April 25 2024


An archive of Star Trek News

Lindelof: Star Trek Into Darkness Mistake

1 min read

Damon Lindelof admits that one decision made during the filming of Star Trek into Darkness may have been a mistake.

In an interview about The Leftovers, Lindelof spoke about learning when to be mysterious and when that works against one.

“That’s the thing that I’m trying to learn, because it’s completely and totally situational,” he said. “When we did Star Trek Into Darkness for example, we decided that we weren’t going to tell people that Benedict Cumberbatch was playing Khan. And that was a mistake, because the audience was like, ‘We know he’s playing Khan.’ That was why it was a mistake. But J.J. [Abrams] is telling us nothing about the new Star Wars movie and we love it. I’ve not come across a single person who’s like, ‘I wish I knew a little bit more.’ We are like, ‘Thank God he’s protecting us from all the things that will be revealed in the movie theater.'”

About The Author

25 thoughts on “Lindelof: Star Trek Into Darkness Mistake

  1. Lindelof has nothing to apologise for. Many movies nowadays spoil far too much content before the release. Yes, we all guessed that CucumberSnatch was playing Khan, but we didn’t know that for sure until we finally heard those immortal words spoken in the film. I know a lot of you on here just didn’t like STID one little bit, but that’s besides the point and I hope the comments below don’t descend into yet another needless bashing of what I thought was a very entertaining film. The main issue here is about spoilers and I for one like to avoid spoilers of any type for any movie, so good on JJ Binks and Demon L for trying their best to keep us guessing till the last moment. Spoilers are called SPOILers for a reason.

  2. Pretty much this. nThere was very little in STID that was good or felt right story or Trek-wise.

  3. > We are like, u2018Thank God heu2019s protecting us from all the things that will be revealed in the movie theaternnYeah. We need “protecting”. Otherwise we’ll roll our eyes and skip the movie altogether.

  4. “I know a lot of you on here just didn’t like STID one little bit, but that’s besides the point and I hope the comments below don’t descend into yet another needless bashing of what I thought was a very entertaining film”nnGood luck with that. I’ve been on this site long enough to know that it’s mostly “Get off my lawn!” fans around here, but for what it’s worth I agree.

  5. I think some fans were mad because if they had known what they were paying to see, they might not have wasted their money.

  6. I’m going to take the high ground for once and say that if these films make you happy, great. I’m just sad it also means my Star Trek has to be over as a result.nnOh ya, and get off my lawn! 😉

  7. STID was a garbage movie, and it showed all the weaknesses of JJ Abrams and his lack of knowledge of the Trekverse (as well as his lack of genuine love for it). He was just using the reboot as a testing ground for his Star Wars sequels, IMO.

  8. What is your Star Trek? TOS? TNG? DS9? VOY? ENT?nnAll of the series were very different from each other, but they were all in the prime universe(I guess Enterprise is debatable, but I *think* it was the prime universe).nnI think that if you merely want to go back to the prime universe, and have a more cerebral star trek experience, there is still hope.nnI think that if you want vintage TOS/Early TNG back, you are out of luck in a big way.

  9. Err… no.nnnNot coming out and saying that Cumberbatch was Kahn was not the problem. The problem was trying to shoehorn Kahn into the movie at all.nnnIn the Star Trek universe, Kahn is the heaviest arrow in the quiver. It is too early in the re-visioned franchise to pull out something so powerful. It would have been far better to keep that one tucked away and just created a movie that did not try to please fans by tying the movie to the most popular character while not using any unique element of that character. What did the fact that the villain was Kahn add to the movie? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.nnnSo they wasted the strongest villain for no reason whatsoever — and in trying to do so, diluted the story that was there (corruption in Star Fleet) so the movie came out as a mess.

  10. Been saying that since opening night for the 2009 film. IN the case of that one, he remade the first Star Wars with Star Trek characters! Talk about a slap in the face!

  11. I’m a fan of everything Star Trek pre-2009 and would defend each show, even Voyager and Enterprise. I agree, each show had a different tone, and yet to me at least, they all shared a similar enough thread to each feel like “Star Trek”. JJ-Trek feels more like Star Wars meets Tom Clancy meets comic book movies.nnnnThat’s not to say I enjoyed EVERY episode of each of the six shows, but the pluses were always more then the minuses! To this day, I still wish Rick Berman’s original vision for Enterprise had been allowed to happen. The studio’s instance that he and Braga shoehorn in the futuristic elements that ended up being the Temporal Cold War turned out to be a clear sign that the powers that be at the studio had no idea how to treat Star Trek. That same lack of vision lead to the hiring of JJ Abrams, a man more interested in making Star Wars then Star Trek.

  12. I have just getting $ 8765 within one month.I am connected with a business entity that outsource online jobs . I heard about it last year and I have made such great cash . It is great and I am just so happy to have that option u2026…. Look here for details …nn===>>> Visit Website in my u0420u0154ou0166u0128u0139u0114nn105

  13. Different studio. Paramount makes the movies. They apparently had the same bright ideas the CBS suits had.nKang will still defend the 2009 film, knuckleheads and JJ not withstanding. However Star Trek Into Kang’s Last Bowel Movement is indefensible.

  14. It all comes down to failure of imagination on the part of the so-called writers. Kurtzman and Orci (those knuckleheads) took far too long to get anything resembling their shit together, so JJ called in his other go-to moneymaking moron, Lindelof. The knuckleheads got stuck in a villain-rut from the get go, had Khan on the brain, and Lindelof of course thought it was a brilliant idea that needed only his childlike cut-and-paste skills.nFortunately for Trek audiences, Orci seems to be in a tailspin, Kurtzman has sensibly moved into production, and Lindelof is busily assfucking the Prometheus sequel.

  15. Yeah I’d be lying if I said I liked the reboots even 1/8th as much as TNG, DS9, Voyager or even Enterprise. I just compartmentalize the reboots, view them in a different lens I suppose. It lets me enjoy them while still understanding they are vastly inferior to prime Trek. nnI am holding out hope that the new TV series won’t be a “reboot” but an actual continuation of the prime universe. I’m hoping CBS has the wisdom to realize it’s the right move, and that Alex Kurtzman has the courage to accept it.

  16. And I got a refund for the IMAX tickets I had purchased in advance after watching a free sneak preview. That engineering scene where they just had to shoehorn a “Khan!” scream sealed the deal for me.

  17. Star Trek into Darkness was not good dividends. It was short-sighted to make a copy of the wrath of khan in contemporary form . Hopefully have learned the makers of Star Trek and Beyond that they come up with something new . What the new Star Trek TV series is concerned it would be the biggest mistake of all time when it would occur in the universe reboot. because it simply does not work and series of short duration will prove to be

  18. I love how all the “creative talent” behind this movie have been on an apology tour and the goofballs on the Trek BBS forum are still blathering on about how fantastically wonderful and successful this absolute garbage sequel was. Ya think Orci has a little framed Photoshop of himself with a Pope hat to remember that brief period by?

  19. I am with those who say, “I liked the movie, but it would have been no different if John had remained John, instead of Khan. In face, it may have been better, because there would have been no “homages” to TWOK.”

Comments are closed.

©1999 - 2024 TrekToday and Christian Höhne Sparborth. Star Trek and related marks are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. TrekToday and its subsidiary sites are in no way affiliated with CBS Studios Inc. | Newsphere by AF themes.