a tantalising prospect, but with so much lore to learn from, could an inexperienced actor be bogged down with preset notions of how these characters should act, or could they embrace the freedom given to them a little too much, leaving our beloved heroes nigh on unrecognizable?

Thankfully, these issues were largely unfounded; Chris Pine, relatively unknown except for the Princess Diaries 2, and Lindsay Lohan-led rom-com Just My Luck, was a revelation. He immediately captured Kirk’s arrogance, not to mention his ability to throw (and indeed take) a punch. His delivery was less refined for sure, but no less assured; the bar scene left no doubt in anyone's mind that Pine could carry Kirk’s resilience, both in a fight and indeed in his pursuit of the other, but just as legendary of Kirk’s penchants. Karl Urban stars as Bones, his introduction a startling reminder of the weathered, experienced voice of reason opposite Kirk’s impetuous, cavalier approach, and Brits amongst us will have needed no introduction to home-grown star Simon Pegg, who slipped into the role of Scotty with consummate ease. So far, so good; but the biggest question mark remained above arguably the franchise’s most beloved character: Spock.

Spock embodies so many essential elements of the Star Trek universe that the trepidation with his casting was more than understandable; here was the character who delivered the franchise’s most memorable line, it’s most recognizable gesture, and was the figurehead for possibly the most famous alien race in the entire universe, the Vulcan. Enter Zachary Quinto. Quinto was possibly the most renowned of the main cast, having starred in both 24 as well appearing as fan-favourite Sylar in cult-hit Heroes. Still, to pick up the mantle of not only one of the most memorable sci-fi roles in memory, but arguably the face of a franchise should not be understated. Amazingly, he was so at home that I found the eventual introduction of once irreplaceable Leonard Nimoy to be somewhat jarring, which I think indicates a job well done. 

Ultimately, the reboot was an undoubted success; perhaps overshadowed by the James Cameron led Avatar, but still, it became an instant cult hit, and achieved so much more than I could possibly have imagined back in the late 2000's. We were introduced to believable characters, a carefully worked plot device to preserve all our earliest Star Trek memories, whilst paving the way for JJ Abrams and his writing team to take this Enterprise and boldly go where no Star Trek team have gone before.

Thus, we are led to the sequel; the marketing campaign has been deliberately ambiguous, although the latest efforts have been analysed and scrutinised extensively by Clive here and in stark contrast to the efforts of the first film. The change in demeanour is deliberate, and highlights exactly what the production team have been looking to achieve with each film. The first Star Trek was presented with a very simple, but difficult goal in mind: make us believe. Make us believe that this cast of upstarts, complemented by a few well travelled and respected actors could replicate characters, locations and ideals that have been held in high regard for over 40 years. 

Early posters were simplistic, and understated, with promotional material centred on showcasing the actors in their new roles, or the Enterprise mid-warp. It endeavoured to pull a few nostalgic strings, whilst readying us for their introduction. Characters such as Spock have such a simple but massively symbolic appearance that it was imperative we saw and acknowledged them before they were thrust onto us on the big screen. The Star Trek reboot aimed to re-establish the franchise, but positioned in such a way that it could be continued for years to come. As much as people would have loved Nimoy and Shatner, or even Patrick Stewart to return if The Next Generation formed the basis for the film, the scope would have been limited massively, and given that Nemesis was making the rounds only seven years before, it wouldn't have been much of a reboot at all.

The marketing was direct but effective, and although I personally went into the film with no expectations whatsoever, such is my personal preference so as to avoid disappointment, I left with naught but a smile on my face. Obviously, I owe that to the fact the film was fantastic, and Eric Bana delivered a much underappreciated performance as Nero, but without that early preparation hammered into me through the marketing campaign, I’m not sure I would have been as readily accepting of what was occurring on screen.

