TrekMovie’s New View Of The 2nd Star Trek Character Posters August 18, 2008
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: ST09 Cast, Star Trek (2009 film), TrekMovie.com , trackback
You knew this was coming. Following on from our previous ‘new view’ of the original Comic Con 2008 Star Trek teaser posters, TrekMovie now brings you a ‘decolorized’ version of the four new posters which were revealed at Official Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas. Now you can get a better look at Cho, Pegg, Urban and Yelchin.
The following poster is also a fake
Again, TrekMovie must point out that the following image IS NOT an official poster from Paramount, and is in fact, a fake. Once again, TrekMovie’s resident artist Steve Moss has taken high resolution images from the official Star Trek site and done his Photoshop magic to see what each character might look like. Clockwise from upper left you have John Cho (Sulu), Simon Pegg (Scotty), Anton Yelchin (Chekov), and Karl Urban (McCoy).
TrekMovie.com version of the new Star Trek Poster
- colorized by Steve Moss
(click to enlarge)
Steve used a mix of the original poster with images of the actors and some educated guesswork. The ‘delta shield’ patterns you see on the uniforms was not added, but the exact colors may not be the same as we will see in the final. In this version of the poster the two part uniforms (first reported by TrekMovie.com in July) are much more apparent.
Original
And in case you missed it, here is Steve’s version of the first set of posters.
TrekMovie.com version of the Comic Con Star Trek Posters
- colorized by Steve Moss
(click to enlarge)
Find out more about Steve Moss at his Retrograde Imageworks website.
Loading ...
Comments»
Nice job again, Steve!
awesome!!!
Looks great Steve! I love the colors and textures in the uniforms. I hope the real colors are this vibrant and rich.
Crap, this guy is great with PS!
From everything I’ve seen so far, actor-wise, they’ve nailed it. I really believe these actors can inhabit these 40+ year old roles and invest them with a new vitality and earnestness.
37 weeks and counting…
When do we get a 2nd trailer??
woop ee!!! yelchin doesn’t look like bashir any more.
and so that’s what Scotty’s hair looks like. much nicer.
These are fantastic!!!! Great work Steve.
Steve is a magician!
Very cool, and yeah a little less Bashir like.
about scottys hair: damn i guess the shat aint the king of the bad rug anymore
These “true color” images are great. I think they’re better than the actual posters. They give a much better indication of the characters these actors will portray. Well, they do to me, anyway.
I’m also much more comfortable with the two-shirt idea for the uniforms when I see them more as they’re meant to be.
Okay, now we’ve seen most of the major players in this movie as their respective characters. So I have to ask…
…you knew this was coming…
…when do we get to see the Enterprise?
I was always sold with Urban as McCoy, but now more so. Mad props Steve.
pointed sideburns!
#13. Buck
http://the-last-maquis.deviantart.com/art/Enterprise-poster-95316469
I remember seeing a pic of Simon Pegg attending a movie premier during the production of STAR TREK. In that pic, he had dyed his hair black. I, along with others that post on this sight, thought this was because Scotty’s hair was black in TOS. I know that this new version of the poster is technically a fake, but his hair appears to be orange/red. I took a second look at the original version of the poster and his hair does appear to be a lighter color there as well… Meaning it is not dark/black.
Did anyone else notice this? What does this mean?
Oops, typo. I meant *site*.
this site covered Pegg’s darker look:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/02/26/bana-shaves-head-for-nero-pegg-goes-brown/
his hair wont be as dark as Doohan’s, but darker than his usual blond look
Are you going to give us a small tutorial on how you did this? I have had limited success trying to recreate what you did with the images, and I would love to read your tutorial.
hmmm
Theres something wrong with the yellow uniform. It has a strange color balance.
My gess is that the original one is a bit darker and with a bit of a mustard tone.
Wonderful work.
We know it’s a (sort of) fake. You just like linking to Senator Vreenak, don’t you?
Man, I LOVE that CHEVRON fabric. Totally awesome.
I love that the pattern on the uniform is lots of little delta shield logos to reinforce that these are Starfleet uniforms.
Wow Zac really looks like Spock.
Keep up the good work.
I really enjoy the two part uniforms. They might look very well on the big screen: classic TOS taste but modern fabric and feeling.
Is that Chekov in the lower right?
Looks like he’s gonna die in this one.
Do we really need to see his character in this movie with Kirk being so young? Perhaps it will be in an alternate timeline?
We need a plot description here someone.
#15
Good point about the ship.
But I am sure Steve did not render that one.
It will be interesting to see if in the movie, the skin tone for Spock is matched as well as Steve did here on the fake. If they are going to give Spock that little greenish tint in the movie, like Steve did here, I don’t think we have much to worry about.
It looks great, but I think you’re wrong. All their shirts should be red. I think they’re not wearing their Enterpise uniforms here, like Spock did on the other poster.
What does the rest think?
I love those updated TOS-style uniforms. They look magnificent! I can’t wait to see the entire uniform.
I did some of these before…. PLEASE TAKE A LOOK! Of course I was inspired by the work of the Trekmovie guys:
http://downloads.scifinews.de/file_70609.html
http://downloads.scifinews.de/file_70608.html
after watching and meeting Quinto ath Vegas con I have to say that I am more comfortable with different actors playing them now. I feel more confident that JJ Abrams will do a good job. Quinto was nice to talk to and made me more at ease when I asked about the film, he also understands the character which is great. I am feeling better about the film.
my only remaining concern is that I have heard that they are making Pike the first captain instead of April. If they are making books canon surely this should be made canon.
I’ve been looking forward to the “true-color” version of the new Trek movie poster since it first came out. The uniforms look great and, based on how they were described in a previous TrekMovie article, they will probably look better than the classic TOS uniform. Every time I hear, or in this case see, something new about this movie I get more and more excited to see it. Still almost a year to go!
looking at these uniforms they do look quite good, i’m still not sure if they look formal enough for officers on a starship, but hopefully once we see the hole thing they will, the look a bit like the uniforms used in the matrix, but great work on the poster, hope these r the true colours.
Is the movie ready yet? :D
Thanks Steve! Great work!
@ NicholasAngel – Great job on your versions. The skin textures are very natural. I love seeing all these reworked pictures of the actors. Makes the upcoming film seem much more reel………real.
Here’s a good comparison between the old and new crews…
I didnt create this.
http://www.breakfastmeat.com/images/startrek/newtrek.JPG
Of course we know that the little chevrons are not Starfleet, but only Enterprise symbols…
…but do they know? Or rather, do they care?
#40
I think that in this revival of TOS the delta symbol will be extended to represent Starfleet as a whole (see the starfleet academy photos with flags bearing the delta). Much more consistent and homogeneous, in my opinion, since it is recognized as an iconic symbol of Star Trek.
40-
Its an oversite i think but I think its an oversite done on purpose for the mainstream audience
does that mean the other starflett ships have their emblems stititch into their uniforms?
A source has told me that the best way to take this film is a two fold approach, my source predicts hard core fans will prob be the most disappointed with the film.
But as I said I have now warmed to the cast as I found Quinto really cool.
Very Sad imitations of the ‘originals’. I don’t hold out much hope for the feature film. I fear it will flop. Myself and other die-hard trekkers of my acquaintance are NOT going to see this piece. Opening night we are planning to stay home, with some munchies and brews and watch the ORIGINAL series on DVD as an homage to those cast members who have crossed to the final frontier.
#43 “Myself and other die-hard trekkers of my acquaintance are NOT going to see this piece”
It’s you right to do this. I hope you didn’t go to Nemesis, too, because in my opinion that was Star Trek at its lowest :-)
Nice job! You can practically hear “Dammit, Jim!” coming out of Urban’s mouth. Still a bit confused about why they took so much trouble styling the other characters and not Scotty, but the overall effect is still pretty damned awesome!
43. This movie’s not for you, then. And that’s fine. More room for me in the theatre on opening day.
Honestly, it’s like…how many people have played Sherlock Holmes in TV and film over the years? People argue over whether Basil Rathbone or Jeremy Brett were definitive (I vote the latter), but the point is these are ROLES, the ACTORS are not the CHARACTERS, and therefore it’s perfectly OK to let other actors have a crack at interpreting them.
If Shakespeare’s audience were the same as you, they’d be reliving their memories of seeing Richard Burbage playing at the Globe as opposed to, you know, allowing the WORK to live on for centuries.
Honestly! Some of you need to expand your cultural repertoire a bit. Maybe you should actually, you know, act in a play (NOT a fan production) or make a movie and then you’d understand how things work.
