Star Trek Teaser Trailer Review & VIDEO January 18, 2008
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Review, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackbackAnd so it begins. Up until today all this talk about a new Star Trek movie was just that — talk. But today, in theaters around the world, moviegoers seeing the ever-so-hyped Cloverfield were treated to the teaser trailer for Star Trek. This is getting real.
The Future Begins
Firstly the previously reported description of the Star Trek teaser is pretty much accurate. The trailer starts with a welder who could be from any time and slowly reveals that he and swarm of other workers are building the USS Enterprise in a dockyard somewhere on Earth. Ominous musical cues punctuate flashes between black, images of workers and glimpses of the ship in a dramatic fashion. Although shot in a highly stylized manner, the trailer depicts a very real…very human…kind of world of hard hats, sparks, grease and just guys getting the job done. Interjected into this world we hear the sounds of JFK and NASA during the heyday of the space race followed by the slogan “THE FUTURE BEGINS”– which appears to be the message of the trailer.
Everything old is new again
This is followed by Nimoy’s “space the final frontier” voice over, the reveal of the USS Enterprise saucer, the unmistakable Alexander Courage TOS sting, and the TOS transporter sound effect beaming in a title card stating “UNDER CONSTRUCTION,” the new TOS-style logo, and credits. These are all nice touches and should bring a tear to the eye of any Trekkie. By the time the “USS ENTERPRISE” reveal hit the screen the audience in the theater I attended started to applaud…a welcome sign for a bunch of young Culver City hipsters there to see the first midnight showing of Cloverfield. That being said, I wonder if the lack of the title “Star Trek” and the “construction” thing may be a bit too clever. The film makers always say they want to bring in the general audiences and it is not clear Cloverfield-like mysteriousness will work when you are re-branding something.
The ship?…out of danger?
As for the look of the ship at first glance it seems much larger than what we are used to and perhaps that is the point. From what can be seen of the design it clearly retains the general shape of the TOS Enterprise, but we see far more TMP style detailing and the proportions seem different…especially the engine nacelles which are ginormous. The design seems to fall somewhere in the middle between ‘exact copy’ and ‘radical redesign,’ possibly closer to the original than most might have expected. I have never been a purist and so for what I can see so far it looks pretty good. But I sure want to see what the whole thing looks like.
Land Ho
As for the Enterprise being constructed on Earth, this seems to strangely be stirring up quite a bit of controversy. Of course the plaque on the bridge of the USS Enterprise has the words ‘USS ENTERPRISE’ and ‘San Francisco, Calif.’ on it…and last time I checked, San Francisco is firmly attached to the planet. If you want to go further it was established in TNG that the Enterprise D was also at least partly constructed on the ground (in that case the Utopia Planetia on Mars). Star Trek The Motion Picture set up the notion of the Enterprise being refit in space and so many might assume that it was also entirely built there, but that is really just ‘fanon.’ After speaking to a number of canon experts, all seem to agree that constructing the ship (at least partly) on land is well within Star Trek canon. Plus an argument can be made that it makes more sense to build a ship on land as it is a much less hostile environment. Oh…. and…it’s just a TV show.
This is big
Bottom line is that the teaser trailer delivers exactly what it had to do. It sends the message that we today are linked to Gene Roddenberry’s future with the USS Enterprise and her crew. It shows that Star Trek is not a fantasy, not from a galaxy far far away…it is real and it is us. The trailer also creates a new sense of majesty and epic style for the franchise that has not been seen since the time of Star Trek The Motion Picture. The message here to the general film audience is, like this ship depicted, Trek is big…really big…and JJ Abrams is constructing it right now.
Money shot of the new teaser trailer (click to enlarge)
Related: TrekMovie.com Review of Cloverfield
VIDEO UPDATE: And here it is
The trailer is available now on YouTube in an unofficial form, but it really really does not do the trailer justice. You cannot see many of the details and it really should be seen on the big screen for your first time. So go to Cloverfield and then come back and watch it to review. I also think that Paramount should put this thing up today. When the trailer for Star Wars Episode III came out it was up at starwars.com the same day.
…if it dissapears from YouTube, it can also be found at our German friends at TrekNews.de
UPDATE 2: Trek Writer Roberto Orci’s Q&A On Trailer
VOTE: Did you like the trailer?
So did you like the new Star Trek teaser or do you feel that your childhood needs a hug? Vote in our latest poll (right sidebar).
Comments»
is it monday yet?
IT WAS TOO BUILT IN SPACE!! YOU MAKE ME SO ANGRY!! I’M QUIVERING IN RAGE RIGHT NOW!!
awesome-ness defined in two words; Star Trek!
4th!
Hello again, Enterprise. My girl sure looks familiar…
It’s a wonderful teaser. The film itself may pale by comparison.
Like I said in the previous thread. Can’t they attach additional Nacelle plating around the engines to…
Wait a minute. It’s Sci-Fi. I get it now.
This will be soooo awesome onscreen. Please release this a month early!!!! November 25th sounds better to me!
Status = fascinated.
Can’t wait.
Respect Canon!!!
Why didn’t JJ Abrams just create another TNG movie? Tha way, canon will not be altered.
I loved the teaser. Epic and majestic.
#8, TNG does not deserve another movie. This is Star Trek’s time to shine.
This was posted in the preview image thread too, but it bears repeating.
http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/heavycruiser_enterprise_up1.jpg
The Enterprise’s nacelles were *always* that big - we’re just not used to seeing them from such a *dead on* front view.
Will someone please post the teaser before Monday!!!!?
Let me guess….because the Enterprise wasn’t built in space, you guys are gonna start screaming, “J.J. ABRAMS RAPED MY CHILDHOOD!” We never saw the Enterprise being built in the first place, and the plaque does say San Fransisco on it, so to those who are upset about this…get over it.
“Why didn’t JJ Abrams just create another TNG movie?”
Because he didn’t want to. End of story
#10, #13
Star Trek canon has been destroyed by this new movie! They should just officially say that this movie is a TOTAL REBOOT!
Star Trek canon was destroyed when Klingons got ridges, Romulans got headbumps, Khan recognized Chekhov, Kirstie Allie became Robin Curtis, etc. We are all still alive!
#15
“Canon” is what Paramount say it is “canon”.
The Animated Series destroyed the canon by Giving Spock’s mother Amanda her last name; Grayson. Wrath of Khan destroyed canon by linking Khan with Chekov. This is no reboot, it’s a revival.
#16
But the Klingons’ ridges were explained in ENT!
#15
Totally agree, Section 31.
I would love to se new TNG film, or, even better, DS9 movie set after Nemesis. Star Trek: Return of the Emissary. :)
#20 Finally! Someone agrees with me!
#18
IT’S A REBOOT!
NOT A REVIVAL!
So I guess Abrams raped your childhood. Get over it.
#23 Where’e the Law & Order: Special Victims Unit when I need it?
This new movie will have a giant scope, I agree with the producer this isn’t your daddy’s Star Trek. No way. This is the big time now baby.
section 31 you are spamming and trolling….so a warning
comments to http://trekmovie.com/about/feedback
#19
When Klingon ridges appeared, back in the 70s, no explanation was intended. They were a deliberate canon violation, and we all survived. As Roddenberry said, the ridges were intended to be in TOS too ;-)
Somebody REBOOT you out of this thread before you spam it to death.
Me, I’m happy the nacelles are round. ‘Nuff said.
(I was referring to #22, BTW… kind of irrelevant now, after post #26)
Anthony, you are a saint to include the very important words…
“Oh…. and…it’s just a TV show.”
It’s one we all love, but it can stand a little tweaking.
Looking forward to seeing the teaser!
20 & 21.. i agree too. my fav series.
great preview. too short, but i’m glad that almost a year before the release that so much effort is already going into it. obviously being taken very seriously by all involved. and i love the nacelles! beautiful, sleek and sexy! the scale of this thing is almost overwhelming.
I will be keeping an eye on YouTube all weekend!
The ship is under construction in this image for gods sake. I’m sure they’ll add the beloved narcellcaps eventualy
I cannot wait for the Quicktime Hi-res version.
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see a TNG film as well, but they had their chance and lost it and this film is what we need to get Star Trek going again. Not just hope for TOS, but all the other series in the franchise as well. Called a reboot if you will, but I have my trust in Abrams, Lindelof and Orci.
Great review, Anthony, and a good summary of the trailer, as well. And I agree, there’s nothing in canon that says the ship couldn’t have been built on Earth… although it does say, in canon, that the bloody thing was built in San Francisco.
