J.J. Abrams' Star Trek

[Sxottlan]

Filming commenced today.

And Bruce Greenwood has been cast (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ic62850cbeffe3295552071dc869 2830d) as Captain Pike. Interesting choice.

[Morris Schæffer]

I guess Star Trek XI will be jumping back and forth a lot then. Between present and future I mean. After all, Nimoy is already cast as well.

EDIT: I wonder what budget they'll have to work with. I also wonder if perhaps they shouldn't target a summer release for a change.

[Watashi]

Paramount Pictures and director J.J. Abrams have set Winona Ryder to play the Vulcan mother of a young Spock (Zachary Quinto) in Star Trek.

Written by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, the film revolves around the Starfleet Academy days of the crew of the Starship Enterprise.

Ryder joins a cast that also includes Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Chris Pine, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Anton Yelchin, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, Bruce Greenwood, and Rachel Nichols.

Star Trek is scheduled for a Christmas Day 2008 release date.

Winona Ryder as a Vulcan?

*swoons*

[Mal]

Anton Yelchin? How unfortunate.

[Sxottlan]

There appears to be confusion about Ryder's character. I haven't read any casting sheet, but Spock's mom was human, not Vulcan.

Unless they changed it for the film.

[Sxottlan]

Some of the casting for this film has been a bit weird. I'm glad they're going with character actors like Greenwood and this is certainly the biggest cast a Trek film has ever had. Getting Pegg has been their biggest coup in my opinion.

Still, I won't deny that I'd have rather seen Damon as Kirk, Sinise as McCoy, Brody as Spock and Tom Hanks as Pike etc.


EDIT: I wonder what budget they'll have to work with.

It's at least $100 Million dollars and I'm pretty sure it's quite a bit more. They definitely appear to be going all out for this one.

[Morris Schæffer]

Possible story *******MINOR SPOILERS*********

Romulans from the future, most likely TNG time frame lead by a Romulan named Nero, played by Eric Bana, finds the City on the Edge of Forever and uses the Guardian of Forever to go back in time and kill the person who has been the biggest thorn in the Romulan’s side and is crucial to the success of the Federation and Starfleet, James T. Kirk.

Mr. Spock, played by Leonard Nimoy in the original timeline, becomes aware of Nero’s plan (not clear on the details of how he knows) and also goes back in time to protect his best friend, James Kirk. This is where the Old Spock (Nimoy) and Young Spock (Quinto) meet.

Old Spock warns young Spock about Nero’s plans and it’s up to them to protect the future Captain Kirk and also help try to protect the timeline and the future of the Federation and Starfleet.

This happens before Kirk and Spock form their life long friendship and bond. We have been told that there is a very cool scene where Old Spock tells the Young Spock about his friendship with Kirk, so while this may sound “illogical” (pun intended) it’s been described as very emotional.

[Morris Schæffer]

Young spock:

http://www.jfxonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/newspock-402.jpg

http://www.jfxonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/newspock-404.jpg

http://www.jfxonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/spock-349.jpg

[Raiders]

Quinto looks pretty convincing there. It says nothing of what his performance will be, but I like the look.

[[ETM]]

Quinto looks pretty convincing there. It says nothing of what his performance will be, but I like the look.

Well, he got cast based on looks alone, so... :)

[Torgo]

There appears to be confusion about Ryder's character. I haven't read any casting sheet, but Spock's mom was human, not Vulcan.

Unless they changed it for the film.

I don't get this either, especially since the blonde, blue-eyed Jane Wyatt played her in the series. So much for canon...

[MadMan]

I'm not too keen on this prequel. However the cast rocks, so that's a good sign.

[megladon8]

Definitely looks the part.

Can't say I'm too thrilled about Abrams directing, though. I can't imagine him doing anything that doesn't move a mile a minute.

[Morris Schæffer]

Definitely looks the part.

Can't say I'm too thrilled about Abrams directing, though. I can't imagine him doing anything that doesn't move a mile a minute.

I think Abrams is a somewhat encouraging sign. He has a reasonably keen eye for populist entertainment as well as a visual flair that was lacking from some of the previous helmers although that might not be entirely fair considering that Abrams' financial means will likely be higher for this prequel. I say let this picture move a little faster, sport some more energy and a better pace than the last two which were both severely deficient on either front. I think it's important that it's a major hit. Thus, let them amp up the action, provided it's genuinely thrilling and memorable of course, as well as the coolness factor. Star Trek has always been Star Wars' nerdier cousin, never as cool, and I'd like to see that change without sacrificing the essence of Roddenberry's creation.

More news:


Third consecutive day in a row with STAR TREK news hitting the wire. Variety is reporting that Chris Hemsworth and Clifton Collins Jr. are now attached to the next adventure aboard the Enterprise. Paramount and JJ Abrams have placed Hemsworth in the role of Kirk's father (George Kirk) while Collins has been set to play Nero's henchman & general, a Romulan by the name of Ayel. They join Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Chris Pine, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Anton Yelchin, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, Bruce Greenwood, Winona Ryder, Rachel Nichols and Jennifer Morrison.

There was no explanation in the press release on why Hemsworth is playing Kirk's father in the movie. With the the actor only being 24 years old, it either points to a flashback scene between father/son while Kirk is a toddler or some timeline managed trickery on the parts of Abrams and Co.

[Sxottlan]

The teaser trailer is out in bootleg form. Go here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RllSZW_YLk8).

Beautiful trailer. The welding imagery is unexpected, but with Trek anymore, unexpected is very welcome. It works very well as a metaphor for the making of the film itself.

What I love the most: the almost ominous, haunting feeling that the trailer gives off. We get these abstract views of what the workers are building combined with the eerie old audio of JFK and NASA transmissions. The different look and approach helps make it feel like we're seeing a trailer for a big movie and not just a Star Trek movie.

I especially loved how the old transporter sound effect is mixed with the music to create an echo-like effect.

[Morris Schæffer]

Very nice, but also very teasery.

[megladon8]

Eh, I wasn't too impressed.

Granted, it's just a teaser - but I honestly found those shots of the sweaty, oily guys welding pretty damn cheesy.

[Dukefrukem]

Eh, I wasn't too impressed.

Granted, it's just a teaser - but I honestly found those shots of the sweaty, oily guys welding pretty damn cheesy.

You think they hand welded that whole ship?? :lol: You'd think by then thy'd have automated machines to do the job for you.

[Sxottlan]

The teaser trailer is now officially online (http://www.paramount.com/startrek/).

The HD version gives great detail to the shipyard.

[[ETM]]

Check this out: http://www.ncc-1701.com/

It's linked to the red dot next to the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION" on the main site... 3 out of 4 cameras are online, I'm guessing they'll be turning the fourth on soon. The "frequencies" for the three cameras are 564, 125 and 955. I guess when all four are at 100%, something will happen.

[megladon8]

;27279']Check this out: http://www.ncc-1701.com/

It's linked to the red dot next to the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION" on the main site... 3 out of 4 cameras are online, I'm guessing they'll be turning the fourth on soon. The "frequencies" for the three cameras are 564, 125 and 955. I guess when all four are at 100%, something will happen.


I imagine it'll be an official release of the teaser trailer.

[Sxottlan]

The fourth camera that is offline. If you wait long enough, a shot of the ship's interior corridor appears briefly.

[Dukefrukem]

The fourth camera that is offline. If you wait long enough, a shot of the ship's interior corridor appears briefly.

how long?

[EvilShoe]

;27279']Check this out: http://www.ncc-1701.com/

It's linked to the red dot next to the words "UNDER CONSTRUCTION" on the main site... 3 out of 4 cameras are online, I'm guessing they'll be turning the fourth on soon. The "frequencies" for the three cameras are 564, 125 and 955. I guess when all four are at 100%, something will happen.
No more mysterious sites!
Not again!!!

[Morris Schæffer]

No more mysterious sites!
Not again!!!

Perhaps due to one of the goals of this movie, to get non-trekkies into theaters, the marketeers felt they needed to go the distance with its campaign. Not saying a mysterious site is the way to go, and for this film it's certainly rather odd, but if it works, then that is good news for the franchise.

[Henry Gale]

Star Trek Pushed Back to May, 2009
Source: Variety
February 13, 2008


Paramount is pushing back the release of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek from December 25 to May 8, 2009, reports Variety.

...

The trade says the changes were part of a major reshuffling to the studio's release calendar, as well as DreamWorks' release calendar.

Studio insiders said Star Trek has the potential to gross more in May than in December. The movie has no competition in its new slot so far.

Well that just sucks.