Moving onto Star Trek Into Darkness however, we see that JJ Abrams is no longer content with just seeing if the reboot was even possible, he’s looking to rattle some cages. The tone couldn't be more juxtaposed; our eyes have feasted upon the same recognizable characters (with Uhura thrown in for good measure, teasing a much larger role for her in the upcoming film), but this time action shots are the key focus; Kirk, Spock and Uhura all out of their element, appearing dishevelled or in unenviable positions, and our mysterious villain marvelling at his wanton destruction. I for one am not anticipating the jovial, Kirk and Spock camaraderie we witnessed at the end of Star Trek 2009.

In fact, the reception from the early teasers has been so well received, with Benedict Cumberbatch’s role central to most conspiracy theories, that the film has generated far more buzz on its own than any marketing effort could hope for. Trailers have shown Cumberbatch on top of our heroes in more ways than one, with the mystique surrounding his true identity and intentions being displayed with certain Avengers-esque flair. Although never existing purely as a single character, the notion of a band of heroes working together to defeat a powerful foe has been a huge critical and commercial success over the years (Avengers Assemble, The Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall in just the past 12 months), and from the anticipation building as we approach May, it seems as though Star Trek Into Darkness should easily warp past the $385,000,000 the first made at the worldwide box office.

The true area for growth, however, is outside of the US; the reboot performed admirably, but with only $127,000,000 from burgeoning overseas markets, it’s easy to see exactly why we’ve seen a shift in locale. The destruction of London is sure to generate a lot of interest in the UK, and following on from the London Olympics, the threat to London we saw with Skyfall and the UK’s Royal Wedding all occurring within the past year, they couldn't have selected a location more engrossed in the minds of the world than the Capital of ol’ Blighty. 

So, what are my expectations? I've been incredibly impressed with the build-up to the sequel so far, and my thoughts on the first film couldn't be higher, in fact I hold it in my top 20 films of all time, but do I think the sequel will best that? Possibly is the safest word to use. I recall my opinions on other franchise reboots and the Nolan-led Batman trilogy springs to mind. The first film in that series, Batman Begins, is critically and commercially inferior to the sequel, The Dark Knight. One could argue that The Dark Knight is the better of the two films, and from an objective standpoint, it’s hard to disagree, but subjectively, based on the impact it had on me as a fan, I will always hold Batman Begins in higher regard. I think Star Trek is taking a similar path; the reboot centering around an origin story, an introduction to well known characters, seen through someone else’s eyes; eventually leading into a darker, sombre sequel with an uncertain outcome. Star Trek Into Darkness will be a fantastic film, and I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a near doubled box office gross from Star Trek 2009, somewhere in the region of $700-800 million. However, will I remember it as fondly, will I be as desperate to watch it again? That remains to be seen. 

Prediction: 10.5/12 (If you really want to know about the 12 point scale, just ask). 

Joe Hardacre is a Trekkie and a former work colleague of SKOST creator Clive Burrell. In the few weeks they toiled side by side in 2012 their combined interest in Star Trek gave them a respite from the daily labours of work. Although not quite a fan to the same level as can be witnessed in the wider world, it's more than enough for him to wade blindly into an argument if someone should dare speak disparagingly about Will Riker. Joe's hopefully going to stick around and talk a bit more in the future about more aspects of Star Trek

- he might even get a contributor profile...!

Let's Take a Reality Trek (Into Darkness)

"You think the rules don't apply to you because you disagree with them" - Admiral Pike

The media machine for Star Trek into Darkness has ramped it up again with the continued evolution of the mobile app for Android and iOS (when the damn thing works that is) and the stunning, first ever motion poster featuring a smouldering London and the rumbling tones of "JH" aka Benedict Cumberbatch (removed as it got annoying).

Great idea and I've seen there is also one in existence for The Wolverine but that's off topic! It's a great new concept and was the first real clue that London was going to have a a starring role in this new production thanks to the inclusion of the Mayor's Gherkin (and it's not as interesting as that initially sounds).

