Star Trek (2009)

[Yog]

This teaser trailer speaks for itself.. :D

http://www.paramount.com/startrek/

[Miranda Tarkin]

Wow... nice teaser. Very pretty Enterprise and it certainly makes you want to see more. I just hope pretty aside, when we see the actors in the roles, it gives me that same feeling

[Alpha]

I saw this at Cloverfield. Gotta say I'm really excited by this one.

[Yog]

Hmm... there is a red dot next to the "Under Construction", if you leave it on for a while. Clicking it, you get to this page. Some kind of puzzle:

http://www.ncc-1701.com/

Edit: I solved it!
the aim is to get the sliders and adjust the numbers so you get 100% on all cameras. The numbers are #1: 564 #2: 125 #3: 955 #4: 289. If you let the cameras stay at 100% for x minutes, a teaser image will show for y seconds at the one with static image. If you refresh the page, a different camera will go offline, although, I think they just show the same image; a space ship corridor.

[Alpha]

EDIT: Wow. I got it too. Very cool. : )Thanks Yog

[Yog]

You need to have them at exactly 100.0%. Click on the last number to get it 1 by 1

Edit: this is what you will see if you get it right..
http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shipyardfd2.jpg

[Rod Stafford]

Yes, nice teaser. Why this film is being made is beyond me though. Prequels and remakes confess to me that writers and film-makers are out of ideas.

[Alpha]

Well after how bad the last one did, maybe they decided to take a step back and do for star Trek what Batman Begins did for that series of movies.

[Mitch]

I'm actually pretty interested in this.

[Yog]

Yes, nice teaser. Why this film is being made is beyond me though. Prequels and remakes confess to me that writers and film-makers are out of ideas.

You could say that about anything that comes from Hollywood these days though, including Star Wars. I'm not normally interested in Star Trek movies, but that teaser actually made me interested. I don't think it's fair to discard a movie for being unoriginal just because it is based on a popular franchise. If anything, it is being original for showing Star Trek linked to a more familiar and contempary setting, in a far more appealing way. Heck, the sight of the Enterprise gave me the goosebumps.

And we don't even know anything about the writing. All I know about this movie is that Captain Kirk is in it, Enterprise is in, and that it is rumoured to have a $150M budget (the most expensive Star Trek movie ever had a $60M budget). The movie is shrouded in complete secrecy. Actors who come in for auditions are given scenes to perform that aren't even in the movie. The scripts are on dark red paper with hidden watermarks including the name of the actor they've been released to. The cast are made to wear studio clothes over their costumes when they're not on set..

[Rod Stafford]

I am saying that about anything that comes from Hollywood these days, including Star Wars.

As I said, it's an impressive, understated teaser; the music and dialogue was spot on. And based on that, I have a fair certainty that the quality of this production will be high. The cast is fairly impressive, too.

However, I also have to ask why make a prequel or remake with the same characters? Star Trek is a solid, successful, and loved franchise which is more than capable of providing a rich backdrop for innovative new storylines and fresh engaging new characters. Personally, I feel there's an element of playing on nostalgia to make megabucks here. And to be fair, Abrams knows how to play on people's expectations to build hype.

I'm not saying the screenplay won't be impressive, or the acting, or the directing, or the cinematography, etc. What I am saying is why not have the courage to give your audience a wholly new experience?


Well after how bad the last one did, maybe they decided to take a step back and do for star Trek what Batman Begins did for that series of movies.

But there is some truth in this.

[Denarr Sepphist]

I'm a big, big Star Trek fan, and I've got to say this has peaked my interest.

Although I didn't see Patrick Stewart's name anywhere on it (Who's my favourite Picard) I can still look at it with a lot of excitement; like Alpha said regarding the Batman Begins movie.

I'll want to go check it out! See how it all started!

[Callomas Savoc]

There is a lot to be said about rebooting a franchise, and it's had some very good successes lately. Look at Casino Royale if you are worried :) That was the best Bond movie of them all.

[Yog]

I am saying that about anything that comes from Hollywood these days, including Star Wars.I suspected as much. But in the case of SW and ST, it is not a case of just putting stuff on the market because they are out of ideas, it is because they actually have a fanbase who want more of it. There is also very big difference of making unwanted remakes of classics, compared to writing something new, but based on known settings and characters. The ST writers had enough ideas to make 10 motion pictures, 1 animated series, and 726 1-hour episodes. Most series just cancels after a few seasons when they run out of ideas. Why would they be out of ideas in this particular case, where they actually try to do something different?



However, I also have to ask why make a prequel or remake with the same characters? Star Trek is a solid, successful, and loved franchise which is more than capable of providing a rich backdrop for innovative new storylines and fresh engaging new characters. Personally, I feel there's an element of playing on nostalgia to make megabucks here. And to be fair, Abrams knows how to play on people's expectations to build hype.Paramount is already taking a huge financial risk putting $150 million into a movie when its predecessor didn't break even on box office receipts. They probably feel more comfortable in their investment with old characters the fans can recognize.



What I am saying is why not have the courage to give your audience a wholly new experience?Do you have anything particular in mind?

[Peter McCoy]

The cast have some really big shoes to fill. There's only one Captain Kirk for me, one Spock, one Scotty, one McCoy (2 including myself I suppose). But I'd love for these new guys to nail the roles. Look at what Heath Ledger has done as The Joker despite Jack's iconic performance in Burton's film. It can be done.

[Alpha]

As it stands the two cast member sI have really high hopes for are the ones playing Spock and Sulu. I think they are two of my favorite fairly new-ish actors out there.

[Rod Stafford]

Why would they be out of ideas in this particular case, where they actually try to do something different?

For the life of me, I can't imagine why you would suggest that rehashing the original Enterprise and entire host of characters from the first series falls into the bracket of trying something different. The plot will be original, of course, and perhaps locations but it stops there, really. There is something to be said for reboots, as I've already stated, but this is Star Trek, and as you've just mentioned, there are countless different series, films, stories, characters, etc. Therefore, why has the well suddenly run dry?

I am totally in support of an invigorating kick-start to a whole new era in Star Trek but I simply don't see the need to do this with old characters.


Do you have anything particular in mind?
Are you asking me to come up with a plot synopsis for a Star Trek film? If not, then what I am saying is that why not simply use new characters and a new setting?

[Peter McCoy]

I have to echo what Droo said, sort of. The big problem for me is that they are going back to old characters before we met them originally, rather than expanding on characters we already know. What did Tom Paris and Harry Kim get up to after Voyager got home? If they want to revisit established characters, I think that would be a better approach than rewinding. Or as he mentioned, develop and explore a whole new crew and ship.

[Alpha]

I have to echo what Droo said, sort of. The big problem for me is that they are going back to old characters before we met them originally, rather than expanding on characters we already know. What did Tom Paris and Harry Kim get up to after Voyager got home? If they want to revisit established characters, I think that would be a better approach than rewinding. Or as he mentioned, develop and explore a whole new crew and ship.

But in a way we're seeing parts of the original series we'd never seen before. Kirk, Spock and crew are young and just starting out and Pike is their mentor. This is kinda a what happened before the original series type thing. so yes we've met the characters before, but we met them at a later time.

[Eluna Thals]

I have to echo what Droo said, sort of. The big problem for me is that they are going back to old characters before we met them originally, rather than expanding on characters we already know. What did Tom Paris and Harry Kim get up to after Voyager got home? If they want to revisit established characters, I think that would be a better approach than rewinding. Or as he mentioned, develop and explore a whole new crew and ship.

The problem here is that nobody really liked Voyager.

[Denarr Sepphist]

The problem here is that nobody really liked Voyager.

I did :(.

I read that Leonard Nimoy is playing Spock! Has anyone else heard something along those lines?

[Dasquian Belargic]

I thought the guy who played Sylar in Heroes was playing Spock?

Also, I liked Voyager too. Had no idea that I was in the minority.

[Rod Stafford]

I thought the guy who played Sylar in Heroes was playing Spock?

Also, I liked Voyager too. Had no idea that I was in the minority.

First, yes, Sylar is playing Spock. As is Leonard Nimoy. I'm not sure how they're doing it except I can only assume it will be a cameo performance in some capacity which acts as a passing the torch moment. Who knows?

Secondly, Voyager is probably my favourite of the lot. Although I do love DS9 and TNG. I intend to have all of them at some point in the future, but for the time being, I do have Voyager in its entirety. Truth be told, I'm not entirely sure what the problem is that people have with it. There are some poor episodes but not many. I'd probably go as far as saying that it's got the most comedy of the lot and to balance it out, many touching episodes, too.

[Denarr Sepphist]

[

First, yes, Sylar is playing Spock. As is Leonard Nimoy. I'm not sure how they're doing it except I can only assume it will be a cameo performance in some capacity which acts as a passing the torch moment. Who knows?

I think Sylar is playing 'young spock' when they do some scenes of the gang back in the Academy days - with Nimoy filling the shoes of 'present day spock'. I may be wrong, however.

[Rod Stafford]

I certainly hope not! Dear God, that would mean Nimoy's Spock would be stood alongside all the fresh cast. I doubt that will be the case. It would be such a bad idea.

[Alpha]

Hey Voyager had its moments. but then again it's also, to my knowledge the only series in the Star Trek universe that has an episode officially disowned by the canon. It's like the G Savior of Star Trek.

[Rod Stafford]

Sorry to hijack here, but what episode would that be?

[Alpha]

I'm not too familiar with the name. The premise is that they finally break warp ten in a shuttlecraft, which causes Tom Paris and Janeway to "evolve" into these lizard things. They find them and set them back to human, but apparently the two had mated before that. Lemme see if I can find the episode title.

[Peter McCoy]

According to the wikipedia page on the Season 3 episode 'Flashback' (episode 2)...

The actual events on the Excelsior recalled by Tuvok are depicted in the motion picture Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, in which George Takei and Grace Lee Whitney appear. Tim Russ appeared as a human Starfleet officer in the seventh film, Star Trek Generations.

Lt. Dmitri Valtane of the Excelsior dies during this episode whereas he's still alive by the end of Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country and can be seen in the shot where Sulu says farewell to Captain Kirk. Either Tuvok's memory of the incident wasn't quite perfect, or (more likely) Valtane was later revived.