This thing is going to have such an unnecessarily long post-production period now. It already feels like they've been making it for such a long time and now that it's well over a year away, the only good I can see coming out of it is maybe it ends up being more polished in the end. Other than that, all the excitement that's been slowly building up for it is basically dead now.

[megladon8]

Damnit.

I was looking forward to that one.

Now I have an even greater sense of impending disappointment.

[Sxottlan]

This is terrible. It was my most anticipated film of the year.

Never in a million years would I have figured that the strike would affect the film like this. I thought they greenlighted a whole bunch of films to keep the schedule filled up?

:frustrated:


all the excitement that's been slowly building up for it is basically dead now.

That's what's so maddening about it. There's a pretty obvious buzz building about the film and now it's all on hold. Maybe this wouldn't have been so bad if the teaser trailer hadn't already been released and we were less than a year away from release. But it was and we were. Now even though there is no apparent problem with the film, any delay creates a stigma.

[Morris Schæffer]

I think I can hold out for another five months. There's another consideration as well. I can't remember the last time when a Star Trek movie was released in the busy month of May. While this means that it will have to fight off competition, perhaps the picture will now appear more high-profile. I'd love to see a Star Trek flick become a major summer blockbuster because if it rakes in a lot of $$$$$$ then sequels will be assured and subsequent higher budgets as well. To be frank, this is where previous films have been lacking a bit. Nemesis was going to be this big war movie, but it still looked decidedly puny. Naturally, I want quality as well, but the move to the summer does make me wonder if this will have any impact on the succes of this movie.

As a reboot of the entire franchise, why not move away from previous release windows as well? And reposition it as a summer force to be reckoned with?

[Sycophant]

Morris has got some really good points here. It's probably a better strategic placement. It's only a five months' delay. Turning the Star Trek franchise into a slick blockbuster franchise is exactly what the studio wants and (early) Summer's a great launching pad for those.

[lovejuice]

Morris has got some really good points here. It's probably a better strategic placement. It's only a five months' delay. Turning the Star Trek franchise into a slick blockbuster franchise is exactly what the studio wants and (early) Summer's a great launching pad for those.

i'm not a trekkie per se, but i always think a true star trek is not blockbuster material, is it? (or at least that's what fans're claiming.)

[Sycophant]

i'm not a trekkie per se, but i always think a true star trek is not blockbuster material, is it? (or at least that's what fans're claiming.)
Not inherently, no. Personally, I don't really give a damn about the franchise. But that's part of the reason this project is in the hands of Mr. Abrams and why he's opted to "reboot" the franchise. It's supposed to appeal to non-Trekkies, because you can only juice them for so much money, and they just haven't been as reliable in shelling out to the studios of late.

[Morris Schæffer]

Harry has visited Trek helmer JJ Abrams and has, beyond the confines of his monstrous belly, glimpsed some stuff:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37248

A cool read.

[Sxottlan]

At this point I had hoped that the viral marketing campaign and a new trailer would have come out. It was with eleven months to go that they originally started before they pulled the plug on the hype. Right now I'm starting to get excited again, but could use some new stuff from their end.

Although I will say that I'm concerned about the new release date. I agree from the article above with JJ that the movie could have really cleaned up at Christmas. Now it has the second weekend in May, which in recent years has not treated films well (i.e. Speed Racer and Posidon just to name a few). However, looking at the slate of movies next May, nothing except Pixar's next really gives me cause for concern.

[Morris Schæffer]

Although I will say that I'm concerned about the new release date. I agree from the article above with JJ that the movie could have really cleaned up at Christmas. Now it has the second weekend in May, which in recent years has not treated films well (i.e. Speed Racer and Posidon just to name a few). However, looking at the slate of movies next May, nothing except Pixar's next really gives me cause for concern.

Perhaps it would have cleaned up, but the summer release date for a Trek movie is yet another break with tradition and I do welcome that. Wait, you're worried about a Pixar movie performing at the BO? Or you're concerned that it'll be a formidable obstacle for Trek XI?

A lot will also depend on the months Jan~Apr. If they're pretty sucky in terms of entertainment, then perhaps audiences will be totally primed for Trek. It's certainly a more treasured property than Speed Racer and Poseidon. What's opening in May before Trek XI? It would be nice if it was the first blockbuster of the season. Like Iron Man in other words.

[Sxottlan]

First pictures of the cast as Kirk, Spock, Uhura and the villain Nero:

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/ewall.jpg

[Morris Schæffer]

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/lv08/st09postcho.jpg

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/lv08/st09postkurbant.jpg

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/lv08/st09postpegg.jpg

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/lv08/st09postyelchin.jpg

[Qrazy]

I've never seen Simon Pegg look that serious before. I can dig it.

[Henry Gale]

All I really needed to see was the Pegg one.

With the marketing starting up now and the great buzz so far, it's going to be a pretty difficult wait with it now coming out in May. I'm not a very big Trek fan at all, but I'm quite excited.

[megladon8]

I really find it weird the way Paramount is handling their slate. Maybe they are hoping this will be 2009's Iron Man?

J. J. Abrams said at Comic-Con that he finds it mind-boggling as well. He said everything is still running on schedule, and it's already almost complete. It'd be ready for the Christmas 2008 release, easily.

[number8]

It's because they're confident enough in liking the film to fit it into their summer tentpole movies. Abrams should be grateful.

[Sxottlan]

I'm glad that I've stayed away from the forums and threads dedicated to the film on some of the major Trek boards, because from what I have seen, with the release of these pictures, we're starting to get all the bitching and moaning all over again. Then I come over here where I see the reception much more positive.

I like the pictures. I like that I was actually confused about who was who at first. I actually did not recognize Pegg right away. Looking forward to his (more serious?) turn. While at first I thought I was looking at Dr. Bashir, I could tell pretty quickly that I'm looking at Chekov because of the wide-eyed look Yelchin gives him, which is really what is required, not that he have a Monkees-style haircut.

[Morris Schæffer]

I've never seen Simon Pegg look that serious before. I can dig it.

Yeah, it's a bit uncanny. Reflecting upon his previous roles, and then seeing this picture. Simon Pegg the chameleon?


It's because they're confident enough in liking the film to fit it into their summer tentpole movies. Abrams should be grateful.

I"m hoping that's the reason. Anyway, the release slot is also a break from tradition and that can only be a good thing. Here's hoping the months of Jan~Apr offer scant little in terms of entertainment so that come the beginning of May, audiences will be all over this one.

Bring on the first teaser!!

EDIT: Karl Urban does not look like a doctor however. :)

[Morris Schæffer]

Kevin Smith is at it again:

http://trekmovie.com/2008/08/22/kevin-smith-sort-of-reviews-star-trek/

[Sxottlan]

The teaser trailer for this movie really is quite fantastic. I keep watching it all these months later. Haunting, but also exhilerating.

[Morris Schæffer]

The teaser trailer for this movie really is quite fantastic. I keep watching it all these months later. Haunting, but also exhilerating.

Yeah, I did the same a few weeks ago. Let's hope it's some kind of indication. Will that footage be in the movie btw?

[Sxottlan]

Yeah, I did the same a few weeks ago. Let's hope it's some kind of indication. Will that footage be in the movie btw?

There was talk at the time the teaser came out that the footage was shot just for the trailer.

However I don't think anything was ever confirmed with the producers, who have a regular presence over at TrekMovie.com.

[Ivan Drago]

I'm sorry which poster is the Simon Pegg poster? I can't tell.

[Grouchy]

I'm sorry which poster is the Simon Pegg poster? I can't tell.
Red tint, the one before last in Schaeffer's post.

[Morris Schæffer]

There was talk at the time the teaser came out that the footage was shot just for the trailer.

However I don't think anything was ever confirmed with the producers, who have a regular presence over at TrekMovie.com.

A few previous Trek movies had an extended sequence where the Enterprise is shown in all her glory while the crew approaches her by shuttle. I've no doubt that Abrams will do just that in this new movie, but an unfinished Enterprise isn't much help for a reboot of the franchise. Or could it be that the "new" crew will only take the helm at the end of the movie? Doesn't seem likely.

How old was Kirk when he first became captain of the Enterprise?

[Sxottlan]

A few previous Trek movies had an extended sequence where the Enterprise is shown in all her glory while the crew approaches her by shuttle. I've no doubt that Abrams will do just that in this new movie, but an unfinished Enterprise isn't much help for a reboot of the franchise.

Yeah those were actually the same montage repeated in the first and second films.

And actually, I think the ship under construction is meant more as a metaphor for the film itself. But I guess we'll see.


Or could it be that the "new" crew will only take the helm at the end of the movie? Doesn't seem likely.