"You have any idea what a pain you are?" - Pike

"I think so, sir." - Kirk

Over the weekend we also got "Teaser Trailer Two" and under the circumstances I think a more apt name for it is the "Kirk Teaser" as it's pretty much 70 seconds of scene setting for the Enterprise captain. If you've missed it, here it is for your enjoyment.

I would at this point have delved into what we learn from the new trailer but we've already got a lot of answers thanks to the 28 minute previews that have been set up worldwide. Now that's how to tease your fans and make them want more! Of course it could also be Abrams realising that it's a rubbish film later on and continuing to build the super-hype so no one will notice underneath all that lens flare. From what we've seen I doubt it's that catastrophic although there is a lot more of an action/adventure theme than I would expect from a Star Trek movie set in the Prime Universe (but more on that in a bit).

"By now all of you will have heard what happened in London..."

We now know for certain that the scenes of Kirk and McCoy running and jumping into the sea are from the early part of Into Darkness and that the Enterprise is hidden under the waves below. We can pretty much conclude that the clips of Admiral Pike verbally dressing-down Kirk are from his meeting with the captain following his blundered mission on that same red planet. Why Kirk decides to go after John Harrison is still undetermined although we get some sinister posturing from Cumberbatch albeit brief - in fact he's virtually non-existent in this trailer bar about three seconds.

"Jim - the beach is THAT way!" - McCoy

What else is new though? There's a new scoutship sequence which I would suggest is set during the quest for Harrison and there are some nice shots of Scotty double-taking against a fish; Uhura kitted up for an away mission and Spock doing that building jump...again. Overall the bulk of the trailer is focused on Kirk going through some kind of transition process - a mission, a failure and the chance to redeem. Perhaps it's not that there is a specific reason for him going after Harrison except that it is a chance to get back his command. Apart from that it's familiar territory with more repeated clips of the Enterprise creating a bow-wave in San Francisco and what I still think is Starfleet Command/Academy bearing the brunt of a saucer impact following the crash.

"Punch it." - Kirk 

While not physically in this trailer, the 28 minute previews have answered one important question that I've been musing over since Day One. We've finally found out that Peter Weller is Admiral Marcus and therefore, one would believe, Carol's dad. So there goes my super-twist that he's the baddie and Harrison is just a minion! But then who's to say that John Harrison will turn out to actually be John Harrison all the way through or that he's Weller's minion?! Over analysing this new burst of dribble-inducement seems pointless but something more (I thought anyway) interesting came to mind that I wanted to talk about in relation to the direction we're heading in with the Abrams reboot universe.. In part it's due to the trailer that this thought was sparked, it's also thanks to that stunning new poster, an unsettling feeling within the Trek online community and some apparent revelations about Abrams feelings towards the franchise. 

"We're gonna do this we gotta do it now!" - Sulu

This week, a new friend of mine, George Silsby, from the Star Trek: Starfinder audio series, reminded me about the graphic novel prequel series that's out to buy at the moment and how it might be more relevant than we think - and could even bring it back into the realms of (dare we say it) CANON. Are we going to see the destruction of this Enterprise and the arrival/recommissioning of Robert April's Enterprise that's mentioned in passing? Countdown to Darkness also notes that April had Alex Marcus as his first officer on that ship. The dots are slowly joining up! My friend from Starfinder is also postulating that Harrison is Garth of Izar. I'm inclined to agree that he's not Harrison but whether it's Garth is another thing. We'll have to put a bet on this!