It was Abrams’ & Co’s intention to get Trekkie’s mouths watering. They certainly succeeded in my case, and I’m sure they will succeed with most everyone else.
Is it Christmas yet? :-D
Berman was too small a mind for Trek in the first place, we need people in charge who think BIG.
Nacelles.. I like ‘em big and round.
New bumper sticker, anyone?
Everything old is new again,,,
^
Man, how many times have I heard that one…
I never saw the preview yet (I will on Monday, if it goes up by that time) but that pic is more than enough for our first taste of the movie. I am so excited. Good review, Anthony. Keep up the good work.
#35 “I would love to see a TNG film as well, but they had their chance and lost it”
The sad truth. Nemesis has been the final humiliation: I had to travel in another town to see it because no theather of my neighborhood was showing it, and it stayed for a week only. Not a single friend of mine was aware of its existence and not since ST V I felt that Trek was at its lowest…
#11. Nuallain
“http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/heavycruiser_enterprise_up1.jpg
The Enterprise’s nacelles were *always* that big - we’re just not used to seeing them from such a *dead on* front view.”
This diagram that is always posted here as an explanation is WRONG. Just look at the font of the registry… :P
So whoever made that diagram… it is not official.
Can’t wait to see the trailer. Sounds awesome to me!
I can’t wait to go see Cloverfield when it comes out in the UK. Am sure the studio knows Cloverfield will be a huge hit because of this trailer
Please.
The people making the movie is bored to say that the movie respects canon storywise but redesigns the look of everything to make it more realistic.
The movie will be a canon precuel storywise but will redesign the looks. Its a fact and we have been warned several times.
Theres no point in getting surprised now if the lettering is a bit longer or if the plates aren’t painted white.
(Oh, and I insist, the Enterprise does have flames in TOS. On the sides of the lower body, following the yellow Enterprise logo, there are red lines which ARE flames. XDDD flames are canon)
The apparent “bumps” on the sides of the nacells look a bit like a visual efect produced by the line of lights it has there (placed by the constructing crew) and I’m sure the “fans” will be covered and explain the “blinking lights” inside them in TOS.
And if the plate says San Francisco, then Canon says it was built on the ground. It may not be logical, but it is obviously canon. XDD
the trailer evidently acomplishes its mission. OOOoooohhhh how much we want to see those uniforms.
I want to see the uniforms, but also the props!!!
I also like the Enterprise as it looks in that picture. Glad it wasn’t just a CGI version of the TOS Enterprise
I’m seeing Cloverfield today for the sole purpose of viewing the trailer…. it sounds fantastic. I am tremendously optimistic at the reverence, respect, and joy with which Abrams and company is approaching this film.
#2 #8 #15 #20
Shut up and go away. TOS, the films, and the subsequent series’ violated your fanboy fantasy canon so many times, that you should be insane and incoherent by now (wait - you are!).
From what we can see so far in casting, set reports, and the trailer; Abrams is demonstrating an incredible respect for the franchise, the fans, and canon.
THANK YOU JJ !
Come on haters, let the hype flow through you.
#42 - All I’ll say is that if it’s a mistake,it’s one an awful lot of people have made:
http://www.starshipmodeler.com/trek/ss_classic_ent.htm
http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/3d-wips/32873-uss-defiant-low-poly-game-model.html
http://www.startreksite.com/diagrams/constitution_front.jpg
I strongly feel that “Trekmovie-ers” (general population, not you Anthony :) ) are mostly Original seires fans, which have a little apreciation to TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. That makes me very saad
beacuse I, and whole bunch of people like all Star Trek series. Namely, every Star trek series is worthy an appreciation and admire. Every of them is mirror of its time (TOS - 60es, TNG - 80es, VOY and DS9 - 90es, and ENT - first years of 21.st century).
Like the Klingon ridges, someone will figure out how to explain the gigantic nacelles change to the smaller ones seen in TOS. The Star Trek continuity time line is flawed as it is–and yet, someone manages to logically explain everything.
I’m looking forward to seeing how this movie turns out.
50 - well, there the fonts are correct. except the second link, of course.
Can’t wait!
Continuing suggestions for Roberto Orci’s tell-all after-the-fact book:
Star Trek Too: The Wrath of Fan
Star Trek: The Search for Intelligent Fandom and Finding None at AICN
Star Trek: The Voyage As Far Away from You People As Possible
Star Trek: The FANal Lobotomy
Star Trek: The Undiscovered FANwankery
– teaser sounds great, thanks Anthony for the review
#51. Jacques
You are not alone. I love them all. I love Enterprise, TNG, DS9, Voyager and TAS. Each one has things that make me enjoy a lot.
TOS is, for some reason, the one of which I can watch the episodes more times in the shortest time, but all of them I enjoy preety much. (and I have allways loved when they retro-feed, so I REALLY enjoy Enterprise which has got a lot of retro-feeding)
By the way, as this movie will also be mostly retro-feeding, I’m sure I’ll love it a lot
For christ sake all you “why is it being built on earth”-ers. It’s just a god damn teaser trailer! The construction of the Enterprise is a metaphor for the construction of the film. Do you think this is actual scene cut form the film that is almost a year away from completion? I’ll bet you a million quatloos that no scene like this makes it into the final cut. I’m surprised they didn’t replace the Enterprise inscription and call numbers on the saucer section with the film’s title card.
I feel like I am in a time warp and it’s 1987 again. There is a significant portion of Trek fandom trashing and flaming, only instead of this being in advance of the TNG premiere, its about the new movie. At the time I decided to watch TNG and give it a chance even though I was expecting to hate it. I was wrong.
What is so blasted important about white paint or nacelle size or flames? Try to remember that much of what Roddenberry gave us was filtered through the prism of a restrictive budget (like the lack of Klingon ridges). Just because it’s what we got doesn’t mean it was what he wanted.
I expect to love this one but in any case it deserves a chance. For crying out loud, people, do what Shatner told you to do–get a life!
Wow–woke up too crabby on a Friday morning. Bailiff–Valium!
The Earth thing need not be so outlandish… what if the parts were assembled seperately in a dry dock, and the entire dry dock were a ship capable of lifting the unfinished E into orbit for final assembly…
good review!
she sure is a beauty!! the first time i saw the picture of The Enterprise it literally gave me goosebumps!
i can’t wait to see the teaser trailer on monday!
greetings from manila, philippines…
#2, # 8, #15 and anyone else…
LISTEN… and for gosh sakes go out and read:
” THE MAKING OF STAR TREK” by gene Roddenberry and Stephen whitfield
it clearly states that the Enterprise was built ON EARTH and assembled in SPACE.
as to the STAR TREK TECH MANUAL and the ENTERPRISE BLUE PRINTS by Franz Joseph as AUTHORIZED by PARAMOUNT and Gene Roddenberry.
how clearler can it be than that???
The decision to focus these early “brand refreshing” teasers and such on linking the ST universe to ours more clearly — clearly enough for even the “nonbelievers” to get it is the PURE GENIUS that the current team is bringing to this effort, and I think it will work miracles. By focusing there, they are highlighting the aspect of ST that differentiates it from other fantasy universes — making it relevant to a world steeped in inescapable realities. Think about it… Isn’t one of the biggest complaints you hear from non-fans something like “but it’s just a fantasy! It’s not real!” This fights against that attitude. I have a feeling it will win a lot of people over.
62 konar: you’re right… think of ST4 - the most successful film was also set in the real world (our time and our most beautiful city).
I like the steam, the cranes, nuts, bolts, welding machines and sweat involved in constructing the Enterprise instead of unimaginative beams, transporters and glowing devices. The whole thing is more… human. And Star Trek is about humanity.
It seems the key relationship of Star Trek seems to be back. That between a crew and their ship.
Enterprise and Voyager lost that. We can talk about character axis all we want, but Star Trek is about human beings entrusting everything in their small vessel to travel the great and infinite unkown. “Hornblower in space” Roddenberry would say, because he thought of the bravery of navigating the wild and unexplored seas using only a wooden vessel for protection. The love for the ship must be cultivated as it fight to keep its crew alive. She’s a character.
I greatly applaud Abrams/Orci and Kurtzman for the way in which they are treating the old girl, taking the time to re-introduce her. Prior to this, the best man/ship relationship in recent time had come outsideTrek with Mal Reynolds and Serenity; and I am glad to see it back in Trek.
I mean, for all the faults of TMP, is there a Trekkie alive that doesn’t love the look on Kirk’s face when he gazes at the re-fit Enterprise for the first time?
In the words of the Great Shat to those people who are angry about the whole “on earth - in orbit”-canon violation crap..