It's possible. Captain Christopher Pike is in the film after all. I could see him being in command in the film, perhaps even with Kirk as his first officer.


How old was Kirk when he first became captain of the Enterprise?

Don't know an exact age. I heard he was supposed to be the youngest captain ever in the fleet. Picard took command at a very young age in the next century, but I don't know ages at all.

[Morris Schæffer]

Premise of the new movie:


The gist of the story is that it follows Spock, played by Leonard Nimoy, back in time from the franchise's "current" setting, as Romulans attempt to go back in time to kill the young Captain James T. Kirk before he goes on to do all those things that messed up the Romulans' many plans. So, J.J. Abrams has indeed come up with a clever way to bridge the "old" franchise to his new revamp, and since there is time travelling involved, there's even the possibility that things can be changed, meaning everything we thought we knew could be completely different going forward. If the movie is AWESOME, this is great news. If not, it could be perceived as the nail in the Star Trek coffin. I, however, am optimistic, and think this could be the sign that the reboot is more clever and better structured than we're used to as of late.

This is really clever? Time travel?:confused:

[Barty]

This is really clever? Time travel?:confused:

Two of the best Trek films used time travel.

[number8]

Two of the best Trek films used time travel.

Yeah, although they use it better than a "Villains going back in time to kill Kirk" plot. I wonder if it'll be more than that. Maybe tampering the Kobayashi-Maru test?

[Morris Schæffer]

Two of the best Trek films used time travel.

What number8 said although I hadn't taken First Contact and The Voyage Home into consideration. Still, I think we can agree that there comes a point when time travel becomes all too convenient a plot element eh?

[Barty]

What number8 said although I hadn't taken First Contact and The Voyage Home into consideration. Still, I think we can agree that there comes a point when time travel becomes all too convenient a plot element eh?

Not when it involves Leonard Nimoy.

[Ivan Drago]

Red tint, the one before last in Schaeffer's post.

THAT'S Simon Pegg? I hardly recognized him.

[Morris Schæffer]

Some dude went to a Paramount screening of a bunch of things, Including the new Trek:


Star Trek – We saw the teaser trailer and then we saw what looked to be a very very early version of the full trailer – It showed more footage of Quito as Spock, much more Chris Pine and also some John Cho and Simon Pegg footage. The film looks like immense fun and there seems to be a lot of action in it. There look of the crew and the bridge is spot on and the costumes look like the original but with a more modern and practical twist. We got to see Spock talking to his parent as well and Kirk being told to take more responsibility. There were also a lot of montage scenes involves spaceship battles, gun fights and hand to hand combat. I especially like a short clip where we see the crew running through the corridors of the Enterprise – reminded me of next generation loads.

[Sxottlan]

Yeah that was a pretty vague description.

I'm just hoping we can get some definitive word soon about which film the trailer will be with so we can have a specific date to look forward to.

[Sxottlan]

The first full trailer is allegedly (http://trekmovie.com/2008/10/10/star-trek-trailer-coming-in-november/) coming out sometime next month.

Quantum of Solace would seem to be the best choice.

[Morris Schæffer]

I really cannot wait for footage to be revealed!!

[Saya]

Spock & Kirk are on the EW cover:

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/startrekewcover.jpg

[Sxottlan]

More of the first pictures!

http://blog.ugo.com/images/uploads/new-trek-smaller.jpg

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2008/spock.jpg

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/usskelvin1t.jpg

http://joblo.com/newsimages1/excltrekpic.jpg

[Sxottlan]

My initial reaction is very positive.

Love the look of the bridge and the lighting used. I thought the repeated chevron pattern on the uniforms might not look good, but here so far they look fine.

Love the turrets on the Kelvin!

The only thing to give me pause is where ever Nero is, it reminds me too much of the bridge from Sarris' ship in Galaxy Quest.

[Sxottlan]

Another shot of the bridge:

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/star_trek_800x340.jpg

[Watashi]

I like the look of Urban as Bones and Pine as Kirk, but Spock just looks like Sylar with pointy ears.

[Fezzik]

I'm actually rather shocked at how much Urban has the Bones thing going on. He was the one casting I was worried about.

[number8]

Yeah, holy crap. Karl Urban as Bones. Uncanny.

[megladon8]

Urban's actually the only one there who really looks like the original character - and who really looks like he's got the character's physical personality down.

It's odd not seeing him pumped and shirtless.


EDIT: And Spock looks like he has a disturbingly high level of emotion going on in that shot where he's choking the dude.

[Sxottlan]

Looks like the last official pic for now:

http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/920/920323/star-trek-20081015025340385_640w.jpg

I like that Kirk is just wearing black in everything.

There's an alleged screen capture from E.T. with a full shot of the Kelvin, but now I can't find it.

[Sxottlan]

And Spock looks like he has a disturbingly high level of emotion going on in that shot where he's choking the dude.

I'm pretty sure that's Kirk.

[Morris Schæffer]

Urban's actually the only one there who really looks like the original character - and who really looks like he's got the character's physical personality down.

It's odd not seeing him pumped and shirtless.

Could that be why folks here are so impressed with his portrayal of bones? He looks fine to me, but I don't really understand number8's "uncanny."

Kirk and some of the others look insanely young to be given command of the Enterprise.

Still, I'm beyond pumped for the whole thing and pray that Trek will be back for good!

[Raiders]

Kirk and some of the others look insanely young to be given command of the Enterprise.

The only one I have a problem with is Anton Yelchin who isn't even 20 years old yet. The rest seem as I would expect for chronicling the beginning of the crew's days aboard the Enterprise. Pine, at 28, is supposed to be a young, fresh-out-of-the-academy captain. The rest are all 30 years old or beyond.

I actually think the casting for this is pretty damn awesome.

[Wryan]

Kirk and some of the others look insanely young to be given command of the Enterprise.

THIS.

I'm sorry, but this looks so odd. Like these people have no experience whatsoever in doing what they are doing. Like kids playing cowboys and Indians in space. Like a Muppet Babies sketch or something. Someone post the Simpsons picture of the kiddie V comic book. Is that the point of this? To "see how it all began"? Even so, several look like they'll die two feet from the door. Can this really be claimed to be anything more than "teening" it up for younger audiences?

Despite my negativity, I'll see it cause I'm sure Abrams will deliver something fun. And Urban looks great and will probably be awesome cause he's a great actor, even in shit like xXx, or whatever movie like that he was in.

I dunno. I just dunno...

[Grouchy]

Yeah, Spock looks like a virgin teen in a cosplay convention.

[Morris Schæffer]

Is this from the movie:

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/081015/Star-Trek-Movie/uss-kelvin-ncc-0514_l.jpg

[Raiders]

I don't really get it. They don't look that much younger than the original stars when they first started in 1966.

I mean, look at Sulu and Chekov. Even Kirk looks pretty damn young.

http://www.blam1.com/StarTrek/images/TOSCast.jpg

I think for Spock, Nimoy has a bit of a more weathered, older face. I don't really see a problem with Quinto's age.

And remember, this film takes place before this.

[soitgoes...]

Yeah, I really don't have a problem with the ages either. Shatner and Nimoy were 35 when the original series aired. Takei and Koenig were about 30. As Raiders stated, this is supposed to take place before the events of the original series.

[number8]

Um, in this movie they are still students at the Starfleet academy. They're supposed to look like tweens.

[[ETM]]

Is this from the movie:

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/081015/Star-Trek-Movie/uss-kelvin-ncc-0514_l.jpg

Yup. Look at the official photos in the post above - in the exploding ship one you can just make out "KELVIN" underneath the fire.

[Saya]

More plot info (some minor spoilers I guess):

Star Trek’s time-travel plot is set in motion when a Federation starship, the USS Kelvin, is attacked by a vicious Romulan (Eric Bana) desperately seeking one of the film’s heroes. From there, the film then brings Kirk and Spock center stage and tracks the origins of their friendship and how they became officers aboard the Enterprise. In fact, the movie shows how the whole original series crew came together: McCoy (Karl Urban), Uhura (Zoë Saldana), Scotty (Simon Pegg), Sulu (John Cho), and Chekov (Anton Yelchin). The adventure stretches from Earth to Vulcan, and yes, it does find a way to have Nimoy appearing in scenes with at least one of the actors on our cover — and maybe both. The storytelling is newbie-friendly, but it slyly assimilates a wide range of Trek arcana, from doomed Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) to Sulu’s swordsmanship to classic lines like, ”I have been, and always shall be, your friend.” More ambitiously, the movie subversively plays with Trek lore — and those who know it. The opening sequence, for example, is an emotionally wrenching passage that culminates with a mythic climax sure to leave zealots howling ”Heresy!” But revisionism anxiety is the point. ”The movie,” Lindelof says, ”is about the act of changing what you know.”