It could be Harrison is a youthful version of April (reduced aging or from the past?) for instance, as we know there's some kind of aging thing going on in the first 9 minutes previewed a few weeks ago? What about Harrison being a member of April's crew as I'm pushed to think there has to be a connection to the oft-mentioned officer and in the first trailer we ever saw, Harrison was carrying April's Gatling Gun. George also mapped out the concept that with the arrival of Miss Marcus we could be getting  something involving the Genesis device. Now that would be pretty impressive and would offer the chance at life from lifelessness? Is Genesis the cure that Harrison indicates in the nine minute sneak-peak? The secret to rebirth/youth? I also think that with all these plot possibilities that are flying around, JJ will have enough material for the next six or seven films in the reboot universe. TV series later? Doubt it if this film does any good. Next film for 2016 and the 50th anniversary? Very good possibility according to Den of Geek and it would mean that it would be sooner than the four year window we've had since the first film. With Abrams moving to Wars from Trek it would mean a step back to (exec) producer while he focuses on the series that he's admitted to loving a lot more.

Anyway; conjecture, rumour mill, conspiracy theory...move on....

"He's a fugitive and I want to take him out." - Kirk

The consensus over the reboot series is mixed to say the least. Do we see it as canon given that it diverts from the prime universe and how is it classified? Do you enjoy it as an entertaining film or should it just be seen as a complete standalone? I don't believe that there is clean cut answer to it and it's pretty much each to his or her own. However, I'm going to wade in with a few thoughts. I can accept that STID is Star Trek or in the very least that it is BASED on Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek. The grip is that while Nero kinked the timeline in 2009's reboot, surely there should be some kind of crossover bar the appearance of Prime Spock. To keep the fans happy it can't be screwed with completely and yes, I understand that this is one person's interpretation bit there are some fundamental principles that need to be maintained otherwise it becomes diluted and a pale imitation of the very thing it is hoping to bring to a new audience. 

"I believe in you" - Admiral Pike

The new films are heavily focused on the action element and character and themes seem to have been sidelined but this indicates something more about today's cinematic experience. However this week Damon Lindelof has come out saying that Into Darkness is "about family" which seems a bit of a cop out frankly given the issues Trek has covered from day one - wasn't this what the first one was aboout too?! Sadly "issues" are not what today's media-savvy audiences are desiring hence it's about tech, 3D, effects and jaw droppers because that's what puts bums on seats if you'll pardon the expression. Now here's the funny thing - if it wasn't for a fist fight and a demand by the network for less cerebral concepts which led to the unprecedented commissioning of the second pilot, "Where No Man Has Gone Before", then we wouldn't have Trek and the thought provoking science fiction that came over the course of the subsequent series. So just as Roddenberry did to get that first year commissioned so Abrams has gone back to basics and the fact we have a sequel is proof it worked. The wonder is as we in for more of the same or can we hope that Into Darkness recognises the fan base and points more firmly towards keeping with the Great Bird's universe. Problems is that everything I keep seeing makes me go 'wow' and want to see Into Darkness because it looks action packed and amazing as a film ut not necessarily because it's got Star Trek taped to the title.

"Come on; it's going to be fun!" - Kirk

However a series of clips and soundbites gives no idea what it will be like feature length although we've seen some good feedback off the previews that it LOOKS stunning. (Notice where I'm going here?!) This is where the whole poster grumble came in. It looks brilliant. I love the concept and it's certainly made the trailers interesting seeing the Enterprise skirting the atmosphere, crashing into San Francisco or rising up from the ocean as if reborn from the waves and certainly contrasting to its later plummet Earth-wards. Yet wasn't the whole reason for the transporter because they couldn't work out how to land the ship in the 60's? Is this where we start to think it's not exactly what it should be and that Abrams really has just decided to do his own thing and thoroughly retrofit Trek with the intention of attracting a new audience for the 21st Century? In 2009 we even had the Enterprise built on Earth which clearly goes against canon but we have to remember that the opening five minutes of the first film in 2009 effectively gave JJ free licence to do what he wants. Maybe that's just what we should do! Perhaps we should view it as fans of Batman, The Avengers, Superman or even Doctor Who?