#43
I find it slightly bemusing that long-time TOS fans would refuse to even try the new movie. If it’s great, it’s a bonus. If it sucks, the untarnished original is still there to enjoy–no harm done. Two hours of your life on the off-chance that the first bit of ‘TOS’-style Trek in nearly two decades will have some good bits. Seems a fair swap to me!
A year before its release no-one can know enough about the film to say whether it will succeed/flop. I suspect we’ll all have a very different impression of the film by the time that watching it becomes an actual decision.
Some might as well hang a sign on their head that says “Formerly Open-minded Trekker; Now Closed For Business.”
With all due respect #43, I think going to this film (which in a way is an “homage” to the originals) is the best way to pay tribute to TOS.
If the franchise remains dead, then we all lose. Die-hards like myself killed ENT and after seeing it in reruns, I was ashamed of myself for turning my back on what turned out to be great Trek.
I am seeing the new new movie regardless of my reservations, fears, spoilers, etc.- I am giving it a chance. I will be disappointed if I see canon thrown in the dumpster, but I have a feeling the new flick is going to surprise and delight A LOT of people, die-hards included . . .
Star Trek Lives!
Look fantastic! Nice work!
Is there a v-neck or split of some sort at the neck of the overshirt? It’s hard to tell in these images.
If the delta now stands for the entire organization, that’s not only against old TOS, but also against ENT… Mirror Darkly showed that the Defiant symbol is different.
I can live with many changes, as long as they are small ;) giving prominent symbols another meaning is not a small change.
#48 “Some might as well hang a sign on their head that says “Formerly Open-minded Trekker; Now Closed For Business.”
Yes, the sad truth. I consider myself a really hard-core fan but I, for one, wasn’t afraid of the Enterpise built on Earth, April not being the first captain, Pegg’s hair and so on. What really hurts me is the fact that a lot of people outside trek fandom think about us as close minded nerds obsessed by starship schematics and uniforms. It’s up to us to free ourselves from this bad reputation.
Looks amazing!
#43 not much of a trek fan then are you?
Im so sick of all this childish behaviour, “oooh the film doesn’t appear to be exactly how i want it to be *stamps feet and throws dummy on the floor*” fine, you and your ‘friends’ stay at home and live in the past, doesn’t affect me or any other fan, who will be there, in line, on the very first day, supporting trek.
“Very Sad imitations of the ‘originals’. I don’t hold out much hope for the feature film. I fear it will flop.” – Utter rubbish, what proof do you have to support this statement? Have you seen the film? is there a soundbyte that shows the cast speaking in their characters voices? is there a finished trailer? is the script online? have you seen the props and uniforms?……. NO!! and neither have we, we are all, at this moment, playing a guessing game, none of us really know what to expect and therefore none of us have any reason to fear the worst.
Trek today, is dead. On May 8th 2009 Star Trek will come out of hiding for the first time since 2005, 4 long years of nothing, and what are we all doing? instead of being joyous and grateful that our heroes are coming back onto the big screen, which in turn could lead to more movies and even a tv series, we’re all sulking because we’ve seen a picture or we’ve read a sentence (probably out of context) utter foolishness. I’m 20 years old, thats very young compared to the majority of fans. I wasnt alive to see TOS or its re-runs and consider myself to be a real fan of new trek, however im more excited about this film than i ever was about Nemesis, still went to see it though!!
We are all Star Trek fans, regardless of age or which trek is our favourite, and we all owe it to the franchise to support it, if we dont, Star Trek may as well be buried. This film needs maximum support and maximum box office if its to be a success and for us to get more trek (which is what we all want right?) I guarentee that everyone on these boards will go and watch this movie, regardless of how much they stamp their feet… but consider this “purists” its 2008 not the 1960s, Trek is seen by the general public as a joke, a show that nerds and geeks watch, it is not popular in mainstream culture or taken seriously, it is a spoof. JJ Abrams is going to propel this franchise into the 21st century and hopefully gain support and a following amongst the “popular people” of society, the people that spend money on cinema and dvds. Making trek cool is what we all want as it will result in treks continuity, and if we have to sacrifice a little of the original then fine. JJ, Roberto and Kurtzman are all TREK FANS, they are not going to destroy trek, so keep your panties on and sit back, relax and let the hype and good buzz of this film engulf you!!
Jay, UK
#43 “Myself and other die-hard trekkers of my acquaintance are NOT going to see this piece”
Seriously, some people need to get a grip of themselves and stop living in a cave. I don’t know what you’re definition of a ‘die hard trekker’ is but I’ve always imagined it being somone being supportive of the franchise even through it’s hardest times or times of considerable change. This being a time of considerable change of course.
I’m sure many of those stuck in their ways uttered these words when TNG started…and look how that turned out…I wonder where they are now…hmmm…
Playing with their Captain Picard dolls, lol.
16: If you’re going to do it, at least try and match the colours (e.g. http://i37.tinypic.com/f3ernk.jpg )
KRUGE: Speak!
MALTZ: Impressive… They can recolorize posters….
KRUGE: Yes… New posters, homes in the country… your woman at your side… children playing at your feet… and overhead, fluttering in the breeze… the photoshopped flag of the Federation. Charming…Station!
I really hope that any fan, die hard or not, of star trek, will come see this movie, as the only way we can get another series or more movies, is for this one to do well.
#12
Uhhh, no one wears a hairpiece to look bald. I promise you that’s Pegg’s actual hair.
I will be going to see the movie as I really enjoyed meeting Quinto at vegas, he won me over at the con.
The Last Maquis (#16),
Now THAT’S funny! Very nicely done. I guess I stand corrected.
I am a die hard Trek fan for when I was watching it first run as a small kid. I love the new casting. I love that they are revisiting Trek with a new approach. Yes, I do love the TOS movies with Nimoy and Shatner and Kelley … but fack of the matter is the won’t be in this (aside from Nimoy) … I welcome this new movie as a die hard fan. I loved all the Trek series too.. yes, even Enterprise… I still watch the reruns.
Its not a matter of being a die hard fan… it matter of being open minded and open to change. Remember the whole BS when it was announced that Daniel Craig was to play Bond. Shocking! A Blonde Bond? There were even hate sites put up. And it turns out he did damn great as Bond. It was a great idea reimaging Bond and it it’s great from Trek. It breathes new blood into a dying franchise and makes it exciting again.
So you can sit in your mom’s basement with your buddies eating munchies and watching the original (not remastered) VHS tapes of TOS on opening day. Leaves more room for me to go to the cinema ;)
Yeah but can John Cho say “Oh My!” in a deep voice, and make crude jokes at his own expense at a Chris Pine celebrity roast?
“My name is not Chow, it’s Cho. It rhymes with I’m a Ho.”
I’m hardcore TOS, and you can bet your sweet tribble I’ll see this movie!! I wouldn’t trade a chance to see this (even if it sucks) for every TNG movie (because none of them were that great). To me, the new cast is like recasting James Bond, only better. TOS era is my absolute favorite, and though it won’t be exactly what I’m used to, I don’t care. If you’re gonna do Trek, this is the way to go!!!
I want to see the movie now. Of course the actors will never take the place of the originals, however, after meeting Quinto I am more excited about the new cast’s interpretations.
I know I have been vocal in the past but Quinto has opened my eyes.
I hope they dont write Captain April out of canon. But I believe this can be a small oversite I can live with as long as the movie respects Roddenberry’s ideals. It means I can no longer treat TAS as the unofficial 4th season.
When I was younger I thought that if you loved somebody and they died, that you would never be able to love again , because you could never replace that person. When I got older I realized that loving again was the best tribute you could pay to your former love. Loving a new person shows that you must really have been happy enough to try it again.
A problem some women have when expecting their second child is that they feel they love their first child so much that they cannot love the next child, or that they feel they are short changing their first child by allowing themselves to love another. Fortunately love doesn’t work that way. There is no limit to the amount one is able to feel or give. And if you really love your child – you would want more wouldn’t you? Same with Trek. If you loved these characters, you would want to see more of them. Sure, they have to do a good job recasting, but it seems to me like they are trying their hardest to give us the look and feel of the originals and I salute them for all their hard work!!
#67 dude are you in love with Quinto or something :P jk mate…
I completely agree with you, I, like everyone else would love to see Robert April make some kind of cameo in this film, who knows, April could be played by one of these famous actors that we keep hearing will be making cameo appearances !!! Orci knows his trek, i doubt April will be discarded like an empty coke can…
Jay, UK
captain_neill. Where did you get the idea that April has been ‘written out’? I haven’t heard anything about this! It’s not been mentioned on this site!