[Dukefrukem]

http://www.straferight.com/photopost/data/500/spock1.jpg

[Morris Schæffer]

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/081015/Star-Trek-Movie/Star-Trek_l.jpg

[Mysterious Dude]

I like the retro uniforms. I'm surprised at how "right" it looks, to me.

[D_Davis]

Yeah - this actually looks kind of cool.

I hope the plot is good. We need a good SF film.

[Ivan Drago]

I like the look of Urban as Bones and Pine as Kirk, but Spock just looks like Sylar with pointy ears.

Which one is Bones in the picture? As you can tell I'm not a Trekkie so I wouldn't know.

[Qrazy]

Yeah - this actually looks kind of cool.

I hope the plot is good. We need a good SF film.

Sylar will fuck it up.

[number8]

"Are you going to use your Vulcan brain-eating technique now?"
"Eat your brain? Kirk, that's disgusting."

[Watashi]

More photos:

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/trekkirkshuttle.jpg

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/trekspockwindowbridge.jpg

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/trekuhuratalking.jpg

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/empiretrekcover-439x231.jpg

Still hate the look of Sylar as Spock.

[megladon8]

He kind of looks like a Trekkie dressed as Spock for Halloween.

And much too artificial. Nimoy wasn't altered too much to look like Spock - pretty much just the hair and the ears, but much of the time he just had regular hair.

Quinto looks kind of...airbrushed.

[Raiders]

Still hate the look of Sylar as Spock.

He looks fine. I don't think the look could have gotten much closer. As I said before, Nimoy has a very interesting face that would be hard to naturally replicate. Quinto's physical appearance, particularly in the second to last photo, looks quite good to me.

[Morris Schæffer]

That last pic of young Spock does look a bit freaky, but he looks fine in that second one.

[Raiders]

Nimoy wasn't altered too much to look like Spock - pretty much just the hair and the ears, but much of the time he just had regular hair.

Such are the perks of being the one who originates the character. What would they have to change since he was the original unveiling? However he looked was the character's looks. Just change the hair and ears? OK.

Now, we have to alter people's appearances to look like the character, and though I agree the last side-by-side image Quinto's face does look a little airbrushed (it's a studio still after all--not anything in the film), in general he looks as much like the character as I think we can expect.

[Sxottlan]

More photos:

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/trekkirkshuttle.jpg

"Somebody wake up Hicks."


Still hate the look of Sylar as Spock.

Having never seen him in Heroes, this is not an issue for me.

[Qrazy]

"Somebody wake up Hicks."



Having never seen him in Heroes, this is not an issue for me.

Well it's probably too early to tell but based on his role in Heroes and these publicity stills he doesn't seem to have much emotive facial range.

[Morris Schæffer]

If you really can't wait, here are impressions from Paramount employees who've seen the trailer.


The trailer starts by showing a mid-60's Corvette convertible tearing across the country side. After a few seconds we see a long shot that shows a policeman in hot pursuit. Another long shot shows the Vette screaming at full speed toward a steep cliff. A slo-mo shot shows the driver leaping from the car at the last second and tumbling ass over teakettle toward the edge of the cliff itself. The driver is a young boy who looks about 13 or 14. He manages to grab a hold at the last second and hang on as a birds eye shot show the antique Vette fall away into an abyss.

We see the boy get up and dust himself off and the camera cuts away to show a troopers boot come down close-up. The black leather boot is obviously the policeman's who was chasing the car but it looks suspiciously "different." Just different enough to let the audience know this isn't a normal policeman. The shot then cuts to where we can see the policeman standing in front of the boy with his "bike" hovering in mid air a few feet beside him. He shouts at the boy, "Who are you?" or "What's your name?" and the boy shouts back defiantly, "James Tiberius Kirk!"

We're then treated to another long shot showing an older boy riding a hover bike similar to the one the policeman was shown riding a moment or two before thru the country side . We hear a voice over of an older man, presumable Kirk's father saying, "You never found yourself here, you never really fit in." The voice continues as the bike rider pulls up and stops and looks off into the distance, "What you choose to do with you're life is up to you." We see the boy starring at a huge futuristic structure (Star Fleet headquarters?) as the voice over continues, "Maybe you were meant for something different, something....bigger."

It then cuts to scene of an obvious Vulcan woman holding a baby. Again we hear a voice over of the woman saying, "You will always be a part of two worlds." as we cut to a toddler Spock walking in a Vulcan robe. The boy has the Beatles hair cut and pointed ears we associate with Vulcan's throughout Star Trek history. We then see a bunch a quick shots of the crew walking around the bridge of some starship and we see a 20-something Spock angrily pointing at a 20-something Kirk and saying, "I will not be lectured by you!" and an angry Kirk getting in Spocks face saying, "Why don't you do something about it!?!" We then see an enraged Spock trying to stab Kirk with something pointed I couldn't quite make out. It was a quick shot and Kirk is shown using both hands to fend off Spock and hold the object away from his face.

Several quick cuts are shown of space ships firing at one another and people being thrown about the bridge of whatever ship they're suppose to be in. We see crew members running down bright white corridors as another voice over with a Scottish accent says, "I'm having fun!" We then see a close-up of what had to be a young(er) Dr. McCoy with about a weeks worth of black stubble on his face and his arms crossed in that oh so familiar Bones manner saying angrily, "Space isn't suppose to be fun, it's aliens and phasers and death!" We also see a woman in silhouette (Uhura?) pulling off her top and scenes of the crew running to man their battle stations on a bridge.

We then see a bunch of battle shots of space ships being hit by phaser fire and pieces being blown off of them while engine nacels explode before it all ends with the familar Star Fleet logo against a black background and we hear the familar Star Trek opening cords played over it and the release date appears underneath.

I can't vouch for every line of dialog I quoted as being 100% accurate, the cuts were very quick and I only sat through the trailer once but that's the basics. The colors of the corridors and the uniforms was very bright, everything had a "new" appearance. No doubt some of the shots were meant to represent Star Fleet academy training exercises and not real life combat scenes though again, it all went by pretty quick.

[Watashi]

That sounds absolutely terrible. Fuck you Abrams.

[Qrazy]

Uhura pulling off her top lol. Everything about that trailer screams lowest common denominator compromise film.

[number8]

Every trailer needs two seconds of some sort of sex act.

[Mysterious Dude]

Everyone knows James T. Kirk was living on the colony on Tarsus IV when he was 13. This movie had better be consistent with that.

[megladon8]

A couple new posters...

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/2986/spockposter2kd1.th.jpg (http://img529.imageshack.us/my.php?image=spockposter2kd1.j pg) http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/2127/kirkposter2vg5.th.jpg (http://img530.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kirkposter2vg5.jp g)

[Sxottlan]

Here she is:

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/st09trailer1ent.jpg

[Dukefrukem]

Here she is:

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/st09trailer1ent.jpg

I see your enterprise, and I raise you.


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r59/sRdennyCrane/enterprise.jpg

[number8]

Funny, it looks like they hired the BSG folks to do effects.

[Dukefrukem]

You guys have seen this too right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hblRrFoLZ7E

[Sxottlan]

I see your enterprise, and I raise you.


http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r59/sRdennyCrane/enterprise.jpg

The artist who did that works on BSG. He's some kind of wunder-kid or something. I use to see his posts around the Compuserve Trek forums about a decade ago and then he was only 14 or some such age. He was kind of obnoxious. :crazy:

His design is cool, although really bulky. I like the actual new Enterprise . Much sturdier-looking neck there. Do wish there was a little junk in the trunk to balance it out, but that is really my only nitpick.

Of course, the whining has begun on the Trek forums. Conversely, the responses I've seen at ComingSoon are exactly what the producers want to hear: people saying they're not fans but are becoming interested.

Funny. The thread on TrekMovie for this has reached a thousand responses. The first pictures of the crew I think got less than half of that.

[Watashi]

Here's the trailer.... (http://www.trailerspy.com/trailer/1329/Star-Trek-Trailer)

[number8]

Hmmm.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm pretty sure every Trekker is going to hate this film.

[D_Davis]

It looks like they've turned what is often times a thought provoking science fiction franchise into another generic action-based sci-fi space opera.

A car chase? Really? Wow.

[Raiders]

It looks like they've turned what is often times a thought provoking science fiction franchise into another generic action-based sci-fi space opera.

A car chase? Really? Wow.

It's a trailer. That's what they're going to make it look like.

[number8]

What, did we forget Abrams saying he wants to turn Star Trek into Star Wars? This is pretty much what I'd imagined the movie to look like.

