Skip to main content

Star Trek: Into Darkness ramped up its global expansion, grossing $40-million across 40 territories this weekend to reach $80.5-million in overseas total, according to boxoffice.com.      

     by Kriss Perras Running Waters | "The film's global cume stands at $164.5-million with around half of the overseas marketplace still waiting for the film's release," reports the Box Office site.    

     The filmmakers should expect Oscar noms in several categories: Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Production Design, Art Direction, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects, Costume, Hair & Make-Up, Best Soundtrack and Best Film Editing.     

     The film is a visual masterpiece. Director J.J. Abrams' (Star Wars VII, Star Trek, Lost, Super 8, Mission Impossible III) vision of mise-en-scene--every person, place or thing in each shot--told a part of the story in the most excellent way: subtle. When Kirk, portrayed by Chris Pine, sits on the shuttle, with Spock, portrayed by Zachary Quinto, leaving an empty chair between them, this symbolizes the formerly best friends from a different timeline are still on a different path than their Prime timeline. Bones, portrayed by Karl Urban, then sits in the row behind them and in the seat behind the empty seat. He examines Kirk, telling him there is something wrong with him. The whole scene portrays the brokenness of the timeline in which they are now forced to live out due to Nero. Abrams is fine-tuning his skills in the Director's chair and is headed into the masters' hall of fame. The science fiction genre has one of those too. His occasional minimalist bent is the only element holding him from such acclaim.  Read More

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  You're going to get hit with the 'spammer' stick (22+ / 0-)

    if you don't watch out.  The site is actually designed for a diarist to have probably a single active diary at a time, because you're expected to watch for commenters and to interact with them.  We call diaries where the diarist merely drops a diary and then moves on without interacting 'hit and run', and they're considered poor form.

    It's also frowned upon to merely attempt to drive traffic from DK to your own site via 'teaser' diaries with 'Read More' links.  People are ok with crossposting entire diaries you've written (or explicitly state you have been given permission to crosspost in their entirety by the original author.)  And then provide a link to your site so that people who enjoy a diary can then check your site to see other things they might like.

    So you can try to actually use the site as it is intended, or take your chances on getting banned as a spammer.

  •  Well, don't read Anthony Lane in the New Yorker. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eztempo

    He's definitely going to harsh your buzz:

    “Star Trek Into Darkness,” directed by J. J. Abrams, is a great thundering cudgel of a movie, set to stun.
    •  review (0+ / 0-)

      Yeah I've seen reviews that range from down right they hated it, to those who saw the art and great character growth. They're in a different timeline than the original series, so fans and media used to following the films probably feel jolted around from some of the plot reversals, at least that is what I think anyway. :-)

  •  Reality check (12+ / 0-)

    STID isn't going to receive any Oscar nominations outside of perhaps a handful of technical nods.

    The 2009 series redo got 4 nominations - it was a better received film critically.

    The worry for fans is whether this is the last big budgeted entry for a whole. The production cost $190 million. Marketing costs around the world likely add at least $75 million to is expense. With theaters keeping roughly half the money from ticket sales, the amount of money it needs to gross is over $400 million (later revenues from cable and DVD and other sources still to be added).

    My guess is the future for the series will be on Paramount's sister company Showtime where it can get back to its lower budgeted roots.

  •  Meh, it was no 'The Foxorcist' (0+ / 0-)

    I kinda miss that guy...

    It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime. What better place than here, what better time than now? - Guerilla Radio, Rage Against The Machine.

    by Fordmandalay on Sat May 25, 2013 at 09:15:05 PM PDT

  •  personally, the aspect I most enjoyed (5+ / 0-)

    was the very progressive roots it showed.  Comments about how terrible it is to militarize (and to resign to keep from doing so).  Terrible to start a war.  Terrible to kill with no trial (the obvious parallel to drones attacks.)  
    The decisions not forgo becoming a military in favor of exploration.

    my hat's off to the makers.

    •  Agree. Good political themes. (0+ / 0-)

      I'm surprised more reviewers don't point out the obvious point the move made about drone strikes and the war on terror. It's Star Trek getting back to the kind of messages Gene Roddenberry included in the original series. I liked it.

  •  who is this Cumberpatch? (0+ / 0-)

    pretty bad to sing an actor's praises, and then the get the name wrong.............

    •  Benedict Cumberpatch (0+ / 0-)

      Cumberpatch is the bad guy in this film....can't say who his character's name is in the film, or I'd spoil it for those who have not yet seen it. Also the name is correct: Benedict Cumberpatch. He did a great job! He's big in England.

      •  It's Cumberbatch with a b. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jayden

        Here is his IMDB profile.

        Here is an unofficial website devoted to him.

        This guy's name has been all over the place. Now that you seem to really think his name is spelled with a p, I am wondering if you really saw the film.

        I have seen this actor as Sherlock Holmes in the latest, contemporized version of the classic character, and he is terrific in it. I have not seen his Star Trek venture, yet. I assume he is just as fantastic.

        If there are people reading this "diary" from the UK, please give us more details about him, including any information on his name. I believe that this man is starting to achieve near-immortal status (theatrically, that is) in your wonderful country.

        •  thanks for noticing! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          willynel

          runningwaterspr is not very observant..............!  I thought my question would make the point, but no.

          I know little more of Benedict C than the 'net reveals.  He's been around for a while and his odd name caught the eye!  It is real, ie it is his father's birth surname and thus his.  

          His parents are also actors and his father is a face you saw a lot in minor parts on TV - posh types - (tho he did not use his birth name) and his mother less so, tho I do remember her name, again from tv.

          The man himself I know from Sherlock - not that I watch it, but the trailers..... and some voiceovers.

          A star certainly risen, and he'll get there - but not mythical yet.

        •  I did (0+ / 0-)

          Screen STID. He was absolutely fantastic!  He delivered lines so well, inflections at just exactly the right spot. It was his voice, the way he played like he was being nice when he was really a very bad guy character. One always expects special effects in sci-fi, but he totally upstaged the SFX. Awesome talent! It will be cool to watch his next film. Glad someone else liked him too

          Also spelling errors do happen. :-(

  •  meh (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    runningwaterspr, jayden

    I love star trek and I love sci-fi. Im not wedded to the cannon. I dont care if things change from the original version. Im always open to a new twist on an old favorite.

    But this movie was meh. It just wasnt that interesting.

    The movie looked great. Im glad i dropped the $5 (matinee show...im not spending $10+ on anything from hollywood) to see it on the big screen. I nodded off at one point, but not for very long.

    NO one is getting a best actor or best supporting actor nom from this movie. And this doesnt bode well for star wars imho. But then again, nothing can be worse than star wars III: Darth goes bad and theres no real reason ever presented to dislike the empire.

    I cant tell if its a West End musical or Marxism in action.

    by Evolution on Sun May 26, 2013 at 08:43:28 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site