On the other hand, as fans can create whatever continuity they want, maybe Pike’s Constitution-class Enterprise was built from an earlier class of starship commanded by April and designated USS Enterprise NCC-1701. Thus Pike is the first captain of the Constitution-class version Enterprise, although large parts of the ship go bak to the earlier class of vessel.
Rather than have a brain meltdown, people should just use their imaginations to fill in the gaps. I’ve said it so many times before: why do we want to be spoonfed information and have everything explained? What next? The secret of Khan’s hand has to be revealed?
And, by the way, proper Star Trek isn’t about Gene Roddenberry’s ideals: that remark disrespects every other major player that created the dynamics of the original Star Trek universe: Robert Justman, DC Fontana, John Meredyth Lucas, Gene Coon and numerous others who developed the philosophies of the original Star Trek. ‘Gene’s vision’, in its pure form, is only visible in TMP and some early TNG – and what a lifeless bore it turned out to be! Thank God for Roddenberry’s original collaborators!
Jay – “The Real Jim Kirk” – August 19, 2008
“Instead of being joyous and grateful that our heroes are coming back onto the big screen, which in turn could lead to more movies and even a tv series, we’re all sulking because we’ve seen a picture or we’ve read a sentence (probably out of context) utter foolishness.”
Jay, you need to understand that to a lot of “purists”, the real heroes of Star Trek aren’t Kirk, Spock and McCoy, it’s Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelly. That’s where the problem lies, really. There is a similar argument within the James Bond community as to whom was the best Bond. “Purists” love Connery, three or four people like Roger Moore, even less like Dalton (I think one guy in Nevada), some like Brosnan, and a lot of people claim Daniel Craig as the best Bond there has ever been, including believe it or not, a “purist” I have known since high-school.
Ultimately, a true fan of “Star Trek” cares more for the characters and theme (or genre) than the actors. Don’t get me wrong, I am a tremendous Shatner fan. I love his attitude, his sense of humor, and his ability to take even the smallest part in a movie and “Shatnerize” it. However, when push comes to shove, I would still much rather see the continuation of one of my favorite TV and movie series of all time (I’m 39) with different actors than never see it again except in re-runs because the original actors won’t be used. Even a “purist” eventually has to come face to face with the fact that the original actors portraying the parts we love will not be on earth forever and if there are to be further adventures in the world of Star Trek and people of different generations are to love it as we did, a new cast needs to be found. Eventually, people watching will come to identify the new actors in the respective parts they are playing as the characters themselves, just as the “purists” (and many more of us) did and they will become the new faces of those characters without question. One day, THEY will be replaced and the generation that grew up with them will complain just as #43 B. Taylor does today.
All will come full circle and you will see your faith in JJ Abrams ability to deliver the goods will not have been wasted. I anticipate a wonderful Science Fiction movie, regardless of whether it’s Star Trek or not. I’m just glad it turned out to BE Star Trek. He could have been remaking Star Wars (pause for laughter and applause)… One thing is for certain…
On May 8th 2009, at about midnight, 99% of us here will be sitting in a movie theater, with our soda and goodies and other movie-watching accoutrements, a loved one or friend beside us, shushing going on all around us, the previews will end, the lights will dim, the music will start, the Bad Robot logo will appear before us on the screen, Nimoy’s voice will probably be heard as part of the infamous narrative that is the beginning of every Star Trek work, “Space. The final frontier”, and once again, Star Trek will live and breath. It’s going to be epic.
I for one would much rather be there to share in the collective experience of seeing history unfold, than home watching 40 year old re-runs…again.
39.
Great FIND! You can definitely see a resemblance, just look at Doohan/Pegg facial structure. now we need to create one using the new pics!
#68—-Great analogies! I have to agree on all points.
#71 thanks for taking the time to reply, and yes i agree with what your saying, fair points, its just im sick of the whining and general bitching over something that people have seen very little evidence to even result in whining or bitching.
Your description of the theatre and the start of the film made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up… im so excited.
Excellent Work, Steve! :)
#72 thanks man, im glad i stumbled upon it, and yes i agree, the resemblances with all of the cast are amazing, they all look how they’re suppose to look, like younger versions of the classics :D cannot wait til 8/5/09!!
Jay, UK
Wouldn’t Chekov have been ten or twelve years old by the time Kirk graduated the Academy, and McCoy a practicing physician of nearly a decade or so? That’s approximately the age differences I have in mind by watching TOS. Urban looks too young for McCoy it seems to me at this point in Trek history, it seems to me, and Yelchin — believe it or not — a little too old.
Ooh, ooh, more pointy sideburns!!!
kg
Sorry about the “it seems to me” repetition in my post #77.
Oh, and by the way, sorry about the “it seems to me” repetition in my post #77. :)
Hmm… sound like the ladies like them pointy sideburns. Might have to grow me some! ;)
#77. Brett Campbell
Yeah, in “Who Mourns For Apollo” (?) or something like that, Kirk asks Chekov how old he is and gets “22, sir.” Kirk is about 36 at the time (14 years older) so, Houston, we have a problem… I think.
Regardless, I’m still pysched about the movie.
kg
81 – Yes, and as much as I thought Urban was a fine actor in the LotR films, I did think they were onto something when there was rumor of consideration of Gary Sinise as Bones — closer to the appropriate age of McCoy for the alleged time frame of this film and a very strong resemblance to the late, great DeForest Kelley (my goodness what a fine actor he was, as well as one hell of a decent human being).
And I’m psyched, regardless, as well.
Last Maquis™, that Enterprise poster cracked me up. Excellent work, and point well made.
And Decker’s Stubble®… quoting that STIII scene with Maltz and Kruge… kudos to you my friend.
dudes like you make sifting through every comment on this site very worth the time.
THE WOMEN!!
=h=
#77—-”Wouldn’t Chekov have been ten or twelve years old by the time Kirk graduated the Academy, and McCoy a practicing physician of nearly a decade or so? That’s approximately the age differences I have in mind by watching TOS. Urban looks too young for McCoy it seems to me at this point in Trek history, it seems to me, and Yelchin — believe it or not — a little too old.”
That is based upon the assumption that STXI depicts Chekov at the Academy at the same time as Kirk. There has been no evidence as to that being the case.However, we have heard evidence (from Knowles’ report after viewing a bit of the film with Abrams) that McCoy, Spock, and Uhura are depicted at the Academy during that same time.
McCoy has a loose backstory that suggests civilian service as a doctor prior to joining Starfleet, so it is certainly plausible that he is there (albeit a bit older).
Spock is roughly the same age as Kirk (according to TAS, “Yesteryear”), so that is also not a problem.
It is only Uhura that I find out of place at the Academy during that period. There is nothing canon which precludes that, but she seems quite a bit younger (and has only advanced from Ensign to Lt., while her classmates would have advanced to Lt. Cmdr. or above by the time of her assignment to Kirk’s Enterprise). It just does not seem appropriate for that particular character to me.
“Yeah, in ‘Who Mourns For Apollo’ (?) or something like that, Kirk asks Chekov how old he is and gets “22, sir.” Kirk is about 36 at the time (14 years older) so, Houston, we have a problem… I think. ”
It’s “Who Mourns For Adonis”, but no matter… There is only “a problem” if Chekov is depicted at the Academy with Kirk, and again, we’ve seen no evidence of that.
It is much more likely that Chekov will not appear at least until Kirk takes command of the Enterprise (according to established canon –in TWOK, Chekov was indeed aboard the NCC-1701 during the events of the first season of TOS).
“Yeah, in “Who Mourns For Apollo” (?) or something like that, Kirk asks Chekov how old he is and gets “22, sir.” Kirk is about 36 at the time (14 years older) so, Houston, we have a problem… I think. ”
No problem – they’re just rewriting everything that’s in the way of the story they want to tell, the way they want to tell it. But its the same universe. Sort of. Not really. But kind of. Not. The important thing to remember is that only losers and nerds care about details. So just remember the things they want you to remember and forget the things they want you to forget and all will be well, because the most important thing is that something labeled Star Trek is really successful. That’s the most important thing. Because J.J. Abrams is a really nice man and he’s a geek and he’s a big name in Hollywood, so everything he does with Star Trek will be the best thing that ever happened :-)
I’m lovin’ the pointy burns.
Actually its “Who Mourns for Adonais” :-)
#85—Once again, who said that Chekov is depicted as a contemporary of JTK? You’re making a judgement that has no basis in fact.