[D_Davis]

I really couldn't care either way. Not a big fan of Star Trek. I just imagined the trailer to be different.

[Qrazy]

Yeah I dunno the visuals look good but the tone and general thrust of the picture seems misguided and shallow.

[Watashi]

I'm pretty sure every Trekker is going to hate this film.
It will have its dividers, but the fact that it looks so... un-Trek like is what will make it very popular with non-fans of the series.

[Kurosawa Fan]

It will have its dividers, but the fact that it looks so... un-Trek like is what will make it very popular with non-fans of the series.

I don't know. I could be wrong, but from my own point of view, having no desire to see a Trek film and certainly not being a Trekker, I still have zero desire to see this. So Abrams could end up having a very solid opening weekend, but word of mouth could just kill this thing if Trekkers hate it and most non-fans don't care enough to see it.

[Watashi]

I don't know. I could be wrong, but from my own point of view, having no desire to see a Trek film and certainly not being a Trekker, I still have zero desire to see this. So Abrams could end up having a very solid opening weekend, but word of mouth could just kill this thing if Trekkers hate it and most non-fans don't care enough to see it.
If it makes you feel better, I'm seeing it mainly for teh Pegg.

[number8]

Yeah, people are already indifferent to Star Trek as it is. If the fanbase is turned off by it, all you're going to hear in the trades and blogs is "IT'S SO BAD EVEN TREKKIES HATE IT!"

[megladon8]

I'm surprised the guy at the beginning who asked "What is your name?" wasn't Samuel L. Jackson.

He'll probably be in there somewhere.

But yeah...looks fun, at least.

[Morris Schæffer]

Looks slick and kinda epic and those are qualities some Trek movies couldn't even manage. I remain hopeful. I also admit that the car bit is an odd thing to see in a Trek movie, but they might as well go for broke in the re-imagination department.

[Morris Schæffer]

Odd. the timer for the HD version of the trailer has reached zero on the official site, but has now resetted to 1 day, 1 hour and nine minutes.

edit: and actually increasing!:frustrated:

[Mysterious Dude]

Odd. the timer for the HD version of the trailer has reached zero on the official site, but has now resetted to 1 day, 1 hour and nine minutes.

edit: and actually increasing!:frustrated:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/

Just choose your preference under "trailer 2."

[megladon8]

Apple really screwed up there.

Trailer 2 in 480p is the first teaser, and Trailer 1 in 480p is a trailer for Cloverfield.

[Watashi]

Apple really screwed up there.

Trailer 2 in 480p is the first teaser, and Trailer 1 in 480p is a trailer for Cloverfield.

http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h480p.mov

[Dukefrukem]

very awesome

[megladon8]

http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h480p.mov


I guess it was fixed because I just tried to watch it, and I had to settle for the "large" setting because it was playing the wrong stuff.

[Morris Schæffer]

very awesome

Gosh, it does look rather epic and slick for a Star Trek movie. I really hope this turns out great and makes craploads of $$$$.

But I've a feeling that Bana is going to be really awful.

[Dukefrukem]

Gosh, it does look rather epic and slick for a Star Trek movie. I really hope this turns out great and makes craploads of $$$$.

But I've a feeling that Bana is going to be really awful.

I have faith that it will be pieced together very swiftly by J. J. Out of all the Star Trek movies, I found First Contact to be the most interesting, and the first film to be the worst. However, this new film looks more like an action movie than anything... at least right now it does.

[Morris Schæffer]

I have faith that it will be pieced together very swiftly by J. J. Out of all the Star Trek movies, I found First Contact to be the most interesting, and the first film to be the worst. However, this new film looks more like an action movie than anything... at least right now it does.

I'm totally okay with action movie provided the action, story and villain are first rate. The Wrath of Kahn and First Contact, the two best trek flicks, are choc full of effects and elaborate set pieces and they definitely veer towards action. I think Bana will be crucial. Please be a motherfucker of a villain!

[[ETM]]

Out of all the Star Trek movies, I found First Contact to be the most interesting, and the first film to be the worst.

Interesting. I'd put the DC of the first film among the top three, without preference. You don't seriously prefer five to it, do you?

[Ivan Drago]

Everyone knows James T. Kirk was living on the colony on Tarsus IV when he was 13. This movie had better be consistent with that.

Is that true?

I'm not being sarcastic here - I'm not a Trekkie at all so I wouldn't know.

[[ETM]]

Is that true?

I'm not being sarcastic here - I'm not a Trekkie at all so I wouldn't know.

Yes it is. Ronald D. Moore says the episode where this is established is his favorite of the original series.

[Mysterious Dude]

Is that true?

I'm not being sarcastic here - I'm not a Trekkie at all so I wouldn't know.
It is true (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/2246).

Please understand, though, that I don't actually care. The way I see it, Star Trek can become like Batman or Superman, with numerous actors and filmmakers reinterpreting the original vision, and to hell with continuity.

[megladon8]

I can't help but feel that this is going to be no better than a piece of mediocre fan-fic.

[Dukefrukem]

I'm totally okay with action movie provided the action, story and villain are first rate. The Wrath of Kahn and First Contact, the two best trek flicks, are choc full of effects and elaborate set pieces and they definitely veer towards action. I think Bana will be crucial. Please be a motherfucker of a villain!

Those are my two favorite as well.


;113480']Interesting. I'd put the DC of the first film among the top three, without preference. You don't seriously prefer five to it, do you?

Absolutely, but not by much. The bottom three on my list are close to unwatchable, esp the whale one (Voyage Home) If I had to rank them all,

Star Trek VIII: First Contact
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
Star Trek X: Nemesis
Star Trek VII: Generations
Star Trek IX: Insurrection
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
Star Trek

[Raiders]

Dude, The Voyage Home is awesome.

Then again, you rank the dreadful Search for Spock over my favorite, The Undiscovered Country.

[Dukefrukem]

Dude, The Voyage Home is awesome.

I'm rewatching all 10 movies before the release of the new one. We'll see if I've changed my opinion or not.

[monolith94]

They're building a spaceship which was clearly designed to be built in zero-g on the plains on Earth? Dumb.

[megladon8]

They're building a spaceship which was clearly designed to be built in zero-g on the plains on Earth? Dumb.


I thought this as well.

How the hell do they plan to get that thing into space?

[Qrazy]

Um... you guys do realize that we currently build rocketships (that fly in space) on earth, yes?

[megladon8]

Um... you guys do realize that we currently build rocketships (that fly in space) on earth, yes?


Yes, but they're built aerodynamically so they can take off and actually get into space.

The Enterprise isn't exactly something you can just point up and turn on the thrusters.

[Qrazy]

Yes, but they're built aerodynamically so they can take off and actually get into space.

The Enterprise isn't exactly something you can just point up and turn on the thrusters.

Yeah but if they can fly Klingon ships into and out of earth's atmosphere then why not the Enterprise (depending on the model of the ship)?

[Morris Schæffer]

They're building a spaceship which was clearly designed to be built in zero-g on the plains on Earth? Dumb.

But a great trailer shot nonetheless. Btw, is this Utopia Planitia, the shipyard that was mentioned one or two times throughout TNG series? So it doesn't seem like an original idea by Abrams if that is what you were hinting at.:P

And The Voyage Home is really damn good. Got nominated twice for best score and lensing!

[Raiders]

I believe Kirk and the shipyard we see may be:

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Utopia_Planitia

Is it ever shown in TNG or at some other time in another series that at this point in the future, we can breath on Mars? If not, seems it may be unlikely Kirk is at Utopia Planitia riding on his motorcycle.

[Morris Schæffer]

Heh. Utopia Planitia is actually a real name also, but yeah, if UP is on Mars, then that's not UP in the new Trek trailer.

[Morris Schæffer]

I thought this as well.

How the hell do they plan to get that thing into space?

I did some "digging":

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/Lightstorm/chuck001.jpg

[number8]

Yeah but if they can fly Klingon ships into and out of earth's atmosphere then why not the Enterprise (depending on the model of the ship)?

The Enterprise can't launch/land. That's why they have the transporters, 'member?

[monolith94]

And even if it could, assembling high-tech spaceships in space just makes the most sense anyway.

[[ETM]]

Yeah but if they can fly Klingon ships into and out of earth's atmosphere then why not the Enterprise (depending on the model of the ship)?

The Klingon "Bird of Prey" of the Star Trek universe is much, MUCH smaller and built differently - they were made to take off and land. Federation starships, on the other hand, are massive and built in space, held together by a Structual Integrity Field (one of the fundamental parts of "Treknology").