“Get a life”
… oh, and btw, be happy that there WILL BE a new ST movie. Who would have thought that after that suckfest Nemesis…
Everything about this film just keeps getting better. Between the shots of the Enterprise and the photos of the cast at the Cloverfield premiere, I can’t express my enthusiasm for this film and what J.J. and his team have done.
Canon is also being destroyed by the passage of time: No Eugenics War, or Botany Bay in 1996, no Voyager VI, etc. This makes TMP and TWOK non-canon, if you wanna get technical.
Excellent review Anthony! Glad to hear the teaser is succeeding at making the link between today and the future. Gives me goosebumps to read that the audience applauded.
Everyone else, please take a moment to relay audience reaction when you get the opportunity to see the teaser.
May the winds be at our back!
I reckon the more traditional engine nacelles are actual under the massive engines you see in the image.
I expect the ship needs these to break out of earths orbit and once this has been done they will be dispensed and you’ll have the more familiar engine nacelles?
You can see within the engines and see the shape of the old engines, take a look and let me know what you trekkers think.
A shame Garth on Dark Horizons seems so down on the trailer. According to him, the audence was pretty derisive of it! It’s that derision the teasers and trailers are going to have to change to enthusiasm!
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080116f.php
My two cents for what it’s worth and I hope I’m correct. As previously posted “The Making of Star Trek” book by Whitfield & Roddenberry, does state on page 171 that components were built on earth and assembled in orbit. I am hoping that the saucer is one hell of a big component that will be transported to orbital space dock by that winged nacelle piece in the photo. I hope this is accurate if it is and it turns out to be a spoiler, sorry. (This would explain the winged design that was spotted and previously commented on too).
It certainly will be better than what the Lost in Space movie (Revival or whatever), did. They had the movie Jupiter 2 essentially break out of what looked like the original design of the Jupiter 2. I hate to have to make this comparison, don’t want to offend anyone by mentioning LIS in the same space as Star Trek.
I am in disbelief about all the winging about canon. Just enjoy the fact they are reving a franchise they was second away from its death rattle. Enjoy it. They obviously honored the original when looking at the styling of the new ship. Who cares whether it was built on Earth or not. All winging about that - what about the thousands of other continuity errors that appear throughout the series??????? I hated Voyager, but of the few I did watch I noticed Tuvok wearing a pair of Jordan’s in a training exercise or sum such thing. Seriously, calm down and just enjoy it.
Canon, shmanon. I am SO digging where these guys are going with this movie right now.
#51
Hear Hear!
Not official, but it’s here:
http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_seyret&Itemid=227&task=videodirectlink&id=529
I haven’t seen the trailer yet, but I just can’t wait! I think Abrams is doing a great job, and I feel like we Trek fans (and even the “nay sayers”) are going to owe him a debt of gratitude when it’s all said and done.
Post 68. AJ - “Canon is also being destroyed etc…”
Although I have never read them, I am told there where some books explaining how the Eugenics War fitted into History as we know it. Khan meets some other TOS characters in them.
ENT mentions the Eugenics War in a few episodes with a few lines here and there. I know it’s not necessary to mention Eugenics War in this movie but perhaps for the fans they will mention it in a sentence or two. A non Fan can just ignore it and a fan will love that they have referenced it.
51 and 75
With this movie being about the TOS characters, inevitably a lot of TOS fans will be here! Plus a lot of TOS fans (like me) were disaffected by the later Treks and have been brought back by the new film.
I don’t ***hate*** TNG and its successors, but they just don’t feel like Star Trek to me! They just don’t have the passion and melodrama (or psychadelic music) that I loved in TOS. In fact, I really dilike having to refer to Star Trek as TOS it really should just be referred to as Star Trek.
teaser sounds ace, cant wait for a camcorder leak on ‘you tube’
has anyone actually given some thought to what will happen if this film sucks?
Star Trek would probably die… although Star Trek: Titan may be made into a series… I WANT THIS SO BAD (not the trek dying part, the TITAN part!!)
anyway… roll on Christmas 08
Some body better call the waaaaambulance for you canon sooks. I have been a fan of this all my life and I couldn’t care less whether the Enterprise was built on Eart on in space.
the trailer has arrived:
http://www.treknews.de/treknews/newspro-treknews/static/120066120558944.php
woot :)
Awesome. Can’t wait to see the lady fly.
The REAL trailer:
http://www.treknews.de/treknews/newspro-treknews/static/120066120558944.php
:-)
For the second day in a row, my head exploded.
Great review, Anthony!
I am looking forward to watching it tonight!
Okay… I have goose bumps!! Thanks #76!
When can we see this teaser in Germany?????
*totally exited by now*
Hmmm… Looks to dark to be real TREK.
I don’t get it.
Roddenberry only invented transporters because they couldn’t afford to show the ship land each week. It became a very good compromise.
Even Voyager landed.
So. This Enterprise will literally BLAST OFF!!!
#89 Remember how in Generations the E-D suddenly got all dark. Especially the Bridge and Ten Forward?
Thank you 82
*klick play and eeeeeeeek*
I love the Internet - and love this teaser.
My Childhood was raped.
But it was totally asking for it from the way it dressed.
I’m surprised that no-one has commented on the theme of the trailer. The feeling. The Tone.
Which I don’t really like, myself. It has lost the unique pulp sci-fi feel of TOS and drawn it more into the nBSG world of ‘gritty’ and ‘welded’. There is little to no retro feel about the tone of the teaser. It’s saying that the 23rd century is as harsh and as cold as the 21st century, which is not the message Star Trek is supposed to give.
Oh, and yes, this only further cements my view that the film is not set within the original continuity. The ship is just too different, proportions-wise, to be an earlier stage in the NCC-1701’s design lineage.
The nacelles are bigger than original. I wonder if I can get used to it. Also, in Stephen Whitfield’s book, “The Making of Star Trek,” which was written contemporaneously with TOS, the Enterprise was constructed in space. Maybe it can be finished there? Or maybe the movie won’t even show any of this construction stuff and it is exclusively for teaser trailer. I don’t see how the movie would devote time to this anyway. It adds nothing to the story of how Kirk got command of the Enterprise which appears to be the focus of the film at this stage of the rumors. Hopefully after the writer’s strike they can work the Shat in post-production.
#84
I have to resist the temptation to watch it. At first glance it seems the real trailer but I have to find the willpower to wait until monday, for good quality images and sound.
Leonard Nimoy’s (not Zachary Quinto’s) voice
Familiar words from the television show
Utilizing the theme from the show
Utilizing the logo from the show
Utilizing the familiar beaming sound effects
Utilizing a pretty respectful version of the Enterprise
How does this not respect the Kirk era Star Trek?
Geekout Moment!
#95
Please check the Stephen Whitefield text again, page 171. The ship was built on Earth, assembled in space. Please see the plaque from the Enterprise which clearly states “San Francisco, CALIF.”
#97
You’re so right!
my first impression : it’s terminator + nBSG + trek…
this is a very bold move…but i think a right one
Well it proves one thing:
Abrams does not have the slightest idea what TREK is about!
- The Enterprise is built on Earth? Even the NX-01 was build in space… 100 years prior to this one!
- Humans are building the ship??? HUMANS? I mean, they are what… 300 years ahead of us, and even today ships, planes, cars etc. are built more by machines than by men, and then this??? I had to laugh so hard, when I have seen this one?
It is a worst case scenario… the new look of the Enterprise won’t help it either, it only offends long time fans, who came to appreciate and love the original look…
Sorry JJ… this one is a loss.
#90 Doesn’t Scotty invent the Transporter in the new movie? ;)
oh my ….. I just had a trekgasm!
Well done
mada101 (94)
Please please PLEASE give it a rest! I am so sick of whingers on this site bleating on about irrelevancies!
It’s a trailer, for crying out loud! How do you think they put the ship together: with modelling cement?! DS9 showed guys with welding torches in the opening titles, so why shouldn’t TOS?
This is a movie about the characters from TOS and the first six movies, not a slavish copy of the show itself! By your rationale, TMP to TUC must be out of your and your canon-obsessed friends’ continuity too, given the many changes to the technology and non-human make-up!
It’s a sad sign about how narrow-minded a section of the Trek fanbase has become that the change in Klingon make-up even required explanation.
Are you guys so pathetically small-minded that you just can’t get it into your thick skulls that a 2008 movie on BIG cinema screens is going to do its own thing?
You should be grateful to get any kind of Trek movie, especially one where the makers are so keen to try to respect what has gone before! If you want a carbon copy of TOS, watch New Voyages, but you and the likes of your buddy Section 31 have to stop trying to spoil everyone else’s fun. You’re clearly the kind of people who walk into lively parties and turn off the music!