"...Told you we'd fit." - Kirk

"I'm not sure that qualifies." - Spock

Everyone has their favourite way it's been done and reasons why. Over the years they've all seen multiple reboots and re-imaginings (11 times and counting for The Doctor!) but the basics of who is involved and the setting remain although the details surrounding it alter. We can grumble all we want or go along and enjoy it. For the foreseeable future it's the only new Trek were going to get and that has to be a reason to support its continued success. But then JJ comes out with comments suggesting thus is the only Star Trek he wants people to remember. For a generation that might be the case, but Roddenberry's vision was that humanity had put aside it's differences for the greater good, each adventure had some kind of theme or a story which helped explore one of his family of characters etc - so does the plot point of an attack on London, and supposedly by a member of Starfleet really ally itself to that? When we see it's based on Star Trek should we be reading that it's using characters and associations but it's not really the original? A bit like BMW building the Mini if you will. Or Disney doing Star Wars.....?!

"Ready to swim?"

Is JJ really trying to make a new generation aware of only his vision of the franchise and, as LeVar Burton suggested recently, ignore all that's been or will be. This cannot and will never be the ONLY Star Trek that exists and you can't just dismiss everything that came before - you can't ignore over 700 episodes and 10 films! This is the history that JJ is willing to throw away because it's not his vision and now he can with that neat little "Nero" trick. Let's be fair it's allowed some massive poetic licences as we've already recalled and I'm still not totally hot on the Spock and Uhura romance to this day - unsurprisingly we're going to be getting more of that in May. So can we really be happy with changes to a certain style of storytelling where we didn't get product placement from Nokia or music provided by the Beastie Boys? Is there more of this to be seen Into Darkness and is this a sign that we're heading into a new frontier of product placement ala James Bond? Please. No.

"I hate this!" - McCoy

"I know!" - Kirk

As a movie series so far the reboot has been good fun, certainly high-octane visual entertainment of the highest quality, but it will never replace the original series or anything from the Roddenberry/Berman vision. The essence is there but do you come out of the cinema or finish watching the DVD and release that there are more layers to it? I'm not sure it's been designed in that way. Star Trek (2009) may have inspired something of a new audience but JJ needs to remember that if it wasn't for the millions of fans who've supported and followed Star Trek since 1966 (or earlier!) then he wouldn't have a film to make; let alone a sequel. The majority of his audience will be from that long-term fanbase and not from one single two-hour blip four years ago. Let's face it, a lot of fans were (and I include myself here) ravenous for new live-action trek and seeing as it had been four years since the corpse of Enterprise had been removed from the air with THAT damp squib of a final episode, we were going to take whatever we could get - no doubt JJ knew that this would be the case and as long as it had "staples" of the franchise he was onto a winner... I hope George Lucas just keeps hold of those reins a little more tightly which is something I touched upon previously when I considered we might have been a little heavy-handed towards JJ in light of his new role within the Star Wars Mouse House. Interestingly they've just pulled Clone Wars to move the focus onto the next trilogy and I would think that in line with this we can be fairly certain Trek won't be going televisual for some time as even concepts from Michael Dorn (Captain Worf) and Jonathan Frakes have been vetoed in favour of keeping the Enterprise firmly on the cinema screen.

"Tell me this is gonna work."

Now before I start chewing my own arm off with all this postulating let's wrap this all up. The way this franchise is going reminded me of a quote from Deep Space Nine's "Crossover" as spoken by Major Kira to her mirror universe counterpart - ironic that an installment dealing with a different reality would provide a great line that can so easily apply to this new imagining of the classic crew:

"The players are all the same. They just seem to be performing different parts." - Kira

So once the credits roll at the end of this film will we no longer  accept it as Star Trek in its pure form? Will we remember JJ's Trek films as great cinematic action experiences and a footnote in the larger Trek mythos? The box office will only tell part of the tale as will DVD and Blu-ray sales, merchandising revenues and potentially any further big screen outings; the passage of time will record the rest although I suspect that Prime Trek will win out. No doubt it will outlast us all as a certain starship captain once said, "Let's make sure history never forgets the name, Enterprise" - and I would guess that now applies to whatever universe or reality you prefer...