Now, no one says they can't be built on the ground and take off (they did crash Enterprise D, and the Voyager landed on a planet in one episode, and neither imploded), but it's a stretch.

@Morris: So, what, he's just gonna chuck it into space?:P

EDIT: Just remembered something - even the first Enterprise, the NX-O1, was built in space, as shown in the TV series.

[Raiders]

I can see how Abrams has screwed himself. He's taking on a franchise founded on real, sensible science and having them build a spaceship on land.

Despicable.

[[ETM]]

I can see how Abrams has screwed himself. He's taking on a franchise founded on real, sensible science and having them build a spaceship on land.

Despicable.

Eh, no - he's taking on a franchise founded on people who actually like how, while mumbo-jumbo, the technology depicted is internally consistent and largely falls within previously set boundaries. I'm no Trekkie myself (a big fan, yes) but I can see how people who'd pay to see this might frown upon something that is changed simply to make it "cooler".

[Raiders]

;114000']Eh, no - he's taking on a franchise founded on people who actually like how, while mumbo-jumbo, the technology depicted is internally consistent and largely falls within previously set boundaries. I'm no Trekkie myself (a big fan, yes) but I can see how people who'd pay to see this might frown upon something that is changed simply to make it "cooler".

That makes it "cooler?" Building it on the ground instead of in space? Really?

Considering what we're seeing in this film is new and different, does it really matter? Is internal consistency really what's at stake here? I think of this as I do Casino Royale. It has a creative license to change things around from what we know as a "reboot" of a dead series.

I just can already tell I'm going to want to shoot myself over the "Trekkie backlash" we're heading for.

[Grouchy]

That makes it "cooler?" Building it on the ground instead of in space? Really?

Considering what we're seeing in this film is new and different, does it really matter? Is internal consistency really what's at stake here? I think of this as I do Casino Royale. It has a creative license to change things around from what we know as a "reboot" of a dead series.

I just can already tell I'm going to want to shoot myself over the "Trekkie backlash" we're heading for.
Except Casino Royale was a reboot and this is a prequel.

And I'm not even a trekkie - I've only seen one episode of the original series and one of the movies, and I barely remember anything about them.

[Watashi]

Except Casino Royale was a reboot and this is a prequel.

And I'm not even a trekkie - I've only seen one episode of the original series and one of the movies, and I barely remember anything about them.
I'm pretty sure this is a reboot over a prequel. Abrams said he's going to ignore a lot of the Star Trek canon and start from scratch. Hell, Abrams admitted himself he was never a Star Trek fan and is basically "making Star Trek for Star Wars fans".

[Barty]

In Tomorrow Is Yesterday the Enterprise entered the Earth's Atmosphere and was still able to maneuver and maintain it's lift.

[Raiders]

Except Casino Royale was a reboot and this is a prequel.

And I'm not even a trekkie - I've only seen one episode of the original series and one of the movies, and I barely remember anything about them.

Really? This is definitely a prequel only, not a restart of a new franchise? How do you know there won't be a bunch more of these films, all following based on this first film?

I also thought I read the plot of this film is that Nero, the villain, has altered time. That the reason for this prequel is that essentially all that we know of the Star Fleet has been erased and we're picking up again in the past. That history has changed.

If this is true, it seems to me to classify as a "reboot" and not just a "prequel" since I don't think these characters' paths will ever intersect with the original series.

[Qrazy]

But a great trailer shot nonetheless. Btw, is this Utopia Planitia, the shipyard that was mentioned one or two times throughout TNG series? So it doesn't seem like an original idea by Abrams if that is what you were hinting at.:P

And The Voyage Home is really damn good. Got nominated twice for best score and lensing!

Four Academy Award-nominations actually for Best Cinematography, Best Effects, Best Music and Best Sound. I really don't think it's deserving of a cinematography nod in the slightest personally.

[Qrazy]

The Enterprise can't launch/land. That's why they have the transporters, 'member?

Those models can't but perhaps this is a different model... with thrusters.

[Qrazy]

;113966']The Klingon "Bird of Prey" of the Star Trek universe is much, MUCH smaller and built differently - they were made to take off and land. Federation starships, on the other hand, are massive and built in space, held together by a Structual Integrity Field (one of the fundamental parts of "Treknology").

Now, no one says they can't be built on the ground and take off (they did crash Enterprise D, and the Voyager landed on a planet in one episode, and neither imploded), but it's a stretch.

@Morris: So, what, he's just gonna chuck it into space?:P

EDIT: Just remembered something - even the first Enterprise, the NX-O1, was built in space, as shown in the TV series.

Did the NX-01 come before or after the one being built in this prequel film though?

[Watashi]

Did anyone read about the 20 minutes screened in Los Angeles?

It sounds... terrible.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/11/20/things-i-noticed-while-watching-20-minutes-of-jj-abrams-star-trek/


This is a much funnier film than any of the previous Star Trek movies. In one sequence, Kirk and Old Spock (Leonard Nemoy) enter a federation outpost on a snowy planet, where they find Scotty (Simon Pegg). In addition to Pegg’s trademark humor (Scotty admits that he was exiled to the location after he teleported the Admiral’s pet beagle, who was never seen from again), Scotty is joined by this Star Wars looking alien sidekick who he belittles from time to time. In another sequence, James Kirk is snuck onto the Enterprise under the guise that he is sick. McCoy has injected him with a temporary virus but Kirk has an allergic reaction, causing his hands to swell up like balloons. The scene involves Kirk running around the ship trying to warn the Captain not to warp to Vulcan, waving his huge hands in the air, while Uhura looks at him strange. McCoy gives him a shot to fix the allergic side effect, which results in another side effect where Kirk loses feeling in his mouth, causing him to slur his words, and if I remember correctly, his head also begins to swell. The introduction of such a sight gag was oft putting at first. I’m not saying it wasn’t funny, but it just wasn’t expected, especially in a Trek film. I would compare it to the scene in Transformers where Optimus Prime and crew are hiding outside Sam’s house. This scene was part of a package of scenes screened to press months before the release of the film. Many were critical of the comic direction of the film at the time, but that sequence ended up being a favorite of most of the general public.

[number8]

Those models can't but perhaps this is a different model... with thrusters.

So... they had an Enterprise that can land and launch when the crew were young, and then they don't 5-10 years later?

[number8]

Did anyone read about the 20 minutes screened in Los Angeles?

It sounds... terrible.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/11/20/things-i-noticed-while-watching-20-minutes-of-jj-abrams-star-trek/

Yep.

[[ETM]]

That makes it "cooler?" Building it on the ground instead of in space? Really?

Driving up to the construction site on a bike?
Actual welding with actual sparks flying?
Scaffolding and elevators and workers crawling all over it etc.

They tried the in-space approach in the first film, and people complained the scene was too long.:P

[[ETM]]

Yep.

Terrible is a... mild way of putting it.

[monolith94]

;114051']Driving up to the construction site on a bike?
Actual welding with actual sparks flying?
Scaffolding and elevators and workers crawling all over it etc.

They tried the in-space approach in the first film, and people complained the scene was too long.:P
People complained that it was too long… so they change the location? How about addressing the actual problem, that it was too long???

[Qrazy]

So... they had an Enterprise that can land and launch when the crew were young, and then they don't 5-10 years later?

Yep! Ehh... I didn't say it was reasonable but that seems to be the direction he's going with it no? I mean it's that or how do they get it from earth (wherever it is) into space. I can't see a Galaxy class enterprise landing and taking off but perhaps an earlier model would be able to.

[[ETM]]

People complained that it was too long… so they change the location? How about addressing the actual problem, that it was too long???

I was talking about the first film... in 1979.

And they did cut it significantly for the Director's Cut edition.:)

[Sycophant]

Wow, you guys.

[number8]

Roberto Orci explains!

---

TrekMovie.com: So what is your guys logic for setting it on land?

Roberto Orci: Besides the thematic stuff we discussed, which is to connect it to today and make it clear. Firstly, there is the notion that there is precedent in the novels, etc that components of the ship can be built on Earth and assembled here or there. And the second thing is that the Enterprise is not some flimsy yacht that has to be delicately treated and assembled. The idea that things have to be assembled in space has normally been associated with things that don’t have to be in any kind of pressure situation and don’t ever have to ever enter a gravity well. That is not the case with the Enterprise. The Enterprise actually has to sustain warp, which we know is not actually moving but more a warping of space around it. And we know that its decks essentially simulate Earth gravity and so its not the kind of gravity created by centrifugal force, it is not artificially created by spinning it. It is created by an artificial field and so it is
very natural, instead of having to create a fake field in which you are going to have to calibrate everything, to just do it in the exact gravity well in which you are going to be simulating. And the final thing, in order to properly balance warp nacelles, they must be created in a gravity well.