In the flashback scene covering the aftermath of the explosion of Praxis, Tuvok tells Janeway that two days after the explosion, Kirk and McCoy were arrested for the assassination of Gorkon. In Star Trek VI, the assassination of Gorkon does not happen until two months after the Praxis explosion.

After the sirillium is used on the Excelsior to disable the Klingon vessel, it is never mentioned again, despite Voyager still needing new energy supplies.

The Klingon Kang appears in this episode in the original series films' time frame with cranial ridges, despite appearing in the original series without ridges.

EDIT: Oh, you beat me to replying. I just thought this may have been the episode you were referring to. Obviously not :p The one you mean is 'Threshhold'

[Peter McCoy]

Furthermore, any idea why it's disowned by canon?

[Rutabaga]

I saw the teaser before Cloverfield, and I have to say, hearing Nimoy's "Space...the final frontier" raised the hair on the back of my neck. :)

I'm just a little concerned about what I read somewhere last week about Ain't It Cool News supposedly getting a copy of the script and complaining that it basically tries to rewrite all that we've seen before...the 2 examples I read were that the Enterprise is supposedly constructed at Area 51, and that Kirk is portrayed as a complete slacker who cheated his way through Starfleet Academy. Now, we all know that Kirk cheated on the Kobayashi Maru test, but I don't know if I can buy it that he cheated through everything.

That said, I'm still very intrigued by the movie, even if it's just to see Zachary Quinto as Spock and Simon Pegg as Scotty.

[Yog]

For the life of me, I can't imagine why you would suggest that rehashing the original Enterprise and entire host of characters from the first series falls into the bracket of trying something different.Watching the trailer, it has references to JFK, Neil Armstrong and the excitement of breaking frontiers for space exploration. You can see the ship as it's being built. They are welding pieces to the hull. It feels more basic and real. More low tech, less outragously futuristic and far fetched. Like something that could actually happen in mankinds future some time. That is an exciting and different approach. The FEEL is different to me.

As mentioned earlier, I have only a casual interest in the franchise. I have actually not seen a single ST movie in theaters. It is interesting to me seeing how it all started. When you tell a story of the origins and the overcoming space frontiers theme, it seems natural that USS Enterprise (NCC-1701), The Federation Starfleet's first Enterprise is in it. Of course, there is an an element of nostalgy in this (why is that a bad thing though? I think it's a nice gesture to the fans). But it's also interesting for those who did not have time to watch 726 episodes, but wanted to learn more about it (like me). And guess who is the captain of that ship? Yup, Captain Kirk. You can't just leave him out without breaking the lore.



The plot will be original, of course, and perhaps locations but it stops there, really. There is something to be said for reboots, as I've already stated, but this is Star Trek, and as you've just mentioned, there are countless different series, films, stories, characters, etc. Therefore, why has the well suddenly run dry? A movie with the original characters hasn't been tried in 17 years, and the slow decline (be it financial or creative or both) of the newer series may have left the original Star Trek unscathed. DS9's viewers dwindled from 10+ million at its launch to about 4 million at its finale. Paramount is hoping to draw in a new generation of fans to the Star Trek franchise.

Could they use a different setting and characters never seen before? Sure, they could. In a $20M budget movie. Paramount do not want to risk $150M to experiment with new characters, when they have something far more recognizable. This movie goes back to the roots of what made the Star Trek franchise a lasting success in the first place; the original Star Trek characters.



Are you asking me to come up with a plot synopsis for a Star Trek film? If not, then what I am saying is that why not simply use new characters and a new setting?Ok, let me rephrase it then; is it just the name of the ship and crew you do not like, or are there other elements of the setting that does not appeal to you?



The big problem for me is that they are going back to old characters before we met them originally, rather than expanding on characters we already know. What did Tom Paris and Harry Kim get up to after Voyager got home? If they want to revisit established characters, I think that would be a better approach than rewinding.Apparently Harry Kim hasn't had steady employment since Voyager was nearly cancelled in the 6th season and ended the 7th season down to 4 million viewers (feel free correct me if I am wrong though). Consequently, any attempt to make a movie about him or the Voyager crew would probably be another financial bust.

[Alpha]

Furthermore, any idea why it's disowned by canon?

On one of the commentaries, the producers admitted the episode was a "bad idea". Anymore than that and I have no idea.

[Yog]

I think Sylar is playing 'young spock' when they do some scenes of the gang back in the Academy days - with Nimoy filling the shoes of 'present day spock'. I may be wrong, however.

Spock running around sucking people's brains out to steal their powers. Now that is some plot development for you :lol

[Alpha]

I think Sylar is playing 'young spock' when they do some scenes of the gang back in the Academy days - with Nimoy filling the shoes of 'present day spock'. I may be wrong, however.

Spock running around sucking people's brains out to steal their powers. Now that is some plot development for you :lol

I'd pay to see that :)

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I think there may be some sort of Old Spock remembering things or maybe a timetravel element to the movie.

Both young and old Spock are in the movie, so however they pull that off is how they're going to do it. :p Obviously.

Incidentally I read a great article about two weeks ago about how nostalgia is threatening to drown the sci-fi genre. Sure, we all want to drool over another AvP (a franchise that is 20+ years old) and we'll all watch the Star Wars TV series (another old, old franchise), but where are the new and fresh ideas? Sunshine was a fantastic sci-fi movie which was refreshingly sequel and prequel free. I would dare to say that Cloverfield is a new take on the monster movie genre (which is probably included in sci-fi), but when are studios going to stop relying on old favorites like Star Wars and Star Trek and really let some filmmakers break new ground like Kubrick did when he made 2001 - a film that changed the sci-fi genre forever?

I'm not saying I'm against this Star Trek movie, as I'm sure it could be very well done and greatly entertaining. But I'm with Droo in wondering when we're going to get some original ideas for movies instead of mining from the vaults of sci-fi fandom and lore?

Incidentally, this is probably where this thread jumps the shark and the discussion needs to be moved to a thread of its own. Which, I shall do. (http://www.sw-fans.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17499):)

[Rutabaga]

So it was reported last week that Star Trek's release date has been bumped from Christmas 2008 to May 2009.

I dunno if this is good news or bad news. But overall, I think Star Trek movies are more summer movies than Christmas movies anyways.

[Eluna Thals]

First Contact was, but I believe Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis all played late fall / early winter.

[Rutabaga]

I know Nemesis was a Christmas movie, and ST: TMP was released in early December way back when, as I recall. But a lot of them were also summer releases...maybe it works out to be half and half. Not sure, I'm too lazy to do the research. :cool

I guess it depends on the subject matter, just how serious it is...but then again, although December has the cachet of being "awards season," there's always some good old-fashioned escapism movies that come out at the same time. And they seem to do well, as counterprogramming for the serious, heavy stuff.

I dunno. I just hope that when it does come out, it's good entertainment. :)

[Figrin D'an]

I know I'll end up seeing this movie when it comes out, because the Trek geek in me won't be able to stay away. I'm just not sure if this entire project should be done at all. If Star Trek is to come back in any major way, they need a new storyline/timeline for a series that is distinct from the other series so far. Going back to the original series characters may have some fun nostalgia for us, but will it really live up to the standards that should be expected from a Trek story? I'm not sure, to be honest.


I'm probably in a significant minority amongst the Trek fan base who think that DS9 was actually the best series. TNG was close, and had some amazing episodes, but I think DS9 was a little less 'Trek' and a little more 'sci-fi', especially because the general outlook of the story wasn't as clear cut and optimistic and the characters had a lot of shades of gray. It was a nice twist on traditional Trek that still had a lot of the qualities that Trek fans have come to love. I think future Trek writers could learn a lot from the group developed DS9. But I digress.


I keep hearing that the new film is going to involved an elder Spock (Leonard Nemoy) traveling back in time to somehow assist his younger self and the rest of the crew when they were just beginning their original "5-year mission." Time travel storylines in Trek have been extremely hit-or-miss, and the misses have been pretty terrible. Of course, I'm also worried that JJ Abrams will go all Alias/Lost with the plot and make it so convoluted as to diminish it's entertainment value.

The trailer at least was kinda cool.

[Mu Satach]

I have to echo what Droo said, sort of. The big problem for me is that they are going back to old characters before we met them originally, rather than expanding on characters we already know. What did Tom Paris and Harry Kim get up to after Voyager got home? If they want to revisit established characters, I think that would be a better approach than rewinding. Or as he mentioned, develop and explore a whole new crew and ship.

The problem here is that nobody really liked Voyager.

<small>i did...</small>

*hides her toys*

[Rutabaga]

I know I'll end up seeing this movie when it comes out, because the Trek geek in me won't be able to stay away. I'm just not sure if this entire project should be done at all. If Star Trek is to come back in any major way, they need a new storyline/timeline for a series that is distinct from the other series so far. Going back to the original series characters may have some fun nostalgia for us, but will it really live up to the standards that should be expected from a Trek story? I'm not sure, to be honest.


I'm probably in a significant minority amongst the Trek fan base who think that DS9 was actually the best series. TNG was close, and had some amazing episodes, but I think DS9 was a little less 'Trek' and a little more 'sci-fi', especially because the general outlook of the story wasn't as clear cut and optimistic and the characters had a lot of shades of gray. It was a nice twist on traditional Trek that still had a lot of the qualities that Trek fans have come to love. I think future Trek writers could learn a lot from the group developed DS9. But I digress.


I keep hearing that the new film is going to involved an elder Spock (Leonard Nemoy) traveling back in time to somehow assist his younger self and the rest of the crew when they were just beginning their original "5-year mission." Time travel storylines in Trek have been extremely hit-or-miss, and the misses have been pretty terrible. Of course, I'm also worried that JJ Abrams will go all Alias/Lost with the plot and make it so convoluted as to diminish it's entertainment value.

The trailer at least was kinda cool.