Okay, my computer is really slow right now but I finally looked it up and it’s “Who Mourns for Adonais” (TOS, season 2, ep 2).
kg
Oops. Everyone else in the universe got it except me. I THOUGHT it was Adonais and nearly typed that in but it didn’t make sense because I KNEW he said “I am Apollo”. Never did study Greek mythos… Oh well. Thanks, geeks… oops, uh guys.
kg
#89—That’s correct, but the point still remains. Just because Chekov is a character in this film, does not at all mean that he is depicted as one of Kirk’s classmates at Starfleet Academy. His scenes are likely to take place after Kirk assumes command of the Enterprise from Chris Pike.
#91. Closettrekker
I did not reiterate and am not staunchly maintaining that there’s a problem with Chekov. I just wanted to get the episode listing right.
:-)
kg
#92—I got ya’. I just wanted to make sure that you knew that there wasn’t a problem with it. As for the correct title, I actually misspelled it when I first posted the name. I guess I should have looked it up too!
#43
“You have the right to do so…but I would advise against it.”
C’mon Paulaner…look forward. Join us. The future is bright…for the first time in a lonnnnnggggg time. Don’t sit this one out. If we can’t count on Trek fans to support this new endeavour, what chance does the movie have of bringing in “newbies?”
And here’s the reality, if we don’t make this movie a success, all we’ll ever have is the DVDs…while we wait for more of the beloved original cast to pass into the final frontier.
These characters are too big to be the responsibility of individual actors. If the fans and general audiences embrace the “new” Star Trek, the franchise is virtually assured to live long and prosper beyond any of us.
#93. Closettrekker
What you said about Chekov makes sense. I just never really thought it out. Makes me wonder how much screen time Yelchin has. This is killing me. I can’t wait to see it!! I think Gary Sinise would have been great as Bones, though. I can totally see the crusty doctor in him, even at that age.
Better get some work done. Have a good day, all.
kg
My vote is still out on those uniforms. Still looking like underwear. Need to see MORE!
GREAT photoshop work, though.
And I’m still buying the NV guys as the characters more than these guys- for now.
#94—-”These characters are too big to be the responsibility of individual actors.”
I agree 100%.
“If the fans and general audiences embrace the ‘new’ Star Trek, the franchise is virtually assured to live long and prosper beyond any of us.”
If they do not, it certainly won’t be because the characters were recast… Much of STXI’s target audience was not even alive the last time the original actors portrayed them, and the future of the franchise probably depends on that generation more than on those established fans who cannot separate Kirk from Shatner, etc.
If it captures their imaginations as it did ours, the franchise will be fine.
#96—”And I’m still buying the NV guys as the characters more than these guys- for now”
That makes sense. You’ve seen them in action as those characters, whereas with the STXI cast—you have not (with the exception of Nimoy, of course).
#53 –
How can you tell that April is not the first Captain of the Enterprise in Abrams new film — or to be more accurate: how do you know the first Captain is even mentioned? Possibly the first time we see anyone as Captain of the Enterprise, it will be 20+ years after its launch, and thus Pike is Captain. Live-action Star Trek went 40 years without mentioning April (and by the way — the only time we saw April was in TAS, and he said the component pieces of the Enterprise were built on the ground, just like we saw the Galaxy-class ships being built on the surface of Mars in TNG)
Perhaps we will see the launch of the ship at the beginning of the film, but that doesn’t mean we will see the first crew, also. Perhaps we see the launch only as spectators.
#46 “Honestly, it’s like…how many people have played Sherlock Holmes in TV and film over the years? People argue over whether Basil Rathbone or Jeremy Brett were definitive (I vote the latter), but the point is these are ROLES, the ACTORS are not the CHARACTERS, and therefore it’s perfectly OK to let other actors have a crack at interpreting them. ”
You know I agree it’s perfectly ok to let others have a crack at it, but that doesn’t change the fact that I like Kirk,NOT because he said “risk is our business” but rather how Shatner delivered the words “risk is out business. I like the life that Shatner brought to the role. I like the way Nimoy and Kelley took 2 dimensional characters and made them 3 dimensional. I’m not saying others can’t do the same thing. And I hope Pine and the rest deliver the goods. But the stark reality is, more often than not, recasts don’t work.
I loved Tommy Lee Jones as Mcall in Lonesome Dove. He set the bar high. Jon Voight is a FINE actor, but I didn’t like him AS McCall in the sequel. Jim Varney was a fine comedic talent. But after 40 years of watching Buddy Ebsen AS Jed Clampett, Varney just didn’t deliver. I didn’t like him as Jed Clampett and Buddy Ebsen is to blame. Now, by the same token, I thought Raul Julia was a fantastic Gomez Addams and his chemistry with Anjelica Houston’s Morticia was right on the money. It CAN be done. I loved Sean Connery, hated Roger Moore, loved Timothy Dalton and Daniel Craig. Succesful recasts of this nature is sadly the exception rather than the rule. And that is just the casting…we won’t even get into the on-screen chemsitry needed to pull it off in this particular instance.
I can’t wait for this movie, and yes, everyone looks fantastic, even Pegg….but I remain cautiously optimistic.
Trek fans, pro or con the movie is coming soon. As a fan of TOS, THG, DS9, and VOY I appreciate the of sci-fi themes based in the distant future. Some examples are Mad MAX, Planet of The Apes(the original), and (dare I say it) Buck Rodgers. To have a vision of what might be ,good or bad is intriguing. I also like comics, and horror books. What is my point you ask…
As long as the story is good, and the characters are engaging,there is enjoyment to be had. The new Trek movie is just another story. I like the characters.The stage may be different .The players are not the ones from previous media forms but the possibilities are endless for good stories. If this movie is worthy, if the masses like it , it will endure. If you are rigid, if one is closed to viewing possible entertaining sci-fi just because of nostalgia, one has not grown as a movie enthusiast. Who wants to be stuck in limbo. There should be more original sci -fi ideas in hollywood. Re imaging the past makes for comparisons . However, a bona fide idea can reintroduce the positive vision of sci-fi. Why not give it a chance…If you beleive in the characters , what better way to honor them…what better way to love sci fi again… just a thought
#99—-”How can you tell that April is not the first Captain of the Enterprise in Abrams new film — or to be more accurate: how do you know the first Captain is even mentioned? ”
Good point. We know that Pike is depicted in STXI, but we actually do not know that he is depicted as the first commanding officer of the Enterprise.
And if he is not, it wouldn’t be the first time April’s command has been somewhat contradicted in canon Trek. In TSFS, Admiral Morrow claims that the Enterprise is 20 years old. That doesn’t make sense at all canonically. A matter a weeks before, Kirk claims that he has not seen Khan in 15 years. That places TWOK (and presumably, TSFS) in the year 2181. If the Enterprise is only 20 years old, then that only leaves Pike in command of her for 5 years (which, in itself, seems to contradict “The Menagerie”, which depicts Pike as being in command for much longer).
It is unlikely that Admiral Morrow would be so unfamiliar with the age of a ship that he has made (or at least participated in) a decision to decommission.
If you ask me, TSFS has already debunked Robert April’s command. TAS is in the canon “gray area” anyway, so no mention of April is necessary at all. IMO, you can only consider parts of TAS as canon (those parts which have not been contradicted by live-action Trek).
Looking fantastic!
@#7 bobfred: Ha ha, yes! I thought I was the only one who thought that those posters made Yelchin look like Bashir!
#94 “C’mon Paulaner…look forward. Join us”
Wrong person. You mean the poster before me, B. Taylor, right? :)
Just to chat, let’s talk about the delta symbol and its usage in TOS. We know that it was the identification of the ship, not Starfleet, as other ships used different symbols. OK. We read it in books and manuals.
Now, let’s suppose that in the new movie the delta is intended to be the Starfleet icon, as I think and as I hope. Well, manuals and books stated that the symbol was related to the ship, but no TV episode did it explicitly. So, watching the shows one could think that this is not a canon violation. Maybe the (classic) Defiant has some strange reason to use another symbol. What other Federation ships do we see other than the Defiant? Do you see my point? It’s not blatant inconsistent if you are not an avid reader of tech manuals and Trek encyclopedias. Some explanation can always be found.
By the way: I don’t care much about this kind of details.
102 – My thinking behind Morrow’s math on the age of the Enterprise is the refitted Enterprise.