And, just as a heads up to you people who are obsessed with this canon garbage . . . you few might worship this non-existent deity of your faux Trek ‘religion’ but no one else cares. Not one bit! There are so many more interesting things out there that require attention! It’s people like you lot that get the rest of us sci-fi fans all the abuse we get. That’s right: sci-fi as a genre is mocked because of people like you!
Get a life, grow up, chill out and accept it’s only a movie!!!
Phew! I know, I know, but someone has to say it!!
I love it!!!
Wooooohooooooooo!!!!!
Yehaaa!!!!!!!
How do they get that saucer section into orbit?
#97. John, Mary Jo, and Nicky Tenuto
There is a big difference between ‘respect’ and ‘canonical’ ;-)
‘Casino Royale’ was respectful. ‘Batman Begins’ was respectful. ‘Transformers’ was respectful. Part of any previous continuities? Not one of ‘em.
‘Star Trek’ is likely to be a fantastic film. Just not canon. And any producer/writer/other staff member of the production who says otherwise is just lying to get the classic fanbase to buy tickets :-)
That it is indeed going to be depicted as having been constructed on Earth, at the bottom of a massive gravity well, has now been confirmed by no less a source than one of the screenwriters, Roberto Orci.
This is really too bad.
Mr. Orci; I’ve read your every comment here with interest (and ignored the ones from the fake lower-case-’o’ roberto orci) and a certain sense of reassurance that Trek may be in good hands.
I find the overall notion of canon to be largely laughable in Trek, since that very canon is so convoluted and inconsistent as to be largely unworkable any more (Misters Bennett, Berman, Braga et al can take their bow now).
If it hasn’t been heard or seen on screen it should be ignored is how I’ve always looked at it, and if what has been seen and heard on screen contradicts itself, well that just gives us some freedom to interpret things as they best suit us.
The best part of Trek has always been its pure Science Fiction heart. In my posts I’ve consistently stressed the science part of that equation, because Science Fiction without the science is Fantasy. I’ve always been encouraged by the fact that all those entrusted with Trek over the years have maintained that commitment to keeping Trek scientifically believable. Roddenberry hired hard SF writers for TOS. Asimov was a special consultant on TMP. Andre Bormanis’s staff position on TNG.
Then I read you making a statement like this and I despair: “Created in space = not as durable or strong.”
I’m flabbergasted that none of the ‘research’ you performed revealed any of the hundreds of real-world studies performed by NASA, the ESA, JAXA, and universities and corporations world wide showing the advantages of microgravity construction and fabrication and the new materials of unheard-of strength that can only be constructed in space.
I can’t imagine anyone of a knowledgeable scientific background accepting the notion that the Enterprise was built on the ground. There’s been a lot of brandishing the ‘but-it’s-science-fiction’ as an excuse to justify the concept, which is just as saddening, because it ignores common sense. Yes, absolutely, the technology of Trek (one of the more internally consistent articles of Trek-canon) would allow it. It makes as much sense as building ocean liners on mountain tops. Sure we could do it, but who would bother? (and what Roddenberry and Whitington wrote to the contrary be damned).
There is nothing worse than a blatantly stupid notion to draw a viewer out of a story. How do you expect intelligent, thinking people to respect a Starfleet that would build an ocean liner on a mountain top?
How do you expect people to remain confident that you did well by Trek when you write something as blatantly misinformed and outright wrong as “Created in space = not as durable or strong”?
My hopes for a strong and true Trek are in real jeopardy.
Dear 102. Its been stated in this news thread and the prior one a thousand times that since TOS, it has been stablished that the Enterprise 1701 was built on SAN FRANCISCO’s shipyards, Earth. Canon says so, as it is printed on the plate of the bridge since TOS.
And yes, humans are building it. Any problem with that since it is being built on Earth?
So, who doesn’t have the slightest idea of Trek?
http://www.dailytrek.de/index.php?id=120064406189840
My trekgasm is back!
I thought I lost em …..but omg its back!!!!!!!
yea!!!!!!
Happy Vibes!!!
#99 Please check my post. I said this could be fixed if construction was completed, assembled, or whatever you want to call it, in space. Also, this is a tempest in a teapot. I doubt that this will make it into the movie. And even if it does, I will see it anyway. They way I read The Making I concluded that it was completed over San Fran. This should not be about who is the bigger Star Trek nerd. It should be about seeing whether the movie will honor TOS and be worthy of being called Star Trek. With the possible exception of TNG, I didn’t see that in any of the spinoff series.
They’re using a stick welder to assemble the Enterprise?!?!? Is this the steampunk version of Trek?
#106. Dom - January 18, 2008
Erm, once again, you’re incorrectly putting me into the ‘hardcore purist’ bracket. I don’t dispute any points that you’ve made. This is a new movie for a new generation by two capable (I can’t really judge - I’ve only seen ‘Transformers’) writers and a good producer.
And yet, you seem to have a problem with me pointing out that this new movie is just that: new.
Right.
Seeing that trailer has made my night! I can’t wait to see what the whole ship looks like!!!!
Thanks to those who posted the clip.
The trailer proves that no fan outside of $Hollywood$ can do Trek justice.
#115
The Enterprise hull is made of metal alloys (some canon expert would call it duranium, I think). What’s wrong with stick welders? I would not be surprised to see nuts and bolts, too. That’s fine to me.
LOVE IT!!!
OMG - we so much need a serious discussion Board, where all these canonical nerds can have a high time to debate about welding and assembling - on erth, in space, here and there …
… and where we just happy and thankful fans can be otherwhere and far away from this canonical technobabble to simply cherish this special feeling of
“Trek is back”
Thank you so much, all involved in making this happening and …
….. it will be a loooooong year until cristmas 2008
Actually I think the TOS episodes established that the San Francisco Fleet Yards were in orbit.
However this does not mean parts of the ship were not built on earth and later assembled in space much like the International Space Station.
I’ll reserve judgement dor the final film, I think the series and movies work best if you just remember them the way you saw them on TV and not hold up every single detail to extreme scrutiny.
I mean, lot’s of trekkies think the last episode of Enterprise was super cool with Riker and Troi in there, but they don’t look like their characters did when the original episode was shot (The Pegasus).
Kang and the other original Klingons were changed to new Klingons, with ridges. Still most fans love the new Klingons and especially the way they were reïntroduced.
Several actors played the same characters before, nobady objected to that either.
I used to get excited about Christmas coming, something that I grew out of as I grew up. The last 30 or so years it has been just another holiday….it looks like all that changes in 2008. This is one Christmas that I am eagerly looking forward to….what is old is really new again!
Absolutely awesome trailer, Trek XI team! Thanks for reviving the dreams of a lot of Trek fans :-)
^ I think many fans would like to think they know it all but in reality, all they know is what they want to know.
Awesome trailer can’t wait for monday so i can D/L the HD version! woo weee this film looks as tho it will rock!
I for one have been a fan for 25 years, since my childhood. To see the Girl redone in this fashion is in one word “awesome”. All you nay sayers are just that, nay sayers. I for one will support this movie in what every fashion it is in as long as it has GR vision. So far in one picture and a brief trailer it is.
I will not let Star Trek die on my watch. JJ has my full support as he has the support of the people more involved in Star Trek then me. If Nimoy who said a while ago was not going to be in any more ST movies, ie ST VI and he is in it, then it will be good.
Can not wait to see it.
So is Gabe Koerner working on this thing or not? The new design looks a hell of a lot like his Enterprise, down to the oversized NCC-1701 and huge nacelles.
Star Trek should easily be #1 for three to five weeks and make at least 250 million domestically.
#109 Mada101
Thanks for the reply. However, we don’t need a lecture on the difference between the words. We know the difference. Apparently, a few fans do not.
The Enterprise being built on Earth is CANNON.
It is in every single episode of the Kirk era television show.
On the plaque of the ship it reads “USS ENTERPRISE” then later “SAN FRANSICO, CA”
In the very first book ever about the making of television show, The Making of Star Trek, written in 1968 by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry, on page 171, it says the Enterprise was built on Earth, and assembled in space.
I think something that is shown in an episode is canon.
I think something written by the writer of the fictional television show is canon.
Thanks for the lecture, we didn’t need it, though.
Although conjectural, Enterprise the television show did mention that the engines of the Enterprise would be built “at this site” refering to Earth by Zefram Cochrane. TNG showed some of the Enterprise D being built on the surface of Mars. We have never seen a starship being built before, only refitted, which makes sense in space. With respect, we will believe Gene Roddenberry and the artists of Star Trek which clearly show the Enterprise was built in San Fransico.