I agree with every single thing you said, Fig. My main reason for wanting to see the movie is the nostalgia aspect, the complete Trek geek in me. Plus I just love some of the casting choices, and I also respect JJ Abrams. Although I do agree with your comment that I hope JJ keeps it fairly straightforward and doesn't make it all twisty turny. I love Lost, yes yes yes, but not everything needs to be constructed like that show is.

I also COMPLETELY agree with your opinion of DS9. While TNG is my favorite of the Trek series, I think DS9 was the best quality-wise. And it's because it was so different...it was the first series that started to break from the Roddenberry ideal that humankind was so advanced by that point that of course everyone was highly civilized...what I loved so much about that show was that everyone, from Sisko on down the line, was FLAWED. That made it much more interesting. Conflict creates great drama. Plus the story arcs were brilliant at times, and the show also had secondary and tertiary characters that were just as well-developed and fascinating as the primary characters.

I liked Voyager up until they brought Seven of Nine in and then turned it into the Seven of Nine show. It just got too dumb for me. And I lasted all of one episode of Enterprise...I just don't appreciate things that basically make all that came before apocryphal. And I hope that's not what happens with the new movie as well...if they come up with stuff that messes with canon, well, they'll lose me at that point.

[Morgan Evanar]

A lot of the writers from DS9 are working on Battlestar Galactica (which should explain a lot).

[Rutabaga]

Ron Moore is a great writer, a great creative mind...that's why I had such faith in BSG when it was announced. And my great faith has been rewarded many times over :).

[Rutabaga]

Pictures! :eee

http://filmonic.com/new-star-trek-images

[Lilaena De'Ville]

:\ Site isn't loading for me...

[Rutabaga]

:\ Site isn't loading for me...

Hm...appears to be down, maybe too much traffic?

[Rutabaga]

It's up again now :).

EDIT: Just in case...here's a link to another site with the same pics, including a bonus pic of the upcoming EW issue with Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto on the cover.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/10/15/star-trek-reveals-galore-kirk-spock-nero-full-cast-and-more/

[Captain Untouchable]

D'aww... doesn't Sylar look "cute" as Spock?

I'm in two minds about the look. The uniforms look very cool, and I like how Kirk is making himself look different simply by forgoing his yellow jumper, rather than by specifically wearing anything extra. Bones definately looks the part as well - he's got the posture and expressions fairly well.

The bridge is really high-tech: not sure about that, since it reminds me a little too much of the new Thunderbirds movie they did. Not sure about the whole uniform design, either: the fabric is too robust. How is Kirk meant to get that ripped off? :lol

[Rutabaga]

One of my friends at MySpace has posted a bootleg copy of the new full trailer that's started showing in theaters this weekend. I have only one comment to make:

If the movie lives up to the trailer, then the Star Trek franchise has been revived and saved. Big time.

According to the official movie website, the trailer will be released online in HD tomorrow. Keep watching this space!

(And if you saw the new James Bond movie this weekend, you should have already seen it. How did it look on the big screen? :D)

[Mitch]

Trailer didn't play before Bond. At least, it didn't for me.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I'm really excited about the new movie. I'm sad they pushed back the release. :shakefist

I like the new look, and I'm glad they're re-doing the bridge and a lot of the effects/look of things. I mean, we didn't really expect to find them working on a cardboard set outfitted with a hundred Lite Brites, did we? ;)

[Yog]

New trailer out at quicktime trailers:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/

[Droo]

I'm not convinced. It looks fantastic visually but that's all it has currently going for it, in my opinion. I wanted this trailer to show me exactly why they've bothered rehashing ancient characters in an ancient setting instead of going with something new and original. It looks like Star Trek 90210.

[Peter McCoy]

At the moment I'm more looking forward to Fanboys. I can't wait for that film.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Just saw the trailer, it looks awesome! :D:thumbup

[Park Kraken]

Trailer didn't play before Bond. At least, it didn't for me.

It played before Bond where I saw it at. Gotta say I'm somewhat excited for this movie as well.

[Captain Untouchable]

I'm not convinced. It looks fantastic visually but that's all it has currently going for it, in my opinion. I wanted this trailer to show me exactly why they've bothered rehashing ancient characters in an ancient setting instead of going with something new and original. It looks like Star Trek 90210.

I think the "why" part is Trek's own fault. It's become such an ingrained part of popular culture that it was inevitable.

Go up to someone in the street, and ask them who Captain Janeway is. Unless you're lucky and find someone who watched Voyager, they'll probably give you a blank look. Ask 'em who Captain Kirk is however, and they'll know exactly who you mean, whether they've seen it or not.

The Star Trek franchise has grown so large, and so lengthy, that for potential new fans - my girlfriend, for example - it's pretty daunting jumping in part-way through. Even the recent movies require more than a casual knowledge of the franchise to fully appreciate them. They cater to the fans - which is great. However, it's tough to get new audiences hooked.

It worked for Casino Royale; it worked for Batman Begins. People know of the characters; now they get to find out about Kirk, Spock, Scotty, McCoy and the others, without having to soldier through all the other stuff. And lets face it: the Original Series is pretty dated. I'm very much looking forward to having a more modern telling of the characters to get my eventual offspring hooked, so that they'll put up with the cheese factor of William Shatner and co. :D

[Rutabaga]

Ah, it was good to see the real trailer instead of the somewhat dark bootleg my MySpace friend had posted. I saw more now, including realizing that we get a glimpse of Captain Pike in the trailer. I love Bruce Greenwood, so I'm looking forward to seeing him in the movie.

The big laugh for me is Simon Pegg's Scotty moment. Oh, that made me laugh and smile so much!

I was very, very skeptical when they first announced this project, but I trust JJ Abrams, and now, after seeing this trailer, I'm allowing myself to get excited. I'm now thinking that perhaps rebooting from the Kirk era is probably a good idea :). The Batman Begins and Casino Royale examples are very valid ones.

I got my love of sci-fi from my mother, who in turn got it from her father. I was only 2 years old when the original Star Trek series premiered, but my mother watched it every week. Over the years she's also attended multiple conventions and cruises with me, she's toured the DS9 and Voyager sets with me, and she even slaved over a sewing machine to make 2 TNG-era Starfleet uniforms for me to wear to conventions. When this movie opens, she'll be a month shy of turning 80 years young. And she's planning on being there with me opening weekend to give it a whirl! :dance

[Droo]

The Batman Begins and Casino Royale examples are very valid ones.


I have to disagree. The Batman and James Bond franchises are exclusive to, and sorry for stating the obvious, Batman and James Bond. Star Trek is not. The point made about asking someone who Captain Kirk is instead of the others is valid, however, it doesn't excuse them for retreading old territory. I hate to sound like a broken record on this but look at that trailer and tell me how it validates using these characters, no matter how awesome they are nor how much they are ingrained in popular culture. Just because we know who Michael Myers and Freddy Kruger are shouldn't be enough of a reason to green light another remake, yet it is, and they're rubbish and wholly unneccessary.

Look at that trailer. Think about how much character time is spliced into it, there's nothing of great significance, it's pretty much a special effects reel, and it does look incredible. As such, I honestly believe that if Abrams and co. had simply came up with a story and script about young scientists, explorers and adventurers embarking on one of Starfleet's great first ventures, and not had them be the original host of characters, it would've worked just as well - it looks too impressive not to and those who aren't interested in Star Trek in the first place will go to see it based on that and not because it has Spock in it.

The characters of Spock, Kirk, McCoy, and Scotty are great and have always had a wonderful dynamic together but other timeless and wonderful characters can be plucked out of the air with imagination and effort. I will go and see this film now, based soley on the impressive production quality, and I hope I'm proven wrong and eat my words but that trailer suggests that won't be the case.

[Dragon]

As a lifelong Star Trek fan, I'm actually not as put off by the idea of a reboot as you see to be, Droo, but my impression of the trailer is very much the same. This trailer was cut for the sake of spectacle and little else; it tells us nothing about the characterization that we didn't already expect - Kirk is a maverick and Spock is caught between two worlds. It's possible they're planning to release multiple trailers and that another trailer may give more of a sense of character. In any event, I certainly hope there's more to the movie than what the trailer showed us.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

There usually is more to a movie than whats shown in a trailer...

[Dragon]

Actually, sometimes there's less...

[Morgan Evanar]

Actually, sometimes there's less...This is true, and that better not have been a real Corvette :(

[Cat X]

Actually, sometimes there's less...

And that's usually very true for Star Trek movies as well. The last decent one (No. IV) and No. II being the exceptions, the whole Star Trek franscise has been ordinary at best, crap at worst.

Maybe a reboot will allow something decent but in the main I doubt it.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Insurrection= crap

First Contact = Gold

[Rutabaga]

Insurrection= crap

First Contact = Gold

I second that emotion.

[Cat X]

Insurrection= crap

First Contact = Gold

If First Contact is the Borg one, that was decidly ordinary.

[Atreyu]

First Contact is ok - I've never been a big fan of time travel plot lines but overall they pulled it off ok (although Enterprise would later abuse it by having some of the remaining Borg (the ones that floated away on the ray dish thing) show up in an episode - 250 years before humans were supposed to first meet them in TNG |I). Having the Picard love interest was a bit lame though. However I loved James Cromwell. :)

But Wrath of Khan is pure win. I also have a soft spot for The Undiscovered Country (yay Christopher Plummer :dance).

[John Jackson]

A "new" trailer - actually it's just the old one with an extra couple of seconds tacked on the end, but hey. It's available in a higher definition, so Star Trek nerds like me can look at it and go: "What the hell - why is Kirk wearing the stripes for a Captain* on his sleeve when he says 'Buckle Up'?"

Clicky (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39238)

Edit:
* By which I mean the Star Trek stripes for a Captain (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Tos_capt.png), not the Navy version (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Navy_O6_insignia.svg). ;)

[Atreyu]

I realised just yesterday that I didn't actually know what the new Enterprise looked like (it's seen in construction in the trailer, plus for a split second before warping away but nothing really clear). So I went searching a found a nice pic :). For comparisons sake, here's a pic of the original Enterprise (TOS) from the same angle:


http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/889/compareen6.jpg

The new version looks a lot more bulky and less angular - kind of a cross between the TOS Enterprise and the Enterprise/Enterprise-A from the earlier motion pictures.