TrekMovie.com: Where did that come from?

Roberto Orci: That comes from our creative license. No one can tell me that it is not possible that in order to create properly balanced warp nacelles they have to be constructed in a gravity well.

TrekMovie.com: Did the dedication plaque [which has ‘San Francisco, Calif. written right on it] factor into your thinking?

Roberto Orci: Yes, that is part of where some of the canon, literary and other sources sparks from.

[Wryan]

Roberto Orci: That comes from our creative license. No one can tell me that it is not possible that in order to create properly balanced warp nacelles they have to be constructed in a gravity well.

I don't know how to properly emoticon this...

[Duncan]

Guys. Go outside.

[Raiders]

Well, the Protector got super-accelerated coming out of the black hole, and it, like, nailed the atmosphere at Mach 15, which, you guys know, is pretty unstable, obviously, so we're gonna help Laredo guide it on the vox ultra-frequency carrier and use Roman candles for visual confirmation.

[number8]

Guys. Go outside.

I am outside. On my laptop.

[[ETM]]

Guys. Go outside.

Heh.

[Sxottlan]

I love the new trailer. Interesting to see Trek through the prism of a big budget film, actually treated like it's a big deal. It's nice to see after the last several films, which had a distinct straight-to-video feel about them.

The trailer accomplishes what it sets out to do, almost cynically so. It's cut to ribbons except for the opening and some sex appeal is thrown in. However, the score really drives it and I can't stop watching it.

As for any perceived canon violations. My god. I just don't care anymore. Build the Enterprise on the ground. It just doesn't matter to me. Given a choice between new images that create a vast sense of scale as opposed to the same spacedock scene we've had multiple times before, I'll take the former.

My only beef: The apparent inclusion of time travel. I've managed to stay mostly spoiler free, but damn it if that doesn't suck. I'm so sick of time travel. The only way I'd really approve is if time travel is shown in the film for what it is: a childish attempt to avoid consequences.

[Morris Schæffer]

Well said Sxottlan. I too love the idea of the ship being built on land because it's new. It's different. That's the only thing that matters and that shot in the trailer looks all kinds of awesome.

As for the time travel aspect, I guess that is tiresome, but then I think of Yesterday's Enterprise (and The Voyage Home and First Contact) and sing a somewhat different tune.

[megladon8]

I don't care about canon.

I think it's sweet that Abrams wants to do whatever the hell he wants.

My problem with building the Enterprise on land is that it doesn't make any sense.

[Sycophant]

But does it not make sense because of what you already know about Star Trek's canonically prescribed space travel theory? Or because it doesn't make sense to build a ship on land?

As a layman (i.e., non-Trekkie), I see no problem with building the ship on land. I can see why the image might be more striking and relatable.

But then I am pretty much never up for science trumping art when it comes to filmmaking decisions.

[megladon8]

But does it not make sense because of what you already know about Star Trek's canonically prescribed space travel theory? Or because it doesn't make sense to build a ship on land?

As a layman (i.e., non-Trekkie), I see no problem with building the ship on land. I can see why the image might be more striking and relatable.

But then I am pretty much never up for science trumping art when it comes to filmmaking decisions.


Again, I don't care about Star Trek's canon.

The size and shape of the Enterprise make it unfeasible for the ship to be built on land. Unless they have some other super-mega-ultra ship come down and lift it into space, I don't see how it's getting up there.

And while I agree with what you say, "But then I am pretty much never up for science trumping art when it comes to filmmaking decisions", one of the coolest parts about Star Trek is that it's always tackled things fairly realistically. It never treated the subject matter as fantasy, it's more like a military show which happens to take place in the future.

[Sycophant]

I guess, as far as a film is concerned, I just couldn't find any other sort of a thing I could give any less of a damn about.

But then, you're talking about "cool parts" of Star Trek, so we're pretty much speaking a different language anyway. [/gratuitous, mean-spirited dig]

[Qrazy]

Nimoy is in new Trek trailer on aint it cool news.

[Watashi]

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/oldspocktop-440x182.jpg

[Scar]

Ooof.

[Morris Schæffer]

Nimoy is in new Trek trailer on aint it cool news.

Thanks hombre. I'm on it!:)

[Mysterious Dude]

If Star Trek exists in a universe where teleportation is possible, I don't see why it's such a stretch that they could get a spaceship off the ground.

[Amnesiac]

http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/oldspocktop-440x182.jpg

Creepy.

I don't really care about Star Trek, nor have I even seen a single episode or movie, but even I get the sense that they should have kept something this epic a secret. What's the explanation for it anyway? A flash-forward? Time-travel? Or is it just meant to be a trailer easter-egg and not something from the diegesis of the film itself?

[Grouchy]

Creepy.

I don't really care about Star Trek, nor have I even seen a single episode or movie, but even I get the sense that they should have kept something this epic a secret. What's the explanation for it anyway? A flash-forward? Time-travel? Or is it just meant to be a trailer easter-egg and not something from the diegesis of the film itself?
I can't remember where I've read this, but old Spock supposedly is gonna be the narrator of the story.

[Qrazy]

Creepy.

I don't really care about Star Trek, nor have I even seen a single episode or movie, but even I get the sense that they should have kept something this epic a secret. What's the explanation for it anyway? A flash-forward? Time-travel? Or is it just meant to be a trailer easter-egg and not something from the diegesis of the film itself?

It's not much of a secret. He's placed relatively prominently in the cast list. More importantly though I think Trekkers would be glad to see him in the trailer and involved with the film. I would guess his role has something to do with time travel as his billing is Old Spock.

[Amnesiac]

I can't remember where I've read this, but old Spock supposedly is gonna be the narrator of the story.

Ah. Again, totally not a Star Trek fan but I can still recognize that as being pretty neat.


It's not much of a secret. He's placed relatively prominently in the cast list.

Okay, so I guess they ruined the potential for a secret earlier. Whatever, not being a fan, I really can't guess how most fans would react to it. But that's something that would probably have constituted as a wicked surprise.


More importantly though I think Trekkers would be glad to see him in the trailer and involved with the film.

Okay.

[Thirdmango]

Eric Bana's character is a Romulan from the future so there will be time traveling involved.

[Mysterious Dude]

Leonard Nimoy was also the one who said "Space: the final frontier" in the teaser, so that was kind of a hint.

And I heard William Shatner was disappointed that he wasn't asked to be in the new Star Trek film.

[Kurosawa Fan]

And I heard William Shatner was disappointed that he wasn't asked to be in the new Star Trek film.

According to Abrams, there was a small part written for him, but he was publicly adamant that he wasn't going to sign on for a cameo role, so they scratched it. Now he's upset he didn't get a cameo.

[Morris Schæffer]

They're building a spaceship which was clearly designed to be built in zero-g on the plains on Earth? Dumb.

some bits from an interview with Roberto Orci:


Anthony: Does the time travel explain why the Enterprise looks different and why it is being built in Riverside Iowa?

Bob: Yes, and yes.

Well golly! It looks like Ole JJ is smarter than you.:)

[Sxottlan]

The film's 30 second Super Bowl TV spot is here (http://trekmovie.com/2009/01/31/new-star-trek-super-bowl-commercial-online/).

[Ezee E]

The film's 30 second Super Bowl TV spot is here (http://trekmovie.com/2009/01/31/new-star-trek-super-bowl-commercial-online/).
Yeah. This won't stop my record of not seeing anything Star Trek.

[[ETM]]

Yeah. This won't stop my record of not seeing anything Star Trek.

That's like saying "Alien vs. Predator doesn't look like my cup of tea, I'm not gonna see any of the films from either franchise." You're missing out on at least two films and a dozen TV episodes.

[EvilShoe]

The only Star Trek property I've enjoyed so far was the first film.
Sorry, Khan.

[MadMan]

The only Star Trek property I've enjoyed so far was the first film.
Sorry, Khan.What? Wraith of Khan and The Undiscovered Country are both great films, with "Khan" being one of the best sci-fi films ever made.

[Sycophant]

with "Khan" being one of the best sci-fi films ever made.
I'm pretty sure there's at least ten of us on the forum who would dispute this claim.

[Watashi]

I'm pretty sure there's at least ten of us on the forum who would dispute this claim.
Have you seen Wrath of Khan? It really is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made.

[Sycophant]

Have you seen Wrath of Khan? It really is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made.

Yeah, I saw it. I had a lot of problems with it.

Which you chided me for.

[Winston*]

Have you seen Wrath of Khan? It really is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made.

It's okay.