If you look closely at a large picture of the nacelles, you can see beneath the outer shell the red, rounded style that they had in TOS. I think that the reason they look so big is that what we’re seeing is a cover, or some kind of construction apparatus, NOT the nacelles themselves. Look closely at the front of each nacelle and look for the red, rounded look that we know so well. There you have it.
IT’S NOT A RE-BOOT…
…it’s a RE-FIT.
68 78 94 102 109
This slavish devotion to canon is BS. TOS and all the other series were never 100% consistent with canon, so in effect, there IS NO CANON. There is only the philosophy and the general setting/universe of star trek. Details are IRRELEVANT.
And, if you really must relate everything back to canon, then re-watch the TNG episode “Parallels”. This was one of the “official” TV broadcasts and therefore in your pea-brain is also canon. It clearly established that there exist an infinite number of parallel universes in which any variation on a basic theme can exist - the Enterprise with flames, the Enterprise with baby-blue nacelle caps, the Enterprise with big honking wings for G*D sake!
Remove your collective heads from your rear ends and get a life.
People,
Just one thing, why is everybody here so angry at everybody else?
If they do this movie they should respect canon as much as they van and not do things that don’t fit if there is no good reason to. For instance, if they just decided to build the Enterprise on earth because the were ignorant of the previously established canon, that’s something I would object to, because that just prooves some-one being lazy or not paying attention. However if they decide to consciously retcon or change something because it serves a story purpose, that has been done so often no-one can really object, as long as it’s done well.
So canon-devotees: Trek has always changed and retconned if it served a purpose, why attack them for doing it now
And non-canon fans: if it serves no purpose why not respect the canon?
Here is something to think about
From an article I wrote from Trekmovie.com, here is Gene Roddenberry’s quote while talking to Dan Madsen about the future of Star Trek
“I feel that we’ve got such good people in Hollywood, and will in future as well, that I would be happy to have a Star Trek come on in 15 or 20 years where people say, “Now that is good! That makes Roddenberry look like nothing!” And that would please me!”
Seems like Roddenberry thought it was okay to improve or change Star Trek no?
http://trekmovie.com/2007/08/25/majel-roddenberry-on-new-movie-gene-roddenberry-on-future-treks/
If they actually show the E being built in the film, canon will be set at that point in time. The trailer, as was said, is simply a metaphor for the film project itself.
#128. John, Mary Jo, and Nicky Tenuto
‘TNG showed some of the Enterprise D being built on the surface of Mars. We have never seen a starship being built before, only refitted, which makes sense in space.’
Not quite true. TNG ‘Booby Trap’ showed us that the ship was built in a drydock in orbit of Mars. And we did see the NX-02 being constructed in a space drydock. And some unnamed ships on VOY ‘Relativity’.
Still, not relevant to this new movie. I’m glad that the teaser is having the intended effect for a lot of newer fans.
Having seen the trailer now, I’m even more convinced that this is simply an allegory of the “construction” of the movie. My guess is there won’t even be an allusion to the construction of the Enterprise in the finished film.
That being said, in my mind’s eye, that’s not how I pictured the Enterprise being constructed. Not sure I care for its “dark” tone, but I understand that’s a convention which lends to the mystery of the clip. Throwing the whole “built on earth vs. built in space” out the window, I think a much more effective trailer would have been close-up, sweeping shots of the enterprise hull fading into one another. Have all of the NASA, John Kenedy narration in the background. Then slowly pull back, revealing worker bees floating around the hull. Then a fade to a reveal of NCC-1701 USS ENTERPRISE. Cue the classic theme’s horns. Then a quick cut to a faraway shot of the E in drydock with the Earth in the background. Fade to the black screen with the words “Under Construction”
The teaser has successfully teased me. Clearly, I am not alone in this.
The whiners are whining just to get attention. The best strategy is to ignore them. Let them get left behind, it’s what they want, and ultimately what they deserve.
Star Trek is being done right, hallelujah.
As soon as I heard Nimoy’s voice and heard the oh so familiar music every nerd molecule in my body began to vibrate and the hair stood up on the back of my neck.
‘m stoked.
Is that a new voice over from Leonard Nimoy?
You know, if you re-read many (not all) of these posts out loud using the voice of Jeff Albertson, Comic Book Guy, they are really hilarious.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Comic_Book_Guy
2nd from the bottom (as of this posting) seems apt.
#135 Rewatch “Parallels” which clearly shows that the Enterprise D was on the ground at the Utopia Planitia ground facility when built. It was assembled in space, which is what we see in “Booby Trap”
I liked the Trek theme music at the end when they showed the Enterprise. Anyone notice the original Transporter sound effect at the end? I wonder if they will use that when they beam down to a planet but have a new transporter effect?
#139 The voice does sound a little ‘aged.’ I’m thinking so.
Everyone wants to see what the movie will look like. I want to hear what it sounds like. Do they use sound effects when the ship flies by in space? (there’s no sound in space.) Do they use some of the background bridge sounds from “The Cage”, or from TOS? We’ve heard that the score will be new. How new? I wanna hear the original TOS theme redone with modern electronic music. Oh, and if the intercom whistle isn’t the same as TOS, it won’t be cannon. :-)
“Parallels” is the best remedial-watching exercise for all of these canon-obsessed idiots. It solves all of the canon objections that the pea-brain canon-freaks have been whining about.
@ 111:
San Francisco Earth Yard - ORBITING above San Francisco…!
That is where the Enterprise NCC-1701 and at least the NCC-1701-E have been built!
:)
amazing
I just listened to the Roberto Orci interview over on IESB, and he says (and I paraphrase), that if you come into the film with no knowledge of Trek, and then go watch everything that’s come before, and then watch it again, it will be a completely different film. And he uses the word “canon.”
I don’t think it’ll be a few “in-jokes” for the fanboys, as some have speculated.
I expect this film will kick some serious butt.
Let me see if I have this right. Some people here feel as if their childhood has been “raped” (using that term in that context bugs the hell out of me). Some are stating that they have no intentions of seeing this film, though they have no real idea of what the quality of it will be Yet others are screaming back and forth at each other about whether or not the ship was constructed in orbit or on Earth’s surface.
Good God, people, chill out already. Let’s review:
Leonard Nimoy, who has so often been Trek’s conscience (refused to appear in “Generations” because he felt the opening scenes were poorly written, threatened to walk out on the Animated Series when Nichelle Nichols and James Doohan were to be excluded from the show) is coming out of retirement to make this movie. The classic “fanfare” has been used in the teaser trailer and will probably be in the opening music of the film. The Enterprise is clearly recognizable as such. The opening lines of “Space, the final frontier…” are being used. One of Hollywood’s top directors is making this his personal pet project…
So far, I’d say we have very little to gripe about. IF the movie comes out and is no good, then we’ll have reason to complain.
Remember, this is the second time that Paramount has risked a whole lot of money on a Star Trek revival film. We fans should be grateul that we’re getting new Trek that by all accounts so far, will be faithful to the original version.
Just my two cents…
I didn’t read the original trailer descriptions that got posted yesterday, neither did I read the reviews or anything. I was proud of myself.
Then today comes and I read this article and I start getting excited about it. Now there’s a video. Of course I watched it a few times already.
Still seeing Cloverfield tonight, still probably going to tear up like I am now.
#142 “Anyone notice the original Transporter sound effect at the end? I wonder if they will use that when they beam down to a planet but have a new transporter effect?”
Not an important detail, but I think that the original transporter sound is one of the most stunning effects in sci-fi history. It has not aged a single year and is fascinating.
#143
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.
I for one don’t care how old Leonard Nimoy is, it’s great to have him back where he belongs.
WOW! Not gonna get much work done today, I’ve already watched the trailer 3 times!
I felt some chills with the photo of the Enterprise yesterday, this gave me chills all the way up my back!
Star Trek is back!
If anything, I could imagine that only parts of the ship would be built on the ground. Maybe segments of the nacelles, maybe the complete nacelles, but certainly not the whole ship. Well, unless the ship is designed to lift off like the Intrepid class.
Saying that structures built in space are weaker confuses the cause and the effect. Actually, structures built for use in space are made weak because it is necessary to launch them into orbit, no matter if in small pieces or as a whole. The astronauts of Apollo 13 would have been glad if their spacecraft had been sturdier, and it was not even built in space.
Clearly by the 23rd century Starfleet would have the technology to lift a starship of several hundred thousands of tons into orbit. But why would they bother, if they can easily get the components up there, and assemble them under zero-G conditions? I can well imagine that the 23rd century welding in space is advantageous, not just because of zero-G but because of the vacuum which avoids unwanted chemical reactions.