EDIT: Here's a fan sketch of the new Enterprise from the side (looks a lot more like the original here):

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h158/wyldemw/constitution-reimagined.jpg

[Captain Untouchable]

I'm a bit torn over these. In the 2007 "Ships of the Line" calender, they had a rendering of an old Enterprise:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y27/Phoenix_56/SOTL_Reimagined.jpg

I liked the above as an old Enterprise, and there are a lot of parallels that can be drawn - more bulk around the "neck", the nacelles, etc. However, things on the 2009 version seem a little too clean and smooth. Don't get me wrong: it's an awesome redesign of the original concept, but it doesn't look like it's an "older" version.

Guess what you're expecting, really. If you're going to take the visual continuity with a pinch of salt, then I guess the differences in appearence aren't too significant.

That said, I am liking what I've seen of the new shuttlecraft. Aside from looking a little like the Argo from Nemesis (which was cool), I like that they seem to have downgraded the technology a little - designed them with aerodynamics in mind, as if the technology to keep the usual flying boxes that Trek employs hasn't been invented yet.

[Dragon]

I went on my own image search and ran across a Star Trek forum where the vast majority of posters were bawling over the new design and how it was proof that J. J. Abrahams is ruining the movie and it's going to be terrible.

Over-reaction, much, I'd say. But then I know how obsessive Star Trek fans can be. I've even heard some people complain that it doesn't match the other ship designs of the era.

I'm a lifelong fan, and I'm probably in the minority when I say I'd like nothing more than to see a skillful re-imagining of the franchise. It doesn't have to be mind-blowing. It doesn't have to be The Wrath of Khan (Nemesis already tried to recapture that magic and failed brilliantly). For nearly the past ten years, Star Trek has been grinding itself deeper into the same creative rut, and I want to see something new.

This design, along with the uniforms, sets, and panoramas I've seen in the trailer, seems to be reaching back to the Flash Gordon serials that were running not too long before Star Trek took popular sci-fi to a new level. It's campy, glittery, and just a bit gaudy; I've heard people compare it to Galaxy Quest, which, darn it, was better by far than the last two Trek movies, that's for sure.

Abrahams doesn't seem to be interested in playing Star Trek completely straight, and it doesn't look like he's planning on sticking to the official chronology. And that's just fine with me. This movie is looking like a lot of fun, and even if it flops, well, at least it's new crap instead of more of the same crap.

As for the ship looking clean and not old enough... clean has always been part of the Starfleet aesthetic. The Federation is very much the Great White Fleet; even if it's stubby and angular, look how smooth and simple the original ship is. The one you posted is a nice design, but it's too dark and aggressive for my tastes; perhaps better suited to a Federation battlecruiser from Star Fleet Battles than to the flagship of the Federation.

My brother has the special edition DVD of The Motion Picture, and in one of the features, the director is talking about the difficulty of redesigning the Enterprise after Star Wars changed everybody's expectations of how spaceships look. But rather than come up with an industrial, hyper-detailed design to mimic the utilitarian look of the Millennium Falcon and Star Destroyers, they created one of the most beautiful and classic starship designs in all of sci-fi, and still one of my favorite Star Trek models; I certainly rank it ahead of the Enterprises-D and -E.

[Atreyu]

::bump::

New trailer:

<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P0xaCB2nLS0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P0xaCB2nLS0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>

I like A LOT. :)

[Figrin D'an]

I have to admit, that latest trailer was pretty well done. I'm still skeptical of this film, but I know I'll end up seeing it, probably on opening weekend.

[Crusader]

This might be exactly what the franchise needs. The only problem is that it is in theory Star Trek 11 and since 11 is an odd number it is doomed to suck badly!!!

[Rutabaga]

I like it :eee

[Dasquian Belargic]

This might be exactly what the franchise needs. The only problem is that it is in theory Star Trek 11 and since 11 is an odd number it is doomed to suck badly!!!

Wikipedia has a funny little point about that relating to Simon Pegg (who plays Scotty): Years before, Pegg's character in Spaced joked that every odd-numbered Star Trek film being "shit" was a fact of life. Pegg noted "Fate put me in the movie to show me I was talking out of my ass." :lol

[Rutabaga]

This might be exactly what the franchise needs. The only problem is that it is in theory Star Trek 11 and since 11 is an odd number it is doomed to suck badly!!!

Wikipedia has a funny little point about that relating to Simon Pegg (who plays Scotty): Years before, Pegg's character in Spaced joked that every odd-numbered Star Trek film being "shit" was a fact of life. Pegg noted "Fate put me in the movie to show me I was talking out of my ass." :lol

:lol

I love Simon Pegg :love.

[Captain Untouchable]

Captain Pike = the awesome. His recruiting technique deserves an award. :lol

[Rutabaga]

Just wanted to share this post from Simon Pegg's MySpace blog today about the sneak preview that happened in Texas this weekend. The blog entry ends with a profanity-filled non-spoiler review from a comic book artist that leaves me quite convinced that we have nothing to fear, and that Star Trek will ROCK. :lol

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=213643855&blogId=481684241

[Figrin D'an]

From Slashdot this morning:

http://entertainment.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/08/1430234&art_pos=5


Looks promising so far.

[Yog]

Looks very promising indeed..

[Rutabaga]

EW also has a report on the Texas screening...reviews are basically raves:

http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/04/star-treks-snea.html

As an aside, perhaps thanks to this movie, Leonard Nimoy is joining the cast of Fringe:

http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2009/04/exclusive-fring.html?cnn=yes

:eee

[Rutabaga]

A glowing review from overseas:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/reviews/article-1172164/Out-world-The-Mails-film-critic-gives-verdict-new-Star-Trek-movie.html

Beware minor spoilage!

It's coming out on Mother's Day weekend here in the US, and my mother is already incredibly jazzed that her Mother's Day present is going to be going to see the movie with me. :angel

[Crusader]

For an uneven Star Trek Film it was really good...one has to wonder how good Star Trek 12 is going to be!

[Peter McCoy]

Droo and I will be seeing it this weekend. But I'm pretty sure it won't topple Star Trek IV as my favourite ST film. Kirk, Spock and McCoy are utterly brilliant in that film.

Spock: 'A double dumb-ass on you...and so forth...'

I might watch that tomorrow night to get me in the Trekking mood.

[Nathanial K'cansce]

Saw this last night/ All in all it was pretty good. When I heard about the whole time traveling aspect of the plot, I was so incredibly skeptical. However, upon implementation, I thought it worked wonderfully.

I do wish they went into more depth with some of the characters. I felt they spent too much time on some, not enough time on the others. Sulu I felt got shafted with no character development.

I'd say 3.5 outa 5 stars

[Droo]

I had a big glowing review written up for this just now but my crashing computer ruined that for me so here's the short short version:

Absolutely spectacular! The characters are all wonderfully familiar and equally fresh. The film looks gorgeous; it's bold, and colour and light just dance on the cinema screen. I was spellbound by the spectacle of a two hour film which shot by at warp speed. Throughout the film I laughed out loud, every scene was magic and I was thoroughly entertained from start to finish. Speaking of which, the segue into the closing credits is a joy for any Star Trek fan. The way in which these characters and the story has been reborn for a new generation is pretty ingenius and I take my hat off to the team behind it and gladly say, "I doubted you with every fibre of my being and I was so very wrong, thank you!"

This film can have my money again, and hopefully, very soon. Here's me grinning like crazy! :D

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Just got back from seeing it - the first ten minutes had me bawling like a baby, and I loved the whole entire movie. It was great.

Gonna go see it on Monday in IMAX. :D

[Rutabaga]

Just got back from seeing it - the first ten minutes had me bawling like a baby, and I loved the whole entire movie. It was great.

Uh oh, I'd better pack my kleenex then ;).

[Redik]

About the first ten minutes was all I really liked. A lot of the rest of the movie was predictable in ways that took the enjoyment out of it. It's pretty clear they want to reboot the franchise and this is how they're going about it, but to be honest, I wish they had held off until they thought of something new.

Simon Pegg and Zachary Quinto (and of course, Leonard Nimoy) were the real bright spots of the film. If you go to see it, watch for their performances.

[Liam Jinn]

Just finished watching it, and I really liked it.

[Figrin D'an]

I saw this yesterday afternoon. I was generally pleased with it. I don't think it's the best Star Trek film ('Wrath of Kahn' is still king here, IMO), but it certainly excels in a number of areas which have been sorely lacking in past Star Trek features.

The Trek geek in me is pretty compelled by the long term ramifications of what the plot device for this film implies. It was a bit cliched, but still functional, way for the writers to mortgage themselves of the established timeline, yet still keep the important underlying qualities of the original Trek universe, by basically saying that this entire reboot is an alternate reality. A Federation in which most of the Vulcan race is dead and their planet is gone? A very bold move by the writers and Abrams. But, Trek needed a serious kick in the ass from a story standpoint.

Chris Pine surprised me with his portrayal of Kirk. Accurate and appropriate without channeling William Shatner. I was impressed. Karl Urban was dead on as McCoy. Quinto performed well as Spock, but I think he really needs to have the character all to himself in the next film to really separate his Spock from Nimoy's. The rest of the cast was reasonable. None of the characters really seemed miscast, but were relegated to such limited screen time that it was hard to really judge their portrayals. I do think that Simon Peeg's Scotty has a lot of potential. Bruce Greenwood did an admirable job playing Christopher Pike. I think Eric Bana did alright with a very underdeveloped villian in Nero.


The film works as a vehicle for getting the crew together for the first time and setting the stage for character development and involved stories. It's definitely an action/adventure film first and foremost. I do think that it is being a bit overrated by a lot of people, whom are colored by nostalgia when watching it IMO.

Good film, I liked it. It's not perfect, but it mostly works. Probably a solid 3 stars, and worth seeing in a nice theater.