According to the loosely based math, TOS to TMP was about 2 1/2 years (aacording to Decker saying Kirk hadn’t logged a star hour in that long), and then about 10 or so years between TMP and TWOK (this was discussed in the novelization, I think, and brought the timing up to normal – 1982=2282).
I think he was over exaggerating the age of the refitted Enterprise, saying she was 20 years old.
23rd Century Rugby — judging by the uniforms. Funny, the first set doesn’t have the little holes. The first batch looks slightly more like velour than this batch.
??
Maybe the production shots aren’t necessarily the same costumes they wear in the film? I’m thinking of the production stills of Shatner, Nimoy and Whitney — or even of the one of Shatner and a 50’s era fake computer. What we see in posters (or trailers) may not necessarily be what we get on screen.
Star Trek is about to be brought into the general culture with a real movie that will pack them in… and the trekkers will be dragged in kicking and screaming as their dead icon is given new life. Sad to see so many against it.
As someone else was saying in this thread, I would really LOVE to learn how to do this using photoshop. Would steve be willing to spend his precious time to teach us, even just one technique that he used?
I am not sure about the how though, perhaps a short Youtube clip? Or a short description of which functions to use in what order for one of the techniques?
Which one is which?
Pegg looks worse, even older and balder
#107—”According to the loosely based math, TOS to TMP was about 2 1/2 years (aacording to Decker saying Kirk hadn’t logged a star hour in that long), and then about 10 or so years between TMP and TWOK.”
Your loose math is accurate in determining the length of time between TOS and TMP, but not between TMP and TWOK (despite what the non-canon novelization may or may not have suggested). Given Kirk’s (and Khan’s) assertion that the events of “Space Seed” occured 15 years before TWOK, that places the time between TMP and TWOK at 7.5 years. I find it unlikely that Morrow (even if he is speaking only of the time since her refit) would exaggerate 7.5 years to 20.
If Morrow was exaggerating the overall age of the ship, he would be grossly underestimating it (again, not likely, considering he just participated in a decision to decommission her), and that would not aid his cause of justifying that decision to Admiral Kirk in that brief conversation.
Morrow’s statement is canon. Even if he was off by 6 years or so, then (according to canon established in “The Menagerie”) that still leaves no room for the TAS assertion that a man named Robert April ever commanded the Enterprise.
I don’t know why so many fans insist that April’s command has to be canon, when so much of TAS is clearly not. Certain aspects of TAS have been canonized and that episode confirmed as canon by live action Trek (like the Vulcan Forge of “Yesteryear”), while others have been contradicted and debunked. TSFS does this with “The Counter-Clock Incident”.
Robert April is never again mentioned in live action Trek (novels and comics are not canon). ENT almost referenced him in “In A Mirror, Darkly”, but that material went unused. Unless live-action Trek decides to canonize his existence in the Star Trek Universe, then TSFS would, IMO, have to take precedence.
I am afraid that Robert April is no more “canon” than the Kzinti War (which the timeline has already debunked as well).
If Abrams’ STXI mentions him, then obviously it will supplant the TSFS information as canon. If it does not, then Abrams is not to blame for contradicting TAS. TSFS already did it. Abrams movie would simply be “honoring” canon—not “violating” it.
43. B. Taylor – August 19, 2008
Ok, stay home. You and a few others have prejudged a movie based on…..a few pictures.
Pardon me if I’m a bit trite and unoriginal fur a moment please…
25 years from now…
ROBOTIC BND: Arrrr… so, what’s in tha’ cinema this weekend?
TALKING DOG: Well, my good man, seems there is a new Star Trek film. Look, it’s starring that young fresh actor Dirker McNuttyblast as Kirk.
ROBOTIC BND: What?! Dear God, no! Oh fur God’s sake… Pine is Kirk! They can’t just put someone else in that role! Arrrrg! Is Chris Pine even gunna be in tha’ bloody film?
TALKING PANDA BEAR: No, dear sir, but if it makes you feel any better, Zachie Quinto is going to reprise his Spock role as the older character.
ROBOTIC BND: Aye, well… if Quinto be in it, I suppose it canna be too bad. Who be Scotty? I mean, since Simon Pegg wuz ironically eaten by tha’ unead in tha great Zombie War / Dance Festival back in 2015…
DEAD HORSE: Hey, mate- Ye’ been beatin’ me fur a quarter century! I’m gunna haunt tha’ hell outta ye’ now!!!
ROBOTIC BND: Just great. Hey, Mr. Panda… are ye’ chewin’ on me leg cuz it’s mosty zinc…
WILLIAM SHATNER: Winning this gold medal in the marathon event at these 33rd Olympic Games here in New Beijing, Kansas… well, (sniff) this truly is the greatest moment of my career.
TALKING OWL (silver medalist): I hear he used to be an actor…
Arrrrrr…
John Cho really reminds me of Harry Kim
#116—Other than the fact that they both appear of Korean descent, I don’t see too much resemblance. I think Yelchin looks as at least as much like Bashir as Cho looks like Harry Kim.
I wonder why Spock has a raised collar like from TOS but Sulu, Scotty and Checkov don’t????
It’s so funny. You come to this site, let alone converse with other fans for years, and you see the same arguments about this movie come up again and again.
“The actors don’t look like the originals and can’t possibly replace them.”
Well of course not. The original actors aren’t being replaced. They are being succeeded. And they are not clones.
“Chekov and McCoy and the Enterprise don’t add up age-wise the way it was described or looked in the original series.”
That’s a good one. It is interesting to me how Trek fans, myself included, like to make the puzzle pieces fit. I can see how this is a sticking point for some of us, but for me it just doesn’t seem to be that big of a deal. But on this issue, I respect those who don’t like how the ages of people and things don’t seem to line up, at least from the outside looking in.
“Are they going to portray Pike or April as the first captain?”
Just how do they approach this issue? Officially, I think, April isn’t the canon first captain, but I’ve always just assumed he was because I was fed that as a kid watching TAS. I also got it repeated to me in Trek novels. But none of that are considered canon. And I can’t find it within myself to get worked up about it one way or another.
“If the Enterprise doesn’t look the same as it did in the original then I won’t want to see this movie!”
Not really a question but I can get behind this. I’m really hoping that there aren’t any radical design changes in how the Enterprise looks. This is to take place during Kirk’s tenure, primarily, at the time of his five year mission. I know that for the big screen you want it to have a sense of size and detail, but I don’t want to see a Gabe Koerner make-over. Nothing against his obviously excellent work, I just don’t want my first love to get plastic surgery. However, judging from the teaser, the E is going to be different. Who knows, maybe I’ll like just as much but in a different way. It won’t keep me out of the theater. People who say they won’t go see this movie are being a bit ridiculous. I’ll bet you really will go to the theater, but you’re just feeling hyperbolic and inflammatory. In any case, how would any of us know if you did or didn’t go? Seems to be a pretty safe yet shocking way to get attention.
Anybody know of any of the other stock arguments we can rehash on the poster thread?
#119 “Anybody know of any of the other stock arguments we can rehash on the poster thread?”
Yes: Enterprise built on Earth.
joking… :)
Honestly — I think the actors look really good in the uniforms, Simon Pegg is definitely “channeling” James Doohan. Clearly the uniforms are somewhat different, with black undershirts and the colored “pull-overs” unlike the “one-pieces” from TOS, and I have NO problem with that, I actually like them. Hopefully they will “get it right” when Pike is commanding and have some semblence of the “The Cage-Where No Man Has Gone Before look”. Especially if there is action taking place on the Enterpirse under Pike’s command. Having said that — who is playing Number One? Who is playing Dr. Boyce? They were KEY PLAYERS for Captain Pike. I also have to believe that we will not see Chekov and Uhura until perhaps the end of the film when Kirk assumes command. I REFUSE to believe that Abrams and company would have Kirk at the acadamy at the same time as Chekov and Uhura — it would make zero sense to have that happen. Yes #116 — John Cho totally “channel” Harry Kim, but he does look good as Sulu in the new “unis”. #108 — you make at outstanding point — these shots just might be publicity shots to “throw us off”. Those shots of Shatner, Nimoy and Whitney (especially of Shatner and Nimoy) — are actually “revamped” styles of “The Cage-Where No Man Has Gone Before” era. I have no issues at all regarding Robert April not being in this film……dare I say (again), where is Gary Mitchell?????
My point being, we could be seeing Spock in the poster from a different era than Sulu and Scotty. We know this is a time travel movie. Maybe Sulu and Scotty are wearing the vests as seen from ‘The Cage’ and should actually be wearing gray as the outer garment,
#121—(speaking of rehashed arguments)”…dare I say (again), where is Gary Mitchell?????”