#110
Mr Cook, you might be the only person online right now who has his head on straight. The ‘not as durable’ thing from the writer redefines moron for me. If you haven’t before, head over to trekbbs and help out, there’s only a few folks who know anything over there, and I think they’re all getting burned out from dealing with this kind of tech-backwards thinking.
Trevanian on trekbbs
Watching the trailer again, all those discussions vis-a-vis the sense of “mass” in the TOS remastered episodes come back to mind. Tell me this Enterprise isn’t just OOZING with MASS!
I mean, people, we’ve got the big, beautiful pre-refit Constitution class Enterprise — with round nacelles! — looming large on our screens. What more could we possibly ask for? JJ, we humbly thank you for this generous, nay sumptuous offering, succoring our poor, Trek-deprived souls! ;-)
just watched the trailer….and i… i… i……. i … (too amazed say anything)
i have never been THIS excited about a movie…
Can’t wait….
Greetings from Manila, Philippines..
#152 But Shatner belongs there, too. No matter how old he is or how much he weighs or if his character died in one of the movies…
I was reeeeeeeeeeeally hoping for some of the cast to be in the trailer, especially ZQ as Spock. So I’m really disappointed about that, but for a teaser trailer it ain’t bad I suppose.
Nicely done trailer. Let’s hope the movie lives up to this level of visual creativity.
Oh my…! This is so great! Star Trek really is back. Since I saw this teaser, I have absolute confidence in Mister Abrams and his team! This movie is going to be BIG! God bless the team of the new Star Trek, you´re doing a really great job! Thank you from the bottom of my heart for bringing back the greatest show ever!
I´d like to thank:
JJ Abrams, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, Bryan Burk, Jeffrey Chernov, Edward Milstein, Bill Todman, Paul Schwake, Leonard Nimoy, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Zoe Saldana, Bruce Greenwood, Ben Cross, Winona Ryder, Chris Hemsworth, Jennifer Morrison, Eric Bana, Rachel Nichols, Paul McGillon and of course Gene Roddenberry!!! (and everyone else working on this movie!)
I. Can´t. Wait. To. See. This. Film.!
If there was any doubt…I think we can all feel certain the franchise is in great hands. (I can’t remember this much anticipation since 1979!) Our ship looks to be intact. Nimoy’s voice-over. The iconic fanfare. And maybe best of all (for me at least)…the transporter sound effect. (I was always a little disappoinnted in the sound FX changes in the movies…the door hiss, phasers, torpedoes seemed to become very vanilla.) Clearly this production team respects and loves their source material.
Absolutely can not wait!!!
#158
The Shat will be in the movie. Do you accept bets? ;-)
Enterprise built on Earth or not…I really liked the trailer! Can’t wait to see the new ship in all her glory…
Redjac
I much would have rather had Shatner intoning, “Space, the Final Frontier…”
Did someone just refer to Mr. Orci as “stupid” and a “moron?” C’mon, guys. Learn some manners.
#58 Capatain Dunsel.
Excellent point. On a number of occasions people have used Shakespeare interpretations as an analogy, and that would work here, too — i.e., just because men played women in the Elizabethan era, does that mean it’s somehow sacrilege or historically incorrect (non-”canon”) to cast women in those roles today? Of course not.
Or consider those historic-performance aficionados who insist that Bach (for instance) should never be performed with vibrato, or that Beethoven should never be performed with a full modern orchestra. Maybe Beethoven would have *loved* to have his 6th Sympthony performed by 90 people on a huge stage. By all means, musicians can perform all such music in an historically echt manner. But that doesn’t mean *everyone else* has to do it the same way, with the same adherence to past habits and techniques.
Adherence to historic performance (or Star Trek canon) is one thing. But at some point, it becomes a fetish. And no one is saying that JJ Abrams has changed the actual content of the Trek universe — he hasn’t turned Spock into a full-blood Vulcan. He isn’t taking a red pen to Bach’s Mass in B Minor or changing the words to Beethoven’s Ode to Joy. He’s just interpreting the source material with a modern voice.
I know this is kind of a rant. But I had to get it off my chest. All this griping and moaning about “canon” this and “canon” that is absolutely insane, a complete waste of energy.
No, those aren’t tears in my eyes. Just allergies!
*sniff*
Is it December yet???
Great!
Great style, very new for Trek and exactly what I hoped when i heard the Name JJA :)
Can’t wait till december :(
Correction: Beethoven didn’t write the words. They are Frederich Schiller’s. Beethoven just borrowed ‘em.
Yawn. Seeing the Enterprise being welded together excites me about as much as unwrapping a box of rocks at Christmas.
Even if Nimoy is the only one from the original crew to be in the film, his voice shouldnt be the one on the trailer. The captain of the Enterprise should be the one doing the voice over…whether it be Chris Pine or the guy who is playing Pike. Again I dont get the use of old NASA countdowns and Kennedy speeches in the trailer as an attempt to tie it to today(or really the last century).
Yeah the space program started and Trek were both started in the mid to late 20th century, but none of the “new” fanbase they’re hoping to attract were even born then, so whats the point. The last time a Trek series tried to tie in closer to our present day was ENT and it flopped…way to follow in those giant footsteps JJ.
Hmmm…Alphabetical credits.
I doubt the movie poster will be like that (i.e. Cho’s name first because it’s first alphabetically).
As things are with the whole “Shatner not in the movie” story, If they had used Shatners voice, they would be, as we say in Spain “trowing stones on their own roof”
If not Nimoy, they should have used Pine instead for coherence, but as Nimoy already did the speech in Kahn’s it should be ok.
Well, this is a TEASER trailer after all. This scene may not even appear in the movie, at least in this form. It may be a stylized way of announcing to the world the movie is well and truly in production. To draw ANY conclusions about the story from this tasty tid-bit is very premature, IMO. I LOVED the trailer. I have to admit, it gave me the chills to see THAT ship’s name, hear THAT music and THAT voice. To quote Animal House’s Flounder, “Oh boy, is this GREAT!”.
Yeah, I used moron. This built on earth thing is about on par with the guy who wrote NEMESIS having a reference to Mercury always keeping the same side to the sun in his first draft, something that was disproved back in ‘64.
less than impressed!!!
Nimoy’s doing the “space the final frontier” voice over.
They’re definitely introducing an alternative timeline.
I think this is strictly a teaser and that such a construction scene will not be in the movie.
It is an exciting visual metaphor to say “We’re filming now! It’s coming!”
Of course, thye could have just shown Spock in-utero; you know an embryo with pointy ears.
as to this trailer being in the film:
anyone see the original transformers “teaser”?
i believe that much in the same vein, IF this clip will find it’s way into film, it will only be as a flashback or some other background piece.
the big E will already be built, in service and commanded by Chris Pike during the main events of this film.
That is effing brilliant!
#158
No doubt, Shatner belongs in there.
It’s impossible to improve perfection and the TMP Enterprise is it. This new design is awful; the nacelles appear to be as big as the secondary hull. This is as bad as if Abrams had turn Kirk into a woman.
I don’t understand all the fuss. I’m curious to see it but since it’s a teaser trailer it’ll probably be totally useless.
Remember this is a teaser folks, and a lot of the imagery may be just for that, the teaser. Lots of movies use teasers that have no actual images from the movie in them. The major tag line from the web site is “Under Construction” and “Coming Christmas 2008″. This may all be just images tied into the Under Construction phrase. It’s a teaser of the Enterprise Under Construction. Images that may have nothing to do with the acutal movie.
Either way, I love what I am seeing so far. Trek, pre JJ was, and is, a mess. A patchwork of continuity that was truly demolished by Enterprise. Don’t get me wrong. I loved Enterprise. but it was the beginning of the end for any sort of sensible continuity.
Remember this is also a time travel story that may have a huge reset button by the time the movie is done.
Either way I am along for the ride, no matter where it might go!
looks great.. nothing against canon as far as i can see…. those that think so simply need to get a life….
Another thing, the Klingons getting an updated look for the movies was Gene Rodenberry’s idea. He didn’t feel there needed to be any “explanation” as was done in ENT for no reason. Because he felt they always looked that way, just the budget constraints and technology contraints in tv makeup made it impossible to do that in the 1960’s. Doesn’t mean that isn’t how he thought they looked all along.
No one with a brain and any common sense thinks there needs to be any explanation at all for the Kingons looking different in the movies than they did in the TOS shows, including Gene himself. Only obsessed canonites who think that anything that appeared in the 1960’s show has to look EXACTLY that way forever in any future movie or tv show about Star Trek. That is just pure lunacy.