[Rutabaga]

I just got back from seeing the movie, and I basically feel like Droo. I am flabbergasted, almost beside myself with joy at just how good, how exciting, and how thrilling this movie is. I not only bawled like a baby during the first 10 minutes...I also bawled like a baby at the end when it went to the credits. I absolutely loved it. As I mentioned way earlier in this thread, I took my mother to see it since today is Mother's Day, and she's been a lifelong Trekkie. She loved the movie as well and said she's already looking forward to seeing the next one. I am starting on nearly 2 weeks of vacation on Wednesday, and have now decided I will be seeing the movie at least one more time during my vacation.

It's so well-done in that it can be enjoyed by people who've never seen a single frame of any other Trek series or movie, but it also has those moments that have a special richness for us fans. I think the moment I recognized that the most was when Sarek told Spock that he had married Amanda because he loved her. That was actually a very touching moment.

The acting was terrific, everyone was perfectly cast. (And Winona Ryder actually was okay as Amanda, much to my relief...and it was really, really odd to see Tyler Perry as a Starfleet admiral.) The music and the special effects were awesome. And I really appreciated the little in-jokes as well...who else out there, when they saw that the third person making the space jump was wearing a red jumpsuit, went, hey, that dude is going to die!.

As Fig said, the storyline as presented here does mean some potentially interesting challenges in regards to continuity with what we've seen in the other series and movies. It will be very interesting to see how they move forward. I really want to see how the Spock/Uhura romance develops...that element of the story caught me by surprise.

Many thanks to JJ Abrams for making being a Trekkie cool again. :thumbup

Here's JJ on The Colbert Report this past Monday...very, very funny interview:

<table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='360' height='353'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.colbertnation.com/'>The Colbert Report</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/226698/may-04-2009/j-j--abrams'>J.J. Abrams</a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:360px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.colbertnation.com/'>colbertnation.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:226698' width='360' height='301' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100%' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/full-episodes'>Colbert Report Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com'>Political Humor</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.colbertnation.com/video/tag/gay~homosexual'>Gay Marriage</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

[Jedieb]

I grew up a child of the 70's and 80's. Back in the day you had 5 channels and one of the things you could always count on was a daily dose of Trek. My mother was even a bigger fan than I was. Star Wars was always the center of my sci-fi/entertainment universe, but Trek wasn't far behind. When I first heard of the reboot I was skeptical, but I got more confident when I heard Abrams was directing. To get to the point, Abrams and company did something which I didn't think was possible. They updated the series while honoring the spirit of the characters. They did this while delivering a first rate MOVIE, not just a good sci-fi or action flick.

I was particularly impressed with Pine's performance. He made me believe that this was the same Kirk I grew up. I'm glad he avoided Kirk inflections. That would have made his performance a caricature. The attitude, the brashness, the ability to bag alien babes, they were all there. It was more than I expected. I found myself laughing out of pure joy at times because of the way the captured characters I had grown up with. My only minor complaint was the there wasn't enough McCoy and that Uhura was really elevated to the 3rd position of the Big Three. And that was a shame because Urban was spot on. When I finally realized a few weeks ago that Mr. Eomer/Pathfinder had been cast as Bones I thought we'd gotten one of the worst casting screw ups since Jake Lloyd beat out Haley Joel. I don't know how he did it, but he NAILED it. So much so that I can't wait to see him and Spock go at it in future sequels.

I may not watch in theaters again, but I'll definitely be grabbing whatever SE they make. My mom is watching it today and I can't wait to compare notes with her.

[Rutabaga]

So your Mom is a Trekkie too? I love it!

Speaking of Karl Urban, I think he was my mother's favorite. She was almost freaked out by him in a way, because his performance was so spookily spot on. :)

[Firebird1]

This was a awesome movie....

I hope this will being people back to Star Trek....

[Ryan Pode]

Yeah, I thought Karl Urban was going to blow chucks as Bones. But he was easily the most like the original out of all the characters, I thought.

[Jedieb]

So your Mom is a Trekkie too? I love it!

Speaking of Karl Urban, I think he was my mother's favorite. She was almost freaked out by him in a way, because his performance was so spookily spot on. :)

I enjoy Trek but I would never call myself a Trekkie. She LOVES Trek. Over the last few holidays I've gotten her the entire set of TOS on DVD and she watches TNG on cable several times a week. She saw it yesterday and loved. My father, who's never enjoyed sci-fi of any kind, complained that it was nothing but sound and fury. Give the man an old western or an afternoon of baseball and he's happy. But a trip to the theater with my mother is pure torture.

[Drin Kizael]

I just saw it last night. Given how much I gush over JJ Abrams work (enough to forgive him for Cloverfield -- now that's devotion), I went in with really high expectations, which is always dangerous when it comes to movies.

This film surpassed my expectations by orders of magnitude. Being a fan of Star Wars and Farscape, getting this geeked out by a Star Trek movie almost makes me feel dirty. I have never seen such a faithful modern day update of a series literally ever. Ever. It was truer to the spirit of Star Trek TOS than the Spider-Man movie was to Lee and Ditko. This film captured all of the best aspects of the series in a way that I never imagined possible.

And I was never really THAT big of a fan of Star Trek TOS to begin with. I always liked it, but I never remotely thought of myself as a Trekkie. It was actually hard to explain why I even did like it, honestly. Truth be told I bashed it pretty regularly... and yet would stop flipping channels and watch it every time it came on. I guess I should have asked JJ to explain it for me, because that's what he did with this film.

Yes the special effects were amazing. Yes the space battles were one awesome thrill ride after another. Yes the funny nods to the movies and series (Chekov's accent, the green alien babe, Scotty's callback scene to ST IV, etc) were great for nostalgia.

But what is going to hook you into this film whether you realize it or not is the chemistry between the characters and their story of friendship and heroism. It's a story of how much better we all are with the support of friends... friends who fight and couldn't be more different from one another, but friends who ultimately need each other. Even the supporting characters had stronger roles than I would have expected. Anyone who thinks that Sulu was cheated is smoking crack. He got more character spotlight time in those 2 hours than he got in 3 years of episodes. Scotty and Uhura and Chekov all had important parts in the story... again unlike the series where they were usually just there.

Scott Kurtz gave a fantastic summation... http://www.pvponline.com/

I didn't want to leave the theater. I wanted to watch it again. I felt like I was 8 years old again seeing Star Wars for the first time. That's how good this movie is.

[Mu Satach]

I <3 McCoy.

[Captain Untouchable]

Wow. Just plain wow.

I'm something of a Star Trek geek, and as one of the people who would be annoyed by all the inconsistancies and stuff, I forced myself to go into the movie expecting to see a remake of the series that would have about as much in common as the new Battlestar does with the old - a few familiar characters, names, and design features, but something several worlds away from the original.

I needn't have worried. Not only was the movie a fantastic adaptation, it was better than the original. Though the sets were all totally redesigned, they looked right: had the designers back then had more at their disposal than plywood, paint and fairy lights, that is how the Enterprise would've looked. Had the makeup crew had as much technology at their disposal, then the alien races would have been as subtly and seamlessly blended in, rather than being the garish and caracature ones that we previously encountered. The characters had extra dimensions, rather than being the 2D stereotypes that sixties TV required, and yet still held true to the soul of the characters. I guess that's the key there - this had all the body and soul of the original, only it was wearing a snazzy new suit.

There's no doubt in my mind that, had GR been born fifty years later, what I saw in the cinema today was how he would have wanted Star Trek to be made, budget and technology permitting. Drin was right on the money: this is arguably the best adaptation of anything, ever.

With regards to the whole continuity issue, I actually don't mind. In fact, I think its better that they have branched off into their own continuity: the alternate universe allows them to approach things we've already seen before from a fresh perspective, without having their hands tied by conforming to the limitations of near 40 years of Trek which - lets face it - couldn't even manage to be consistent with itself most of the time.

I'm usually not a fan of sequels in cinema, but this is an exception of epic proportions. Here's hoping that the renewed franchise has pleanty more miles left on the clock.

Oh, and did anyone else notice the cameo by the ear bug creature thingy from Wrath of Khan? Lol.

[Rutabaga]

There's no doubt in my mind that, had GR been born fifty years later, what I saw in the cinema today was how he would have wanted Star Trek to be made, budget and technology permitting. Drin was right on the money: this is arguably the best adaptation of anything, ever.

With regards to the whole continuity issue, I actually don't mind. In fact, I think its better that they have branched off into their own continuity: the alternate universe allows them to approach things we've already seen before from a fresh perspective, without having their hands tied by conforming to the limitations of near 40 years of Trek which - lets face it - couldn't even manage to be consistent with itself most of the time.

I completely agree that GR must be smiliing, wherever he is. Majel Barrett was able to see the movie before she passed away, and she gave it her approval. I think that says it all.

I also agree on the continuity issue. The more I think about it, the more I like it. Although Trek has now entered into an alternative timeline, it does not for one moment make 40 years of Trek history illegitimate or meaningless. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

And I too noticed the cameo you mentioned. It actually made me giggle. To me, it was one of those lovely in-jokes that we hardcore fans could get a big ol' charge out of. My only surprise was that it was shoved down Pike's throat instead of into his ear :lol.

I'm definitely going to see the movie at least one more time, quite possibly Friday or Sunday. I'm really looking forward to seeing again, and I haven't felt that way about a movie for a long time.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

I hate those damn brain bugs *SHUDDER*

[Peter McCoy]

I went to see it with Droo yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I can't really say more than that.

The cast were brilliant. I loved it that Leonard Nimoy was in it. Everybody did a stellar job (padron the pun) and I really like this bold approach which basically fucked up the space-time continuum.

There were just enough references and nods to the established universe to keep me happy as a fanboy, but the bottom line is that this film really does stand apart from the previous films and series' on it's own two nacelles (lol!).

Aside from almost everything said by Kirk and Spock, my favourite line has to be at the end:

Spock: 'As my customary farewell would seem oddly self serving, I will simply say... good luck.'

And there were a few lines from the original films that were popped in there which brought a smile to my face.

Great film - I can't wait for the Blu-Ray! :)

And Droo - we're watching 'The Voyage Home' ASAP! A ca'nee weet anee longar!