According to “canon”, he is a student in one of LT. Kirk’s classes at Starfleet Academy (obviously after Kirk’s class has graduated and JTK has risen to the rank of LT.). We also know that, during the events of “WNMHGB”, Gary serves on the bridge of the Enterprise under Kirk’s command and is a friend (who at one point even saved Kirk’s life).
However, we have no clear indication that either of those time periods will be depicted in this film. Abrams brand of non-linear storytelling may forward the storyline from Kirk’s graduation to Pike’s command and then to Kirk’s early command of the Big E. By the time we see Kirk, Spock, Bones, Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura on the ship together, Gary Mitchell may be already buried on Delta Vega…
Still, I believe that Paul McGillion’s “mystery character” is indeed Gary Mitchell.
113 – Given how you present it, I agree with you on the math regarding Enterprise’s age.
To me, although its been brought to almost mythological proportions that April commanded Enterprise first (and was presented as such in TAS), the only time I’ve heard him mentioned is in the Whitfield book (in the transcribed memos) and D.C. Fontana mentioning the early concepts, saying April was commander of the Yorktown (which became Pike and the Enterprise).
What’s funny is, Morrow’s quote, although is considered canon, is something I always chalked up to a scripting screw up.
I get the feelng it’s the shinzon game all over again. Nobody really looks like the charactors they are playing. Not even quinto. So the posters don’t do anything for me. I’d rather see a trailer. I think they should have had a trek lookalike contest and then sent the winners to acting school. I think we have all seen someone who looks just like a famous actor sometime in our lives.
additional points in reference to #121—-”…who is playing Number One? Who is playing Dr. Boyce? They were KEY PLAYERS for Captain Pike. ”
They were (at least at one point). How do we know that they will be relevant in STXI? It could be that we will only see Pike at the change of command ceremony that turns the Enterprise over to Captain Kirk. I would think that his First Officer would be present at that ceremony, but “Number One” may not even be in that position by that time (the events of “The Cage” could be approximately 11-13 years prior to the events of “The Menagerie”, and much could have changed during that time).
“I also have to believe that we will not see Chekov and Uhura until perhaps the end of the film when Kirk assumes command. I REFUSE to believe that Abrams and company would have Kirk at the acadamy at the same time as Chekov and Uhura — it would make zero sense to have that happen.”
I don’t think Chekov will be at the Academy during Kirk’s years as a student there. You are correct in that it would make no sense. However unfortunate (if accurate) though, is the report from Harry Knowles (over at AICN)—-which seems to confirm that Uhura is indeed present and receiving her first assignment as well, and seen in conversation with Spock. I agree that her presence would not feel right, and she should probably be much younger than Kirk. I’ll reserve judgement on that until I see the scene with my own eyes.
Bring Back Piper!
#124—”What’s funny is, Morrow’s quote, although is considered canon, is something I always chalked up to a scripting screw up.”
It may have been. But as you say, it is canon. Remember that GR did not consider TAS canon in 1984, and probably neither did Bennett or Nimoy. The script which they did write and direct did not allow for the TAS assertion that Robert April ever commanded the Enterprise. I think that most of us can agree that live-action Trek canon takes precedence over what was written only for TAS, “The Counter-Clock Incident”.
#127 -instagator. lol
#127—”Bring Back Piper!”
Yes. It will be interesting to see if the first Chief Medical Officer of Kirk’s Enterprise will be depicted as Dr. Piper or McCoy. Again, we have no idea as to exactly how much of the change-of-command era will be visited in STXI. Just like with Mitchell, Piper’s time aboard the Enterprise could be over by the time we actually see JTK in command of the Enterprise…I think that would be wise on their part, thus avoiding some of the canon pitfalls that “WNMHGB” provides. Beyond that, there is really no need to rehash those characters who came and went in that period, because then they must explain (to the non-traditional audiences watching this film) what happened to guys like Mitchell and Piper and why they aren’t there later.
It isn’t worth it, IMO.
I’m a stickler for most canon, but not if it harms the story.
I din’t have a problem with McCoy being present at the academy. He could easily have entered the academy after some medical practice.
As for Uhura being in the academy at the same time as kirk, it might still be true.
Not everyone advances in rank at the same rate.
The even bigger question in all of this:
Who is playing the part of redshirt security dude #2 from episode 16 of TOS, and does the new guy look anything like the original?
That question has been keeping me up many nights.
Steve : MySpace has the same poster of Spock but with more of his face and uniform how about doing your magic with this Spock? You see both eyes and his whole chin in this picture and more of his shoulder.
if Finnigan isn’t in this movie… it will be a disaster! j/k guys ;)
although.. maybe McGillion is playing Finnigan???
Someone said that the uniforms were one piece in TOS?? yes.. in SOME episodes… others they were with the black undershirt and pullover. these new uniforms look great.
#133
Excellent suggestion! I too have a request:
Do the same thing with Uhura but make it less uniform vivsible. And more Zoe.
isn’t McCoy’s hair parted on the wrong side???
#130
Could it possible, that there where two ships with the Name USS Enterprise NCC-1701?
I came up with that idea in the morning, after I have seen a DSN episode, where Sisko get another USS Defiant NX-74205 after losing his first one.
I know, it is a bit ridicolous idea, but not impossible. Perhaps Pike loses April’s Enterprise in an major incident (saving the entire galaxy or so) and get another Constituion-Class starship, named Enterprise NCC-1701 in honor of the first ship. I know, it would’ve been named NCC-1701-A. But there where no “A” on the new Defiant and besides the different Enterprises, there are no other federation ships on screen with an A, B, C, D or E.
Beside that, even that theory could not explain the (very possible) different designs between Kirk’s TOS-Enterprise and the new one in Star Trek XI. BUT Morrow could be still right, with the 20 year old ship. I never gave much about the “official timeline” by Michael Okuda and Rick Sternbach. It’s great work indeed, but never seems to fit with the datas given in TWOK and TSFS.
I thought that Chekov (Walter Koenig) had brown eyes???
Now to the topic:
The new uniforms look great. And Steve’s work is really great. Now I really can get a picture of these actors as my favorite Star Trek crew.
WILL PEOPLE PLEASE STOP USING THE OLD REFERENCE BOOKS AS CANNON!!! THE GREAT BIRD OF THE GALAXY EVEN SAID THAT THE BOOKS ARE WORTHLESS PIECES OF INFORMATION AND NOT CANNON, ONLY WHAT IS ON FILM IS CANNON – EVEN THOUGH THAT HAS BEEN VIOLATED AT TIMES!!! DON’T GET SUCKED INTO THE HYPE – REMEMBER THE PHANTOM MENACE!!!
what about Boyce?? eh eh?? http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Philip_Boyce
#131—-I’m with you on McCoy. I think that between medical school and some sort of civilian service prior to his entry into Starfleet, it is natural for him to be a bit older but still attending the Academy at roughly the same time as Kirk and Spock.
“Not everyone advances in rank at the same rate.”
As for Uhura…Here are my thoughts.
I cannot speak in terms of the fictional realm of “Starfleet”, but I can put in in today’s military terms (as a former Marine officer). If an officer cannot advance beyond the rank of O-3 (in this case, Lt.) in 17 years of service (assuming she was still a Lt. throughout the entirety of the 5-year mission), then he/she would not even have the prospect of continuing that career as an option. By age 34, Kirk was a captain (O-6) and Spock was a Lt.Cmdr. (O-4) McCoy, who apparently leaves SFA at the same time, is also a Lt.Cmdr. (O-4). By the end of the 5-year mission, Spock is a Cmdr. (O-5).
However (assuming the report is true), Uhura has been a Starfleet officer for 12 years and has only achieved the rank of Lt. at roughly the age of 34 (not to mention she appeared much younger)! Add another 5 years, and she is still a Lt. at 39 years of age and 17 years of service? That is a stretch for me. It won’t ruin the film for me, but I hope that is not the case.
#137—-That is actually an interesting theory. In “The Cage”, the Enterprise had a crew and officer compliment of 203, while Kirk’s Enterprise had 430 aboard. I always assumed that the Enterprise underwent some sort of refit in between the command of Pike and Kirk, but the theory is certainly plausible. However, I don’t see anything like that being established in STXI (and imagine the self-proclaimed “purists” reactions to that!). I think Morrow’s comment in TSFS is canon, and simply takes precedence over TAS, “The Counter-Clock Incident”.