As for the time period. I see some people saying that the construction of the ship is before the time period this movie is suppose to be set in and therefore won’t be in the film.
Hogwash. Why?
We already know that Spocks birth will be seen.. .i’m betting that the childhoods of several of the main characters is depicted. That would fit with the “epic” description of the project we have seen from many people involved. I bet they will spend some time at the begining of this film depicting the birth and growth of several main characters giving the audience a sense of history and where these people came from and how they came to be on the bridge of the Enterprise, and i think this will include the birth of the ship itself and some of it’s history before Kirk became captian.
So, showing the ship underconstruction may very well be in the film’s final cut.
ok……maybe it is kinda cool…
Looks like nobody has noticed that there’s a new interview with Abrams on the main news page.
I want to see another TNG movie too, and I’m afraid of the new movie a’lá JJ. His previously films (what I’ve seen before) don’t belongs to the best movies of the history.
JJ is not the best director/producer of the world and Stuart Baird isn’t the worst. Paramount should have more creative stuff in the PR and marceting. After 3 years without trek and 6 years without movie not a big deal to increase the interest.
I hope the new movie will be very good of course
Now it is officially my birthday!!! (44 if anyone really needs to know)
What a present.!!!
personally I think Gabe should sue because that sure looks like his design, maybe that’s been the plan all along, testing the water for fan reaction
ABOUT THE NACELLES:
the Nacelles only look so big because of the camera angles that are on it.
take a look at the directors cut of TMP and look at the Vger scene were we see Kirk and company on hull, or the scene after Vger dissipates and the big E approaches screen, showing the saucer section come at you upslose.
the Nacelles look enormous to to the forced prospective of the camera.
I think when all is said and done all will look very proportionate. why go to the trouble to be so close, and then be so far.
does not make sense.
Star Trek is back! the teaser is so freaking awesome
marketing of course:)
Ripped Shirt- Industrial Light and Magic has over 30 years experience designing spaceships–I wouldn’t worry about that too much!
Didn’t get here in time for the previous, now closed thread, but I really like this teaser, and as a designer, and someone here who has been especially interested in the look of J.J.’s ‘Starship Enterprise’ for a long time now, here’s my own thoughts on this PARTIALLY revealed (finally!) design…
I’m delighted that the ‘Aztec’ panelling from ‘ST:TMP’ has been retained, as I always thought that particular previous design decision (along with numerous ’spotlighting’) helped to sell the large ’scale’ of the ‘miniature-work’ used in that Movie.
I’m also delighted that the makers have opted to retain the ‘cylindrical’ look of the TOS’s ‘E’s twin ‘warp nacelles’ overall, although I will reserve judgement on the ‘fins’ sticking out at the rear of them till I see them properly. However they will probably look fine, if a little different from the original ‘E’s’ protruberances near the rear.
I am comfortable if this particular ‘E’s coloration remains ’silvery’ and ‘metallic’ looking, as seen in the teaser, as opposed to my favoured more ‘white’ look, as this is STILL far better than the ‘dull gray’ scheme that CBS Digital opted to go with in their ‘remastering’…
One of the things that I still wonder about at this point, is WHAT color (if any!) will the ‘nacelle CAPS’ end up? At the moment, we see an interesting amount of detail, but I hope this is NOT the finished item…
I hope for a ‘constantly changing’, overall ORANGY glow, as what we have been used to on the TOS ‘E’, and pray this has not been turned into RED…or even worse, BLUE…
Time will tell, but overall, a success so far in my mind, and a pleasant surprise from what it COULD have ended up like. :)
I’m really happy with the trailer.
Love the lighting, love the human involvement in the building of the ship, love the sheer sense of scale and epicness transmitted to the audience.
Star Trek lives again.
I understand now.
After I saw Cloverfield, I heard a college-age girl say to a friend of hers that she’s never seen an episode of Star Trek, but she said she really wants to see the movie when it comes out. I think the teaser has done its job.
Remember the good old days, when we fought over stuff like politics and whether or not Harlan Ellison is a prick? Those bygone discussions now look like the Scopes Trial compared to this “construction on Earth vs. in space” stupidity. Maybe it would be nice if the Canon Police, the “Enterprise Must Be Constructed In Space Or Its Not Star Trek” whiners, and the “Just Happy To Have A Cool Trailer” folks could all have their own forums, but for now perhaps we could all just agree to disagree, and wait to see what the future holds?
Man, this is gonna be great.
#177 Nimoy DID do the “…Final Frontier…” voice-over at the end of Star Trek II, albeit his character had just died….but I’m just saying it isn’t unpecedented.
I find myself hoping that this films duration will be more than just freaky 90+ an average Minutes.
I’m so ravenous and since they have the crew already there …
… please!!!!!!
One of the things that makes it SO hot and appealing is the fact they use welding torches instead of Post-production laser FX… It makes it much more beautiful and realistic vs seeing someone act like they’re firing something when they are not (à la DS9 or VOY)…
Love that hands-on feel. Gawd.
AWESOME!! can’t…. wait……
(and btw you know what they say about camera angles)
Seriously folks, I’m just glad and thankful we have a trailer and a movie on the way. And the folks at Paramount and Bad Robot are definitely accomplishing one thing, no matter what their opinion:
people are and have been talking.
This might sound a bit crazy, but a friend of mine had some original plans of the Enterprise and it had some kind of landing gear (I think maybe just in the saucer section). So it’s not totally impossible that it was built on land. Also keep in mind that the saucer was meant to be detachable…possibly to land in case of emergency. So again…not impossible that it was built on land… Welp, flame away…
Wow. I love how they make the ship look HUGE , much like the wonderful work of TMP. In the first film the ship looked like a huge ocean liner..then as the films progressed they seemed to look smaller and smaller…but in TMP, the ship felt real. This evokes much of that same sense of scale and wonder.
Well done…and for crying out loud, I hope they DO show it being built on the ground…just so it can put the silly argument to rest.
Can’t wait to see it tomorrow on a 75′ screen. Thanks to all involved, great job!
Trailer: More! More! We want more (but AM very happy for what we got too)!
Construction of Enterprise: I see nothing wrong with the idea that canon, (not cannon folks, I’ve never seen the Enterprise or any other starfleet vessel fire a cannonball) –grin– “The Making of Star Trek” be observed.
Who’s to say that components of the ship were not built on earth and then tractor beamed up to the orbital drydock for final assembly? Or even using the transporter to beam up components (although that sounds rather energy prohibitive)?
If you think about it, NASA builds its components of the International Space Station on earth and shuttle them up into orbit.
BUT if they built the entire ship in space, I have no problem with that either. Canon is fun, but don’t be so restrictive that you cannot recognize a new spin on things. EVERY movie has added to the mythos and each have contradicted something along the way. Heck, who can even agree today about the news that was on last night’s TV?
If the ship looks different, just chalk it up to “those damned engineers that like to change things.”
Damn the canonists.
Star Trek isn’t about the shape of nacelles or the font on the Enterprise’s hull — it is about the human spirit, and what we can accomplish.
When it came to a choice between his crew and his ship, Kirk chose the people over the hardware.
They can paint the Enterprise pink and make the engines square for all I care, so long as the move inspires people again.
We desperately need inspiration. Society has devolved, as we have moved from being doers into being mere consumers; we’ve stopped creating the future in order to max our credit cards for immediate gratification.
It is time to inspire people to greatness. And if this movie can inspire even one young person to pursue a brighter future, it will be succeeded.
Oh — and I really want to ladies to be in mini-skirts. :)
My wife thinks it will be part of an opening “narration by Spock” sequence right at the beginning of the movie, similar to “Transformers” with Prime talking about the Allspark.
This trailer makes me excited to see what they’ve done with the bridge. What they’ve done with special effects, like phaser firing, transporter beeming, jumping to warp.
Don’t expect those things to be the same. What would be the point of that? That is where they will show off thier newest special effects and i can’t wait to see what they do with those things.
[…] TrekMovie.com has a much bigger image here where you can make out a lot more detail; they also have a YouTube (so not best quality, but still watchable) clip of the teaser trailer for the movie which is being shown in cinemas in the US with JJ Abrams’ ultra-mysterious Cloverfield flick. We don’t see much except for the glare of welding torches as the Enterprise is finished off. On the soundtrack a medley of soundbites from the golden age of the Space Race - the era which gave birth to Trek - from Kennedy’s inspirational speech to Armstrong’s “one small step” line, as the image pulls back to reveal the Enterprise and a certain Mister Leonard Nimoy utters the immortal lines, “Space, the final frontier…” You know, I’ve said before I am half-excited and half-worried about this film: I trust Abrams as a great storyteller, but am just not sure about how I will be able to accept other actors in those classic roles, playing younger versions of the characters I grew up with (repeats of 60s Trek and Doctor Who were my formative SF viewing in the 70s). But this tiny little clip just sparked something into life in my geek warp core. Go now and look. Print this Story Send to a Friend […]
The teaser was awesome. I don’t care where the ship is built…’nuff said.