And just to comment on what you guys have said about continuity - I agree in that it doesn't void anything. All that has happened from the original series through TNG and beyond is still very relevant - Old Spock has been through it all so it will still be there as long as he's there. And Spock's a friggin' Zombie. A radiation leak in engineering couldn't even kill him. And even if he does happen to die, he can always implant himself into Bones again. I can't wait for all the arguments to start lol!

[Rutabaga]

Wil Wheaton's review of the movie:

http://suicidegirls.com/news/geek/23684/

Absolutely spot on. And I can't help but agree with the digs he takes at George Lucas.

To quote Wil: "It was awesome. I loved it."

[Zai]

I've never thought about Star Trek beside the occasional quote, lameness in comparison to Star Wars and such. Then, I watched this movie.

This movie made Star Trek cool from an outsider perspective. Also, pretty good performances throughout. I think this movie accomplshed everything it set out to do. It pleased the fans of the series, and thrilled the new audience all the same.

Im giving this a 4. I dont get this whole 3. Isn't a 3 a C in school? Thats average. This is NOT an average movie.

[Charley]

Karl Urban should be given a bucket of cash for being so fucking awesome. He came out of nowhere and made me grin like an idiot.

[Captain Untouchable]

Fucking awesome is right. Divorce lawyers should hire him to do commercials. :lol


Edit:

For those of you who are nerds, I found this article kinda interesting: clicky (http://popculturezoo.com/archives/2529). Someone actually sat down and tried to work out how the events of the film have futzed with the future timeline... but actually managed to do it without sounding all whiny and disgruntled about it, which is a pleasant change from the other articles I've been stumbling upon. Its all entirely irrelevant, as he admits himself, and its geeky to the extreme, but hey - its Star Trek. Kinda comes with the territory. ;)

[Ann R. Key]

http://www.pvponline.com/2008/11/18/trek-on/

:lol C'mon you were all thinkin it!

[Rutabaga]

http://www.pvponline.com/2008/11/18/trek-on/

:lol C'mon you were all thinkin it!

Wil Wheaton had a link to that too, and I couldn't help but laugh at it :lol. I have another slightly similar comic strip to add to that, but since Photobucket appears to be acting up right now, I'll have to wait until later.

I saw the movie again earlier today, and it holds up beautifully on a second viewing. I still want to give the casting director an award and a big sloppy wet kiss. Zachary Quinto still leaves me breathless, he's just so good. As is everyone else.

I also caught one tiny little inside reference that I missed the first time around, in one of the earlier scenes where Kirk is dealing with the effects of McCoy's little ruse to get him on the Enterprise...at one point you can hear McCoy yell, "Nurse Chapel!" :)

At the end of the movie, I realized just how wise it was to take the series in this direction and place it in an alternate timeline. If it wasn't an alternate timeline, there would be no tension and no drama, because we would know that everyone's survival was secure. No one could be maimed or die. But that's out the window now. In an alternate timeline, everyone is mortal, and everyone is in jeopardy. Anything could happen.

It truly is the kick in the creative ass the franchise needed. :thumbup

[Hobgoblin]

At the end of the movie, I realized just how wise it was to take the series in this direction and place it in an alternate timeline. If it wasn't an alternate timeline, there would be no tension and no drama, because we would know that everyone's survival was secure. No one could be maimed or die. But that's out the window now. In an alternate timeline, everyone is mortal, and everyone is in jeopardy. Anything could happen.

This is going to mark me as a cynic, but I think this notion is complete crap and circles back around to the reason the film didn't grab me. Vulcan getting the torch aside, did they really open any new doors? I submit that they did not because they brought back the same characters the series began with. All they've done is created a slightly different universe for the crew to play around in. Is it less safe? Well, they all lived through the movie didn't they?

Now had one of the central crew died during the film, I might agree with you. Had a main character died in a dramatic, heartbreaking moment like Spock did in Wrath of Khan, then maybe I'd even believe new things are happening myself. As it is, still seems like everyone who isn't wearing a red shirt has a charmed life.

It's a decent movie, to be sure. Had a few good moments and some nifty special effects. It's just not really that representative of any major shifts in events.

[Captain Untouchable]

This is going to mark me as a cynic, but I think this notion is complete crap and circles back around to the reason the film didn't grab me. Vulcan getting the torch aside, did they really open any new doors? I submit that they did not because they brought back the same characters the series began with. All they've done is created a slightly different universe for the crew to play around in. Is it less safe? Well, they all lived through the movie didn't they?

Now had one of the central crew died during the film, I might agree with you. Had a main character died in a dramatic, heartbreaking moment like Spock did in Wrath of Khan, then maybe I'd even believe new things are happening myself. As it is, still seems like everyone who isn't wearing a red shirt has a charmed life.

It's a decent movie, to be sure. Had a few good moments and some nifty special effects. It's just not really that representative of any major shifts in events.

I think that's a slightly flawed argument. Bear in mind that this is potentially the first film of several. The intention was to chart how the crew came together from their various separate backgrounds, so that the story told was new from the perspective of veteran viewers rather than a "retelling" of stories you'd already heard, or just another installment in the regular saga. If they'd killed off one of the main characters in this movie, they'd have failed in their objective to show how the whole crew came together.

That doesn't mean they'll be invincible forever... but it would have been a catastrophically bad move for them to have killed off one of the core characters right away. Come "Star Trek II", maybe we'll see the heartwrenching death of Uhura taking its toll on both Spock and Kirk, or a scene where Spock dies a la Wrath of Khan. But that's something for the sequels to tackle: not the movie that establishes the premise.

Besides - if you have an issue with knowing that the characters probably won't die, how on earth do you manage to watch TV? That's *always* a possibility, since killing off cast members is extremely rare. ;)

[Droo]

I know I was protesting against this film on similar grounds prior to seeing it but having seen it I think all I have to say to debunk that kind of argument is:

Batman Begins? Casino Royale? By the end of each film the franchises had been re-established with the same key characters in place in the newly envisioned setting; style, quality, and origin story were what gave what could've been flat cash-ins real appeal and made them box office hits. I think Star Trek follows this pattern exactly. We have the same characters revisted in a boldly re-envisioned universe; the film has quality, style, character, wit, charm, and is achieving critical and commercial success. All things are looking positive for the future of Star Trek in our cinemas, and as for the argument about no-one having died yet, again, how is that any different from the Batman and Bond films? This first film is merely an introduction and I've no doubt we have plenty of fresh and daring plot twists ahead of us with this one.

[Rutabaga]

They took a big enough risk just making this movie in the first place. If they had dared to kill off a major character right away, there would have been a major Trekkie conflagration, regardless of the quality of the movie. As it is, they did kill off a much beloved and respected character, Amanda Grayson. That caught me by surprise since I had avoided spoilers, and it left me feeling sad.

I suppose some might argue that any tension or jeopardy created by the new alternate timeline could just be an illusion, because killing off a major Trek character will always be controversial. But you never know with JJ Abrams...we've seen lots of major characters bite the dust on Lost, including 2 fairly popular and important characters over the last 3 episodes of the season that just concluded. So I still believe anything is possible. And this Trekkie will have no problems with the death of any of the Trek characters, as long as it is a meaningful death, a la Spock in Star Trek II. No Tasha Yar-type deaths, please :x.

As for how much of a change the events of this movie made to the timeline, I know my response may not satisfy everyone, but it's the only one I have to offer right now: we have to wait and see. And I will be along for the ride every step of the way. Quite happily.

[Hobgoblin]

I think that's a slightly flawed argument. Bear in mind that this is potentially the first film of several. The intention was to chart how the crew came together from their various separate backgrounds, so that the story told was new from the perspective of veteran viewers rather than a "retelling" of stories you'd already heard, or just another installment in the regular saga. If they'd killed off one of the main characters in this movie, they'd have failed in their objective to show how the whole crew came together.

So what you're saying is that we're now looking at the exact same crew the series ran with back in the 1960s? We're looking at a series of events that are 99% zero sum in the context of the movie's events versus established continuity. Kirk winds up Captain of the Enterprise and the usual crew is all present and accounted for. Even Amanda Grayson's death still works out to no real change, because her initial existence had a humanizing effect on Spock which her death seems to have accomplished just the same, except maybe sooner. To be perfectly honest, I'd rather see future things in this alternate reality set in the time of TNG to see what effect a lack of Vulcan has had on the intervening generations. I would be extremely interested if they did that.


That doesn't mean they'll be invincible forever... but it would have been a catastrophically bad move for them to have killed off one of the core characters right away. Come "Star Trek II", maybe we'll see the heartwrenching death of Uhura taking its toll on both Spock and Kirk, or a scene where Spock dies a la Wrath of Khan. But that's something for the sequels to tackle: not the movie that establishes the premise.
If they shouldn't be invincible in the future, there's no reason for them to be invincible now. You are touching on an issue that is, I think, becoming more and more a problem with movie franchises and lies not so much with whether a character lives or dies, but whether the outcome of the story is predictable. Below are two spoiler-protected examples.

Example 1: Kirk at risk. There were two points in the movie where Kirk is hanging from a ledge. The first is when a Romulan has knocked him over the edge of the Romulan ship's drill while it is drilling into Vulcan. The second is when he is hanging from one of the catwalks inside the Vulcan ship. In both cases, Kirk survives due to the sheer stupidity of his attacker.

The Romulan on the drill stands there for three minutes trying to stomp on Kirk's hand while his comrade is being attacked. And he fails. Miserably. I can think of three different things he could've done that would've been more effective and twice as cruel but no, they opted to take the cliched way out. This in and of itself wouldn't be so bad if they didn't repeat the event later on. Apparently, however, the Romulan on the catwalk of the ship has an equally low IQ. Even worse, he has a gun that Kirk later steals to defeat him. Why not pull it out and shoot Kirk in the head? I mean, we've already seen Kirk in this predicament once in the movie and he survived. Why am I going to believe he's at risk when the villainous thug did the stupid thing last time? I would have found the situation much more believable and more interesting had Kirk been shot in the hand and fallen to his apparent offscreen death only to show up later having somehow survived through the brash risk-taking we know James T Kirk to pull off.