For my money, TSFS put Robert April in the shredder…Orci’s script is not obligated to mention him or leave it untouched to honor canon. Bennett and Nimoy already contradicted it.
These are great but Karl Urban DOES NOT have blue eyes… Just sayin’.
#141—see post #126. The same logic applies to Boyce’s relevance to STXI as to Number One’s.
WILL PEOPLE PLEASE STOP TYPING WITH THE CAPS LOCK ON!! EVEN THE GREAT BIRD OF TH GALAXY KNEW WHEN IT WAS RUDE TO SHOUT AT OTHERS! AND IF YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT WHAT CAN BE CONSIDERED CANON OR NOT, TRY NOT TO CONTRADICT YOURSELF WITHIN THE SAME SENTENCE!!
jk (because that makes it all better)
#144—What if he wore color contacts in the film? I don’t think that McCoy’s eye-color is a significant issue, but he certainly could have….
Well done…
#148—Thanks, Bob. Nice of you to chime in. Have you been following our discussions today?
so Bob, any comment on how close Steve got to the actuals
#148—I think he did a great job too. And yeah, how close?
Anthony Pascale – August 19, 2008
so Bob, any comment on how close Steve got to the actuals?
On a scale of 1-10 I’d say PRETTY DARN CLOSE.
On a scale of 1-10, PRETTY DARN CLOSE!
Bob – the more I look at them, the more I think I’m diggin’ those – *AHEM*- ‘reinterpreted’ uniforms. Any idea when we’re gonna get a ‘full frontal’ ? LOL
Bob,
What’s on your plate these days? Any new thoughts on potential storylines for sequels to STXI (or zero)? I know it hasn’t broken any box-office records yet, but there must be some action in that imagination of yours….
could the ‘different’ uni’s be cadet uni’s? or some sort of special duty uni?
#152 “On a scale of 1-10, PRETTY DARN CLOSE!”
Bob, with scoring skills like that you missed your calling as an Olympic judge for the horseshoe-tossing event!
#156—-What would you judge, Harry? The women’s balance beam?
#156 Harry
Funny!
“the Ukranian judge scores it an 8.7. The French judge scores it an 8.8. The Canadian judge scores it an 8.6. And the American judge says it was Really Neato.”
Personally, I prefer my women unbalanced……or is that unhinged?
#43 – that’s a great approach. Hardcore fans don’t go see Trek opening weekend, hurt the B.O. and then convince Paramount that Trek should finally be buried for good. That’s what any true fan would do. (SARCASM)
The more we see, the more I’m convinced that JJ will give us a Trek for ALL. And if the hardcore TOS fans don’t want to go – well have fun at home with the DVD’s you’ve seen 10,000 times.
So, if you get wood while watching the women’s balance beam event, could you turn to someone of Scottish origin and legitimately say, “the women’s balance beam me up, Scotty!”
#161—BND might say, “Shiver me timber!”
#32 – Nicholas Angel
I seriously love you right now… The one you made of Karl is simply breathtaking. I just have to show this to my fellow Urbanites. Will give you all the credit you deserve of course. :D
Watch out, Nicholas Angel. SciFigirl has you in her sights. Don’t screw this up. And remember to get digits.
How about a new trailer for the closing Olympic ceremonies!
I dunno, I always kinda got the impression that McCoy was never at the Academy, but rather came to Starfleet from private practice. Remember how McCoy was the only one on the bridge who didn’t know what a “Dunsel” was in The Ultimate Computer? Even Daystrom seemed to get that reference before Spock explained it.
But I don’t really care. I’ve loved ST since all we had were the reruns in the 1970s, and I most definitely will be there on opening day, with my children right beside me! I love TOS and I can’t be more excited about this new film!
Nice job!
106. We saw the patches for Exeter and Constellation in TOS (and maybe Defiant as well.) Ex Astris Scientia has a nice jpg here showing several patches
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/gallery/other/tos-emblems.jpg
99 102 et al
The Menagerie places the Enterprise’s first visit to Talos 4 thirteen years before Spock’s trial. Spock says that twice in the dialog. The Menagerie occurs prior to Space Seed, which in turn happens fifteen years before TWOK. This places the minimum age of 1701 at about 28 yrs when Morrow makes his statement. So his statement cannot be referring to the entire age of 1701.
In truth, many dates/times/ages given throughout ST’s four decades cannot be reconciled with each other. For example, in several TOS episodes–and TWOK–it was established that about 200 hundred years separated Kirk and Co.’s time from our own. TVH gave us “the latter part of the 23rd century.” That’s three hundred years not two.
Given such inconsistencies, April being in this movie would be acceptable from a date/time/age POV. April not being in the movie would also be acceptable.
@13
I seem to remember Spock wearing two shirts (that is, putting on a second shirt) in The Naked Time, after the doc gave him the OK…
I don’t give a fart in a windstorm about canon, which former captain (if any) will show up in the movie, who bunked with whom at the academy, whether the uniforms are polyester or velour, what color Scotty’s/Kirk’s/McCoy’s eyes are, or any of that stuff. Since this is all…dare I say it…fiction, I’m letting my brain be flexible about all this. Not going to overthink it, not going to fret about it, not gonna let it ruin my day. I’m looking forward to the movie, seeing it multiple times, and hoping that the “new” Trek excites me the same way the old Trek did.
The Trek is dead. Long live the Trek.
Come on. Let’s have some fun with it.
#49 …Thanks for being a man and confessing your respect for Enterprise. The show has gotten a bad rap and just like the original found a fan base after the fact when we could have gotten an extra 3 years of the history of TOS. Manny Coto would have de-bergmanized the franchise and who know what could have happened. There are always possibilities :)
#16 I saw what you did. It also asks if I wanna buy the print. I’m pretty sure JJ’s gonna make sure you only see this movie if its during your conjigal visits with Tyrone by your side. LOL
#160 – ‘Personally, I prefer my women unbalanced……or is that unhinged?’
I have an ex-wife I’d like to introduce you to………
#168—-”This places the minimum age of 1701 at about 28 yrs when Morrow makes his statement. So his statement cannot be referring to the entire age of 1701.”
There is no indication that he is referring to anything but its “entire age”…
“The Enterprise is twenty years old…”
What else could he have meant?
Your chronology is correct. However, the point of my initial post on the subject was to point out that STXI will not be in violation of canon if April is not depicted as the first Captain of the Enterprise we know as NCC-1701.
As for why I chose to point out Morrow’s statement, the intention was to prove that STXI would not be the first ST film to contradict “The Counter-Clock Incident” (TAS), and the existence of Robert April or evidence that he ever commanded the Big E has never been confirmed in live-action Trek (unlike some other aspects of TAS).
“In truth, many dates/times/ages given throughout ST’s four decades cannot be reconciled with each other. For example, in several TOS episodes–and TWOK–it was established that about 200 hundred years separated Kirk and Co.’s time from our own. TVH gave us “the latter part of the 23rd century.” That’s three hundred years not two. ”
Actually, TWOK officially set itself “in the 23rd Century…” (the film opens with that on the screen). All subsequent Trek places the TOS-era in the 23rd Century. This is what I mean. Just as TWOK retconned the timeline (even if the dialogue in the film once again contradicts it), STXI may determine once and for all that there was no Robert April in command of the Enterprise by depicting Pike as its first captain.
But you are correct. Both “Space Seed” and TWOK have dialogue which suggest that Khan and his people were aboard the Botany Bay for two centuries, and yet place their departure from Earth in the year 1996. Furthermore, the timeframe in which TOS was set often failed to be consistent from one episode to another.
Yet despite all of these inconsistencies, people like the poster I initially responded to act as if all will go to Hell if Abrams STXI makes even something which is only perceived in “fanon” as a canonical error, or contradicts the lore which is often born out of the slightest bit of TOS dialogue or a 25 minute cartoon that has always been in the canonical gray area to begin with.
On The Offical Star Trek Website they only list Three Captains of the Enterprise are April,Pike and Kirk.
I always herd that the only thing Gene held as cannon from TAS is that April is the first captain of the Enterprise…
#175—I still maintain that it is hard to say that it is canon when it has not only gone unconfirmed in live-action Trek—but actually contradicted in TSFS!
If everything in TAS was canon, how would you explain the Kzinti War? The fact is, some of it has been made legitimate by DS9 and ENT, while most of it has not.
#176—Let’s take that with a grain of salt…GR also did not consider any ST film other than TMP to be canon either…It is very difficult to consider TAS, “Yesteryear”, for instance, as non-canon when it is used as a template for the geography of Vulcan in future Trek and the director’s edition of TMP.