Just saw the trailer for the first time.
LOVE the tone and feel of it. I hope the movie is the same way.
GO JJ! It’s your birthday…
AN END TO THE DISCUSSION?
According to Memory Alpha:
In the early to mid-23rd century, at least twelve heavy cruiser-type starships, the Constitution-class, were commissioned by the Federation Starfleet. The vessel registered NCC-1701, which was constructed in San Francisco and launched in 2245, was christened the Enterprise. Larry Marvick was one of the designers of the Enterprise. (TOS: “Tomorrow is Yesterday”, “Is There in Truth No Beauty?”)
According to The Making of Star Trek, the Enterprise was built on Earth but assembled in space.
According to a computer display that was created behind the scenes, but never used on screen, Jonathan Archer was present at the launch and died the next day. This information remains non-canon because it was never photographed on film.
Captain Robert April oversaw construction of her components and commanded her during her trial runs and early missions. (TAS: “The Counter-Clock Incident”)
Dialogue given in the episode claims the Enterprise was the first Starfleet ship equipped with warp drive, however, this not only violates canon established by Star Trek: Enterprise, but also dialogue given in TAS: “The Time Trap” claiming that the Bonaventure was the first Starfleet ship equipped with warp drive.
I INCLUDED THE LAST BIT just to show Trek is not a static thing, they change things around, even the Great Bird of the Galaxy did it.
The TOS sting was good to hear but for some reason the sound effect used for the transporter in TOS gave me goosebumps…
Strange
Well, (figure of speech warning) blame the reboot or whatever you want to call it on the success of “New Voyages”. Thanks to them maybe Paramount realized that they had something called Star Trek, no bloody A, B, C or D, to quote Scotty. After the failure of the last installment they might have realized a need for a Star Trek that was untouched by the influence of Rick Berman within the fan base and acted on it. This is just a theory, but I know I kind of was hoping then that if they ever would do a new series a totally new production team would get a hand on it. We get a brand new feature film instead now, and I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (trailer = goosebumps).
# 24 Section 31: Where’s the Law & Order: Special Victims Unit when I need it?
You got a warning from Anthony, but your quip really made me laugh when I read through all the canon vs. non-canon stuff.
“That it is indeed going to be depicted as having been constructed on Earth, at the bottom of a massive gravity well”
Yes. Luckily, it has engines, though, so I imagine it won’t be a whole movie of them failing to get off the ground.
Anyone who sees that trailer and doesn’t get a little tingle in their spine … well, you know where your Voyager DVDs are. Go suck on Neelix and Chakotay for a while.
It’s a teaser. It gets across the sixties space race stuff without going all retro. It gets across the sense that building the Enterprise was hard and involved human effort.
It looks great. There is, finally, a bit of buzz and excitement around Star Trek again amongst people. If your first thought involves the word ‘canon’, you need to reorganise your thoughts.
The best Star Trek movie ever made was Master and Commander. This is a teaser, so who knows, but it gives me that same vibe. The Enterprise is something impressive and real again, not just a collection of redressed sets.
The trailer’s great, but why do they still have men welding 300 years in the future?
Will the Enterprise actually have a major role in the film? I guess, since the film is Spock-centric, he will serve with Pike on board. But his service with him, if I recall, was “11 years, 4 months, 5 days,” an eternity before JTK.
This film will have to cover quite a bit of time. Perhaps it will conclude with Kirk getting command and the crew we have come to know. And the Big E will warp out for the sequel.
#172
I’d like to amend my comment about the alphabetical cast listing…
Bana and Nimoy weren’t in the Alphabetical listing, but rather listed separatly under the rest of the alphabetical cast…Does this make Bana a bit more important, or were the looking to list the “crew” all together in a democratic fashion…or maybe a little of both.
Wonder how they get her into space? Under her own power? Space elevator?
Was it “Piece of the Action” that kirks say the ship doesn’t land? Or can’t land? (maybe it need a special dock to land on.
Remember Gene saying he couldn’t land the mother on every planet because of budget reasons - hence the transporters.
Also keep in mind, as technology get better in the trek future they could build more and more ships in space. This trek is earlier in the scope of things.
Building the ships on the ground would mean lots of dirt, germs and junk inside. But I guess you can’t build something of that size in an inclosed environment. Even in dry dock (ST: TMP) there would be junk in orbit, dust, micro meteorites.
Can’t wait to see the film! Trek will go on and get better and better…
holly shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! great music theme,it vibes !!!!!well lets see !!
There are legitimate reasons to criticize movies, there are stupid reasons to criticize movies.
A little mental exercise. Which column does this criticism fall into:
‘It contradicts my Star Trek fanfic’.
If you get the answer right, you win the best prize of all: this Christmas, you get to see a great Star Trek movie.
#216
To show that great things come from sweat. Its sort of a symbolic thing, in my opinion.
‘The trailer’s great, but why do they still have men welding 300 years in the future?’
The women are all inside, answering the phones.
One thing the trailer had me thinking: in the 20th Anniversary of Star Trek TV special, Gene Roddenberry said, “Aliens didn’t build the pyramids - human beings built them!”
In the Berman era, it was forgotten that Star Trek was, at its base, the story of ourselves going out into space, and exploring more to make ourselves better.
Human beings are building the Enterprise, on Earth, to show that we believe in a future beyond a “flash and a bang”.
Abrams, Orci, Lindelof, and everyone else making this movie get it. They know the engine driving this, something that got lost (pun not intended) in the prior regime of Star Trek.
#182 You know what the last episode of TOS was, right ;) ?
To all those who are screaming and hopping mad, and are saying that they won’t go see the movie (#2 especially):
Fine. Don’t go. There will be less nerdy people coming out of the theater after the movie — and the regular folks standing outside might actually wonder why all these cool people are happily coming out of a Star Trek movie. They might even want to go see the flick.
Go watch The Wrath of Kahn on DVD for the 843rd time instead. Meanwhile, many of us will go watch and enjoy a new Star Trek movie.
How do you know it isn’t in space? Maybe it is being built in spacedock, just because the guy isn’t wearing a spacesuit, doesn’t mean it isn’t still in space
FREAKING AWESOME ANTHONY!:)
KIGS :)
Clearly some people are confused about this Khan Chekov deal, Wrath of khan didn’t destroy canon, chekov was in the series at that point, he just wasn’t in that episode, and it’s not like we see the enire encounter in one hour, So they were bound to meet at some point. that’s like saying that every new episode of SW destroyed it’s canon, it did, but what the hell i’m not that big od a SW fan…
As a fan(atic) from the first in ‘67, I will always and forever simply be happy to see the words “Star Trek” and “Enterprise” be real and in front of me again. It never really mattered how good or bad all the iterations were or how much they let me down or lifted me up - they were some form of trek and that’s all that ever mattered. In fact, I’ve never seen a show or movie that lived up to all the expectations or fantasies I had. A first love is forever, and even the teaser’s giving me the feeling of seeing my old love, changes and differences not withstanding. Welcome home.
Very respectful to the old stuff, yet a very modern and exciting feel. Quite a feat to have accomplished that. A job well done, and I can’t wait to see the HD download.
216 - Why the heck not? People still need jobs 300 years from now. We can’t have everything done by robots or else we’d become a very lazy people, which is exactly the opposite thing Roddenberry envisioned.
this image is the most canon thing i’ve seen since 1969.
Do the Trek-XI guys realize that today I am not doing my work? Christmas is far, far away…
#51 - Nope, some of us like more than just TOS. My favorite three are TOS, DS9, and ENT, but I enjoy tthem all.
#66 - I think most folks will rest easier when they realize that, on that issue, there is no canon to be violated. ;) It was never previously established.
#68 - Nah, ’s not an issue. the Trek Universe is a *fictional* world. It is not our own. It merely serves as a portrayal of a future world in which Humanity has perservered and survived and become better. (In some ways, that’s why keeping at least broad consistency within that fictional world is even more important. Without some level of consistency, believability begins to fail.)
#136 - I generally agree, Kirk. (Are you *the* Kirk Thatcher, BT