Example 2: There were two transporter sequences in the film. The first resulted in success whereas the second resulted in the death of Spock's mom. In sequence one, Kirk and Sulu are falling to their doom when they are rescued by the odd brilliance of Chekov in working a transporter. In sequence two, the Vulcans are standing still awaiting teleport to off of their imploding planet. All is entirely believable until Spock's mom WANDERED OUT ONTO THE EDGE OF A ROCK LEDGE DURING AN EARTHQUAKE ARE YOU SERIOUS????

Ignoring the fact that there's little point to show the scene where Spock beams down to Vulcan as it's imploding unless someone important to him is going to die during the trip, I have to say "Sorry film, you lost my suspension of disbelief there." If she's dumb enough to do that, she's gone and you know no amount of transporter trickery will save her.

In the face of these and other things that completely telegraph further points in the film, it's really hard for me to take it seriously or enjoy it as a standalone work.


Besides - if you have an issue with knowing that the characters probably won't die, how on earth do you manage to watch TV? That's *always* a possibility, since killing off cast members is extremely rare. ;)
Even if the standard wasn't different for TV shows than movies, you assume that I watch TV frequently. You shouldn't do that. ;)

The last two shows I watched with any regularity were Heroes and The Office. I would keep watching The Office if I weren't usually working on Thursday nights, but I'll be able to go back and catch up when I choose. The subject of Heroes is a little more relevant so I'll go into detail.

In my opinion, Heroes jumped the shark awhile back and I don't watch it anymore. However, the first season of the show was absolutely brilliant (again, IMO). One of the things it did was take the main cast of the show and show that no invincibility bubble applied to them. By the time the finale of that season rolled around, a number of people had died or been in vulnerable positions. There was no way to accurately predict exactly where things would end up until it all happened.

That was simply not the case with this movie. Every time another event happened, my brain was already two steps down the line thinking "Okay, well there's only one reason they're going to do that and that's if such and such blah de blah de blah is going to occur." Three of the film's brightest moments for me were when Scotty comes into the story on that outpost, when he winds up being transported into that tank on the Enterprise, and when Kirk and Spock wind up in the engineering section of the Romulan ship after Scotty casually proclaims the location they're being beamed to ought to be the cargo bay if the Romulan ship has any common sense in its design because they weren't telegraphed way in advance. That is the kind of writing I was looking for throughout the movie, where things make 100% sense and yet wind up being a delightful surprise. I just didn't find as much of it as I was looking for.

Lest we get completely offtopic though, I'd like to end my discussion on this subject here. If you'd like to go into it further with me, by all means, send me a PM or hit me up on AIM.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I just saw it today on IMAX and I loved it. This is coming from someone who was never a Star Trek fan. I thought it was a great fun movie that captures the spirit of the series. I really like Pine as Kirk he did a great job, but so did Urban and Pegg as been mentioned before in this thread. I am curious to see how future movies will go I say they need to bring in the Klingons soon, but maybe they should consider bringing in the Borg since the time line is all changed.

[Captain Untouchable]

*shrug* I've no desire to waste time disecting what was frankly a superb piece of film-making (imo), since that kind of thing tends to tarnish whatever positives you manage to take away from the experience.

All I can say, Hob, is that I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the film as much as everyone else around here clearly seemd to. Its a shame, because I was very nearly in need of new pants after seeing it the first time.

[Yog]

I love this movie. Think I mentioned earlier that I'm not really into Star Trek, but this is a full reboot of the franchise, appealing to even the most casual movie goer. :thumbup

[Peter McCoy]

While the Borg idea is interesting, given what I know about the Trek universe, this pre-Galaxy-class era would likely be no match for the Collective.

I say they bring Guinan into it! :) And who knows, perhaps Q might pop up somewhere.

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

I'm definitely in the camp of leaving the Borg out of things. I've always felt they were more TNG antagonists as it was. With this new vision of ST, I think there's a fantastic chance to explore and delve into the Federation's expansion, and to really get waist-deep in Kilngon and Romulan happenings. Like many others, I can't wait to see the Kilngons in the next film and whether or not further down the line they bring in Carol Marcus.

And I'm probably gonna be in the minority in this, but I want them to hold off on killing any main characters and just let loose on the poor redshirts just like the series ^_^;

[Mu Satach]

And I'm probably gonna be in the minority in this, but I want them to hold off on killing any main characters and just let loose on the poor redshirts just like the series ^_^;

ditto! and NO BORG! No more timetravel. No no no no no. I'm even none to keen regarding Klingons... just because I want new adventures on planets with aliens I've heard of all my life but never seen.

[Rutabaga]

Its a shame, because I was very nearly in need of new pants after seeing it the first time.

Thank you for the biggest laugh I've had all day. I love it! :lol :lol :lol

I also think bringing the Borg into it would be a mistake...I think it would be pushing it, to do that. I agree that the Borg are more associated with TNG, and these movies should stay playing pretty squarely in the OS playground.

And Carol Marcus being brought in...I had that thought today too. That would be actually pretty neat, since it would fill in some background on something big in Kirk's life.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well it looks they are thinking about bringing in Khan from rumors I read. I have no problem with that. Need to find the right actor for that character.

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

Khan was another one that I was hoping they'd explore and bring into the equation. The big caveat to that though is that they'd have to find someone on par with Mr. Montalban.

[Rev Solomon]

Khan does not need to be revisited. This movie already paid many, many homages to TWoK as it is.

If they do the Klingons, they need to get away from the vision that was brilliantly introduced in TNG, expanded but ultimately tired out in DS9, and dragged to a slow and agonizing death in Enterprise. In TOS, they were more or less a cipher for the Soviet Union, locked in a sort of cold war with the Federation. Some of the novels developed the idea further: the Klingon Empire never had the material wealth of the Federation, but they poured a much greater percentage of their resources into their military. They eked out a spartan existence and looked on their decadent Federation neighbors with disdain and mistrust.

It'd be great to see new visions of the Tholians, Gorn, Organians, Orions, even the Romulan Star Empire (since Nero and crew were certainly not representative), but the disposition of the Klingons has to be one of the major formative forces in this new Star Trek universe.

[Sanis Prent]

I always thought that the Romulans were vastly under-used as a nemesis in Star Trek, and they really need to fix this. After all, one of the first major interstellar shooting wars in Trek history for Earth was against the Romulans, and that was early enough for both sides to be flinging nuclear weapons at each other.

[Rutabaga]

I think they need to tread very carefully if they're really going to bring Khan into the series. Mainly because he is still the best villain Trek has ever seen, and also because Ricardo Montalban is so indelibly connected with the role. I would presume they would essentially be remaking Space Seed, unless the events would play out differently due to the alternate timeline being in place. No matter what, though, if they really are going to use Khan, I don't think it should be in the very next movie. Wait until the third or fourth movie down the line.

Now, on another note, Photobucket has finally fixed their maintenance issue, so I can post the other cartoon I mentioned a couple of days ago. I couldn't help but laugh at this, although the laugh was admittedly a tad bittersweet. :)

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb164/Rutabaga64/candorvilletrek.gif

[Captain Untouchable]

I agree on the Borg thing; they got over-used after TNG, and lost all their fear-factor. It took an entire armada of ships to take down a single Cube in "Best of Both Worlds" and "First Contact", but Voyager got way too casual over the whole affair, and panzified 'em.

I hope they go back to the TOS Klingons too; it'll be interesting to see how they factor them in visually, as well as in terms of politics. Will we just see the same old classic ship designs, or are we going to see another Enterprise moment, with something funky and new? Which side of the ridges fence are they going to sit on - the Romulans we saw weren't a match to either TOS or TNG; are we going to see a similar restyling of them too?

The one thing that did bug me a little was how casual everyone was over seeing Romulans. At this point in history, no one was meant to know what a Romulan looked like; it wasn't until after Kirk took command of the Enterprise that we had that "Gasp! They're Vulcans!" moment. Presumably, things unfolded a little differently: I'd be interested to see how that develops, particularly on the whole Vulcan/unification side of things.

[Rutabaga]

I agree on the Borg thing; they got over-used after TNG, and lost all their fear-factor. It took an entire armada of ships to take down a single Cube in "Best of Both Worlds" and "First Contact", but Voyager got way too casual over the whole affair, and panzified 'em.

That was one of the reasons why I gave up on Voyager (besides the fact that it ultimately became the Seven of Nine show)...Voyager absolutely destroyed the Borg, which was really sad to see.

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

On the subject of how Nero and his crew appeared, it's explained in the prequel comic ST: Countdown:



"There was a tradition on Romulus that when a loved one died you would paint your grief upon your skin. Ancient symbols of love and loss. In time the paint would fade, and with it the period of mourning. Life would go on. We paint these symbols on our skin now. But we burn them deep. So that they will never fade. Because life does not go on. We died with our friends. We died with our families. We died with Romulus. And all that is left is revenge."


I'm not sure how they're going to do the klingon ships, since they looked - from what I could see of them in the Kobayashi Maru simulation - like the standard battlecruisers. What I'm dying to see though are the Bird-of-Preys. Those are my absolute favorite ST ship.

[Peter McCoy]

I'm not sure how they're going to do the klingon ships, since they looked - from what I could see of them in the Kobayashi Maru simulation - like the standard battlecruisers. What I'm dying to see though are the Bird-of-Preys. Those are my absolute favorite ST ship.

Which one? 'Bird of Prey' refers to a number of different, small Romulan and Klingon vessels. I have a feeling you may mean the Klingon B'rel-class Bird of Prey though - the one Kirk and his crew steal at the end of 'The Search for Spock' and use in 'The Voyage Home' - it's the one which, similar to an Imperial shuttle, can fold it's wings:

http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/klingon/scout_brel.jpg

I think it's a very iconic-looking ship. And I love the interior of Klingon ships - they remind me a lot of the interior of Predator ships. Minus the dry ice of course :p

[Peter McCoy]

Oh, and something I decided to check up on: a comparison of the new Enterprise's bridge with the one of the Enterprise A (NCC-1701-A) from the end of The Voyage Home. I was quite pleased:

NCC-1701-A (http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/e/ee/Constitution_class_refit_bridge_2.jpg)

NCC-1701 (new/alternate universe) (http://blevkog.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/star_trek_400x765.jpg)

[Emelie Shadowstar]

Voyager absolutely destroyed the Borg, which was really sad to see.