[Ezee E]

;135750']That's like saying "Alien vs. Predator doesn't look like my cup of tea, I'm not gonna see any of the films from either franchise." You're missing out on at least two films and a dozen TV episodes.
dozen TV episodes out of how many?

I think I'll still pass.

[Mysterious Dude]

I don't think any of the Star Trek films are great films, but Star Trek is a great TV series.

[megladon8]

dozen TV episodes out of how many?

I think I'll still pass.


Dumb move on your part, but I won't be losing any sleep over it.

[Ezee E]

Dumb move on your part, but I won't be losing any sleep over it.
Phew.

[Sycophant]

I am going to lose sleep over both the fact that megladon8 is not going to lose sleep over it and the fact that Ezee E is relieved to hear that.

So distressing.

[Ezee E]

I am going to lose sleep over both the fact that megladon8 is not going to lose sleep over it and the fact that Ezee E is relieved to hear that.

So distressing.
I will still remain okay.

[Sycophant]

I will still remain okay.

At this point, E, that is to be expected.

GLARE

[Ezee E]

At this point, E, that is to be expected.

GLARE
Phew!

[[ETM]]

dozen TV episodes out of how many?

I said "at least". And the dozen I speak of are probably better than most movies. Not just Trek movies, either.

But yeah, whatever.

[Dukefrukem]

what's your hate for Star Trek E?

[Sycophant]

I don't think it's hate. I think it's ambivalence.

[[ETM]]

I don't think it's hate. I think it's ambivalence.

Yeah. I'm a big fan, but I can certainly see how one can be completely uninterested in all of it. I just tend to react when people point out that fact.

[Sxottlan]

A third trailer for Star Trek will be in front of Watchmen.

[Sycophant]

I saw a trailer for this movie today. It looks like Star Trek from the guy who brought me Alias and the trailer for M:I-3 and my understanding of what Lost is.

[D_Davis]

First Contact is better than Wrath of Khan.

First Contact is a fantastic SF film.

[megladon8]

First Contact is better than Wrath of Khan.

No.



First Contact is a fantastic SF film.

Yes.

[MadMan]

I'm interested in seeing the prequel, even though I'm not really a big fan of Star Trek. I've liked all of the movies I've seen out of the series so far, with the exception of Insurrection, which funny enough I saw in theaters when it came out. I've viewed just one Next Gen movie, and II-IV and VI from the original series.

And hey I'm watching IV on TV right now. Good stuff, although I don't think as highly of it as some of the fanbase does.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I saw a trailer for this movie today. It looks like Star Trek from the guy who brought me Alias and the trailer for M:I-3 and my understanding of what Lost is.

You watch your mouth. J. J. Abrams is one of the greatest film directors alive today. I read it in EW.

[Qrazy]

New trailer:

http://treksinscifi.com/podcast_notes/?p=842

I really like the music.

[Kurosawa Fan]

That was a really great trailer. I'm still probably not seeing it, but that was pretty damn good.

[Morris Schæffer]

May can't come soon enough!

[Watashi]

Fanastic trailer.

Giacchino's score is amazing.

[Scar]

That was a really great trailer. I'm still probably not seeing it, but that was pretty damn good.

It just might work....

I'll toss it in my blockbuster queue.

[Morris Schæffer]

Fanastic trailer.

Giacchino's score is amazing.

So that's definitely from the original score? Sounds great!

[Barty]

New trailer:

http://treksinscifi.com/podcast_notes/?p=842

I really like the music.

Yeah, the the trailer is extremely well put together, I'm not sold that it's going to do justice to Star Trek, but it looks like it could be very good as a stand alone movie.

And, yeah, the music roxxors my boxers.

[megladon8]

There was a point in the score around the 00:30 mark that sounded like it was channeling the two-note Batman theme by Zimmer and Howard.

[Qrazy]

I just get this image of Abrams in my head... 'There was no lens flare in that shot! Do another take!'

[Sxottlan]

Caught only half of it in the theatres, but it was still absolutely amazing.

The final shot was just crazy. I wasn't even trying to find a seat at that point. I just stood in the aisle transfixed.

Would it kill the theatre to have more than one person slooowly working at the concession stand?

[number8]

Would it kill the theatre to have more than one person slooowly working at the concession stand?

This one theater here used to have a concession cart that would wheel into the screening rooms and sell shit while the bullshit movie trivias and commercials are playing. It was pretty sweet.

[Watashi]

So yeah, it's not Giacchino's score in the trailer.

It's still probably my favorite trailer this year.

[MadMan]

Pretty sweet trailer, but then all of the trailers for this film have been pretty good. I have no idea if this will actually turn out to be any good, but I will be seeing it in theaters. Despite my lack of Star Trek fanboyism, I've still committed myself to seeing the entire series.

[Sxottlan]

Yeah, that's sucks that that's not the film's music. I had hoped by now any new trailer would have the film's score in it.

[Morris Schæffer]

There's music from Giacchino on the official site.

http://www.startrekmovie.com/

Just skip the trailer and enter the main site.

[number8]

I don't know why, but I always notice certain sections in his scores that remind me of LOST.

[Wryan]

When Pine says, "Yeah we do..." he sounds like Matthew McConaughey. I expect him to continue with, "Alright, alright, alright..."

And Bana looks/sounds awful.

Looks like fun though.

[Qrazy]

When Pine says, "Yeah we do..." he sounds like Matthew McConaughey. I expect him to continue with, "Alright, alright, alright..."

And Bana looks/sounds awful.

Looks like fun though.

But that was another life... haha I'm kind of digging on it.

[Morris Schæffer]

Don't know if this is new info for you all, but here are the guys responsible for the trailer music in trailers #2 and #3:

http://www.twostepsfromhell.com/index-home.php

And a 3 MB download for the trailer music from the last trailer:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/608mw0

[MadMan]

I actually didn't recognize Bana under that makeup the first time I saw the trailer. I think he'll make for a cool villain, at least hopefully anyways.

[Sxottlan]

New TV spot (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/startreknews.php?id=53901).

It's like they're trying to make Bana look like Tom Cruise.

Still looking good. Premiere is in Sydney in about two weeks, but I don't know if any Australian press is attending.

[Sxottlan]

Wait, you're worried about a Pixar movie performing at the BO? Or you're concerned that it'll be a formidable obstacle for Trek XI? What's opening in May before Trek XI? It would be nice if it was the first blockbuster of the season. Like Iron Man in other words.

I was genuinely worried about Wolverine opening before Trek, but five weeks out and I'm just not getting any buzz one way or another about it. It should still clean up, but a film going after one sub-sect of a comicbook's fanbase may not have widespread appeal.

Whereas I'm often reading at places like ComingSoon.net that people say they're not Trekkers, but they'll check out Star Trek anyway. That's huge.

The month looks ridiculously stacked now. I'll be seeing something every week, but Angels & Demons doesn't look to be aimed at the same audience being sought for Trek. So the two may not do any damage to each other.

[Morris Schæffer]

I
Whereas I'm often reading at places like ComingSoon.net that people say they're not Trekkers, but they'll check out Star Trek anyway. That's huge.

Indeed, over at RT there seems to be a feeling that even non-trekkies are reasonably impressed by the batch of trailers. Fingers Crossed. Star Trek, like James Bond, should never die.

[Sxottlan]

Ridiculously good international poster:

http://trekmovie.com/images/st09/sto09poster_uk3_t.jpg

[Grouchy]

The top font reminds me of The X-Files. As does the whole poster, in fact.

[[ETM]]

The top font reminds me of The X-Files. As does the whole poster, in fact.

That poster was the best part of the X-files movie for me so I hope the trend does not continue.

[number8]

Is Stat Trek going to anger the great Armond?

http://trekmovie.com/2009/03/27/paramount-market-to-hipster-crowd-with-star-trek-photobooths-and-star-trek-dance-parties/

[Sxottlan]

Variety reporting that Paramount is already moving ahead on a sequel (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118001885.html?categoryid=1 3&cs=1).

Not greenlighted yet though.

[eternity]

New TV spot (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/startreknews.php?id=53901).

It's like they're trying to make Bana look like Tom Cruise.

Still looking good. Premiere is in Sydney in about two weeks, but I don't know if any Australian press is attending.

Someone told me yesterday that Tom Cruise was in Star Trek and I had no fucking clue what they were talking about.

[Sxottlan]

Turns out the movie had a secret premiere Monday night in Austin, Texas ahead of its world premiere in Sydney. A screening of The Wrath of Khan turned out to be a rouse to show the whole new film.

Reaction on Twitter is starting to crop up here (http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/04/06/early-twitter-buzz-star-trek-has-secret-premiere-in-austin-texas/).