Oh thank god I'm not the only one that thought that!

But yes...they could never touch on them again and I'd be happy with that.

So anyway,

Finally saw the movie Sunday. I don't think I've ever claimed to be a Trekkie...though I was the kid who grew up watching reruns of the TOS, watched TNG with my parents (Q was so my hero... :| I have a teddy bear version of him in the judge robes. lmao), moved on to DS9, and kinda stopped watching somewhere around a season or two into Voyager.

I wasn't really sure what to expect from the movie as I actually avoided most anything about it for fear of spoilers. Personally the cast was enough to get me to squeal like a retard (Pegg...yep.) and then when the reviews started coming in and I wasn't hearing anything bad about it, I knew I had to just give up on my "they're going to ruinnnnn itttt" mentality and go. I will honestly say now that this movie made me honestly feel that it was worth my time and money to see and I would gladly do so again.

I took my mom and the both of us basically sat giggling like two retard fangirls at everything during the entire movie. I loved the fact that any little "inside jokes" that were made were enjoyed by the both of us and it was wonderful to see how they reinvented everything without making you feel like they tromped all over the original series/movies. My mom flat out went home and told her mother to go see it. Cracked me up.

:D But yes. I don't have a bad thing to say about it and honestly am contemplating seeing it again in theaters which is really something I rarely do as I have little patience for people and such.

[Rutabaga]

(Q was so my hero... :| I have a teddy bear version of him in the judge robes. lmao),

I have one of those bears too!!! :lol

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

I'm not sure how they're going to do the klingon ships, since they looked - from what I could see of them in the Kobayashi Maru simulation - like the standard battlecruisers. What I'm dying to see though are the Bird-of-Preys. Those are my absolute favorite ST ship.

Which one? 'Bird of Prey' refers to a number of different, small Romulan and Klingon vessels. I have a feeling you may mean the Klingon B'rel-class Bird of Prey though - the one Kirk and his crew steal at the end of 'The Search for Spock' and use in 'The Voyage Home' - it's the one which, similar to an Imperial shuttle, can fold it's wings:

http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/klingon/scout_brel.jpg

I think it's a very iconic-looking ship. And I love the interior of Klingon ships - they remind me a lot of the interior of Predator ships. Minus the dry ice of course :p


Aye, that's the one :)

Man that thing is just so gorgeous.

[Captain Untouchable]

On the subject of how Nero and his crew appeared, it's explained in the prequel comic ST: Countdown:

I was meaning more the fact that their ears were much more prominant and less detailed (very different from Spock's), and the fact that they didn't have the pointy brow ridge thingies that TNG Romulans have. (clicky (http://bitsofbrain.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/romulan2.jpg)) Even with the lack of hair and the addition of tattoos, you would've expected that kind of ridgework to be more visible.

Its not an extensive difference - not the sort of thing you'd notice unless you were totally anal - and I for one thought they came up with a more stylish and stylized look; the tattoos kinda conveyed the same sort of facial shape, even though the ridges themselves weren't there. I'm all for seeing that repeated on the Klingons, just so long as they keep their beards, and they don't get anyone but John Colicos to play Kor. :shakefist

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

aahhh, I see what you mean. The more prominent brow ridges I'd forgotten about.

And dammit, I'm gonna go watch Voyage Home now ^_^;

[Peter McCoy]

I'd just like to say how much I'm loving the End Credits Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdysH77YxFw) on Youtube! :)

[Peter McCoy]

And dammit, I'm gonna go watch Voyage Home now ^_^;

You, Miss, are awesome.

I've been exhausted the last few nights but still put it on in bed. I recall getting up to around Chekov getting captured on the Nuclear Wessal before falling asleep. It's my favourite Trek movie by far. I would have watche dit last night all the way through (I got in bed early to watch a movie) but my dad bought 'The Thing' on DVD for me (never seen it - and loved it). I'm very tempted to watch it now even though I'm up for work in just over 6 hours :p

[Captain Untouchable]

I'd just like to say how much I'm loving the End Credits Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdysH77YxFw) on Youtube! :)

That's another thing I didn't bother to rave about - the soundtrack was *superb*. I love the new theme bit that they kept brushing against throughout the film - slots perfectly into the musical style of all the TOS movies.

And was I the only one who cried during the scene where Kirk was born? Damn; that (this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZSQJ-XnR78)) music had half the cinema I saw it in sobbing away.

[Rutabaga]

I'd just like to say how much I'm loving the End Credits Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdysH77YxFw) on Youtube! :)

I immediately downloaded the soundtrack from iTunes after seeing the movie, and I've played it multiple times already. My only complaint about it is that it's too short, I wish there was more to it.

My mother said after the movie that she thought it was a really, really wise move that we never heard the original theme music until the final credits. I think she's quite right...it gave Michael Giacchino a chance to establish some original themes and then pay tremendous tribute to Alexander Courage's theme music at the end. And the original themes Giacchino created are just beautiful.

Michael Giacchino appears to be JJ Abrams's composer of choice, since he does the music for Lost. Plus he conducted the orchestra at the Oscars this year. If you have never heard Roar!, his overture that played over the closing credits of Cloverfield, that is a really great piece of music too. Very evocative Japanese influence in it, paying some homage to Godzilla movies. There are brief moments of the Trek closing credits music that are reminiscent of Roar! too.

Ah, found a YouTube version of it, listen if you're curious...just be forewarned that it's a nearly 10 minute piece of music:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-xhIX4qr9JI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-xhIX4qr9JI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Rutabaga]

I'd just like to say how much I'm loving the End Credits Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdysH77YxFw) on Youtube! :)

That's another thing I didn't bother to rave about - the soundtrack was *superb*. I love the new theme bit that they kept brushing against throughout the film - slots perfectly into the musical style of all the TOS movies.

And was I the only one who cried during the scene where Kirk was born? Damn; that (this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZSQJ-XnR78)) music had half the cinema I saw it in sobbing away.

I cried during the opening scene. Both times I've seen the movie. I also started crying when I heard the original theme music as the closing credits started. And dammit if I don't get teary-eyed just listening to the soundtrack too. I am a wuss. And proud of it :).

[Captain Untouchable]

Lol. I feel a little better, then. The Opening Scene was just such a powerful bit of cinematography; acted, directed, cut and scored to perfection. Having the memories of it conjured up by listening to the soundtrack gets me all emotional too; though I'm gonna use the term "sensitive" rather than "wuss", so I feel a little more manly. ^_^;

[Rutabaga]

I can't even begin to tell you how much I love the first 10 minutes of the movie. Not only do I love George and Winona Kirk, but I also totally and thoroughly dig Captain Robau. I would almost love to see a movie just about him! :D

My sister ended up ragging on the movie and said her big Trekkie friend didn't like it either...feh, their loss. I love my sister dearly, but every so often she totally misses the boat. Or in this case, the starship. :evil

[Darth Turbogeek]

I am no Trekkie - in fact I actively LOATHE most of Trek. ST:IV and ST:II I do like but that's it.

HOWEVER,

This movie is VERY good because it's accessible and works really well to non trekkies. I dont know or care if it upsets or works for Trek fans - it is just a plain good movie, well acted and good plot for those with some sort of attention span and lots of pewpew and explosions for the ADHD generation.

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

I've always called ST:IV 'The Whale Movie'. Growing up it was always The Whale Movie. Hell, even to this day I still call it that :)

Also, Michael Giacchino did the music for Pixar's 'The Incredibles' and 'Ratatouille', so adding that to all of his other stuff makes for a pretty impressive resume. I'll be getting the soundtrack over Amazon so that once I've imported the songs, I can put the cd in with all my other ST soundtracks. So far I have 2, 6, First Contact, and Nemesis. I need to add to it desperately though.

[Mu Satach]

A bah hum bug to all for no reason!

Can't resist after reading Rutabaga's post about her sister.

<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/common/assets/onn_embed/embedded_player.swf?image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonio n.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSTAR_TREK_artic le.jpg&amp;videoid=94844&title=Trekkies%20Bash%20New%20Star%20Trek%20Film%2 0As%20%27Fun%2C%20Watchable%27" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/common/assets/onn_embed/embedded_player.swf"type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffi les%2Fimages%2FSTAR_TREK_article.jpg&videoid=94844&title=Trekkies%20Bash%20New%20Star%20Trek%20Film%2 0As%20%27Fun%2C%20Watchable%27"></embed></object><br /><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film?utm_source=videoe mbed">Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'</a>

[Rutabaga]

That is just unbelievably hilarious! :lol

[Lilaena De'Ville]

REMINDER:

This is the last week to catch Star Trek on IMAX, so get yer butts out there. We still haven't and I'm getting nervous we'll miss it. :cry

[Tear]

Sadly the ones in B.C have all been reserved for Disney's Earth :( Curse you Disney. CURSE YOUUUUU KHAAAAAAAAAN

[Liam Jinn]

http://www.startrekmovie.com/panoramas/bridge.html

360 view of the Enterprize's bridge. Thought I'd post that since Peter was talking about it earlier.

[Wyl Staedtler]

I am not a Star Trek fan. My father used to watch the occasional episode of Next Generation and I recall having a girly and completely shallow crush on Riker (I named a guppie after him) but that is the extent of my exposure to the franchise.

That being said, this movie is fucking epic. Hot damn. Yanking the kids out of school tomorrow to go see it again. :D

[Captain Untouchable]

I am not a Star Trek fan. My father used to watch the occasional episode of Next Generation and I recall having a girly and completely shallow crush on Riker (I named a guppie after him) but that is the extent of my exposure to the franchise.

That being said, this movie is fucking epic. Hot damn. Yanking the kids out of school tomorrow to go see it again. :D

Told you that you'd like it. :D

[Dasquian Belargic]

I haven't seen this yet, but as if to mock me Miranda just texted me from the IMAX where she is enjoying the movie :shakefist

[Miranda Tarkin]

It wasn't a mock! It was a gloat! :D

It was AMAZING on the IMAX screen :eek