I know that GR initially wanted to set TOS aboard a ship called the USS Yorktown and call its captain Robert April, but I’ve never actually heard that comment. In any case, GR wanted to strike the entire 3rd season of TOS from canon as well as the 5 movies after TMP.
I cannot justify basing such a significant bit of canon history solely upon a 25 minute cartoon seen on Saturday mornings some 35 years ago. I need something else, if only a hint in a live action Trek production. If Abrams STXI makes April’s captaincy legitimate—fine. That will supercede the contradiction in TSFS. Until then, I will consider the first captain of the Enterprise to be Chris Pike.
Canon nerds suck the life out of Star Trek.
There, I said it, let’s move on!
168 well stated. To continue the speculation…
““The Enterprise is twenty years old…”
What else could he have meant?”
The twenty years between The Cage and TSFS probably (our time line.) With the crew getting a renamed Excelsior, maybe? seems to me that I remember such rumors swirling around TSFS at the time that that was the plan.
“Actually, TWOK officially set itself “in the 23rd Century…” (the film opens with that on the screen). … as TWOK retconned the timeline (even if the dialogue in the film once again contradicts it),”
No contradiction is present in the movie if TWOK is set very early in the 23rd century. :-) 1996 + 200 + 15 = 2211
“Yet despite all of these inconsistencies, people like the poster I initially responded to act as if all will go to Hell if Abrams STXI makes even something which is only perceived in “fanon” as a canonical error, or contradicts the lore which is often born out of the slightest bit of TOS dialogue or a 25 minute cartoon that has always been in the canonical gray area to begin with.”
Yep people hear what they want to hear, see what they want to see and assume what they want to assume. (case in point: the 12 Constitutions / 13 Constitutions debate that raged in alt.startrek back in the day.)
Anyway I am really looking forward to this film. And I have yet to see any thing to damper that enthusiasm.
Sherlock Holmes? Jeremy Brett all the way. :)
Maybe instead of new actors they could have used 3d computer images of the original actors and even use their voices, look at the film Final Fantasy; the spirits within, it looked very realistic! IMO no matter how much JJ ‘reimagines’ the classic Trek, something tells me he is going to destroy my childhood memories.
153 Boborci, The crew wearing the yellow or red or blue jackets with the delta shield pattern in the posters are they wearing dress uniform jackets?
#179–”No contradiction is present in the movie if TWOK is set very early in the 23rd century. :-) 1996 + 200 + 15 = 2211″
It isn’t set early in the 23rd Century, much less “very early”. TVH suggests that it is set in “the late 23rd Century”. 2281-2282.
“The twenty years between The Cage and TSFS probably (our time line.) With the crew getting a renamed Excelsior, maybe? seems to me that I remember such rumors swirling around TSFS at that time”
Uh…no. Once again, “The Cage” (according to “The Menagerie”) takes pace 13 years prior to the events of the first season of TOS, and is set aboard the Enterprise NCC-1701. Furthermore, TWOK is roughly 15 years after “Space Seed”. That means that 28 years prior to TWOK-TSFS-TVH, Chris Pike was in command of the Enterprise, Number One was its First Officer, and Spock was a science officer aboard.
Morrow’s statement is simply contradictory. The question is—is he 8+ years off or 16+? 8 seems a great deal more plausible, making April’s command non-canon.
Rumors? If TAS is in a gray area and novels are not canon, then rumors aren’t even worth mentioning…
“And I have yet to see any thing to damper that enthusiasm.”
Nor have I. STXI not mentioning Robert April (which was the whole basis for that discussion) won’t either…
IT WAS GENE RODENBERRYS BIRTHDAY TODAY!!!!
Did I miss an article on here or something?
Where’s the respect?
Great work on those posters.
There’s also one constant in the Trek Universe. I’ve been a fan now for over 30 years, and I could step into the timeline at any point and find a bunch of fans arguing with each other over who is a TRUE fan.
IDIC, folks, IDIC. No one’s wrong, no one’s right. We all have just taken away different things from this wonderful thing called STAR TREK.
Little Boy: Oh Talking Owl, how many flicks of a Star Trek franchise does it take to get to the Roddenberry center?
BND’s Talking Owl: I don’t know. Let’s find out. (Licking a micro-DVD on a stick) One. Two-hoo. Thrrree. CRUNCH! Uh, Three.
Announcer: How many flicks must Trek fans sit through until everyone is happy? The world may never know.
184. Newman – August 19, 2008
IT WAS GENE RODENBERRYS BIRTHDAY TODAY!!!!
Did I miss an article on here or something?
Where’s the respect?
_ We passed around cake earlier… where were you?
I still can’t get over how convincing Quinto is playing Spock. It’s mind blowing.
I doubt the delta shield pattern in the fabric will be this evident in the film, short of freeze framing the Blu-Ray DVD. However, I find it a little distracting and a lot overkill. It’s starting to look like a Star Trek convention with all the Delta shields on everything. Hate they chose to stick with the primary color scheme inspired by RCA’s marketing strategy to sell color television sets of the 1960s. With any luck the red shirts will be muted and not as bright as these faked images. Otherwise, the eye will be drawn to them wherever they are, even if they are not the focus of the story. Let’s hope the sets make even more sparing use of this dominant color.
183
#179–”No contradiction is present in the movie if TWOK is set very early in the 23rd century. :-) 1996 + 200 + 15 = 2211″
It isn’t set early in the 23rd Century, much less “very early”. TVH suggests that it is set in “the late 23rd Century”. 2281-2282.
———————————————————————————–
No you claimed that the movie contradicted itself. It does not. It may contradict some revisions that came after it but it is consistent with itself and with what was presented in TOS, especially Space Seed.
———————————————————————————-
“The twenty years between The Cage and TSFS probably (our time line.) With the crew getting a renamed Excelsior, maybe? seems to me that I remember such rumors swirling around TSFS at that time”
Uh…no.
————————————————————————–
Was referring to time between movies, not the ST timeline. And I still think the plan was to give Kirk the Excelsior at the end of TVH.
————————————————————————–
Morrow’s statement is simply contradictory. The question is—is he 8+ years off or 16+? 8 seems a great deal more plausible, making April’s command non-canon.
——————————————————————————-
His statement is flat out wrong and therefore cannot be trusted, neither as a gauge of 1701’s age nor as a gauge as to who could have commanded her. And just because one answer may be more probable doesn’t exclude the other from happening. Low probability events happen the universe all the time.
———————————————————————————–
Maybe this is McGillion’s secret role, maybe he’s April.
# 190
It was obvious Morrow not shared much for the old Enterprise. With his twenty years comment, he just want to say, the ship was old.
MORROW: “Jim, the Enterprise is twenty years old.”
KIRK: “She’’s arround thirty years, Admiral”.
MORROW: “Oh hell… She should be already scrapped by now!”
# 191
That would be a really great surprise. A really great surprise. Physically McGillion more matches Gene Roddenberry’s April (pictures of him was used as “April” in the official chronology and in the Enzyklopedia) than Garry Lockwood’s Mitchell.
From everything that I have heard there are action/battle sequences that are supposed to take place under Pike’s command, IF that is the case there must be (at least):
1-Number 1
2-Dr. Boyce
3-Tyler
Needless to say, the uniforms, should reflect that time period.
Just some consistency please.
- Scotty looks like JOHN SAXON..in PLANET EARTH.. The doctor looks more like that ugly romulans from ENTERPRISE with that stupid chin..( i must confess that i really hate the ENTERPRISE producers for that stupid change of look added to romulans…and for replaceing the TNG warbirds with that stupid .. flying fleas.. and i hate TOS REMASTERED producers too , for that change of looks added to warbirds)..and the new clothes looks like the uniform weared by TUVIX….bleah…The trek producers in generally are trying (very hard) to p…off on the fans wishes..too bad…
#194 –
It’s true that Dr. Boyce, Tyler and Number 1 (at least the Number One from “The Cage”) all were on the Enterprise 11 or 12 years before Kirk took command…
…But what if a “Pike-commanded space battle” takes place a year or two (or even five years) prior to Kirk taking command? We have no idea who Pike’s crew was during that time period.
#190—”…you claimed that the movie contradicted itself. It does not. It may contradict some revisions that came after it but it is consistent with itself and with what was presented in TOS, especially Space Seed.”
It is not consistent with what was presented in “Space Seed”, which places Khan’s departure from Earth aboard the sleeper ship Botany Bay in the year 1996 (this is reiterated in TWOK). Khan asks if he had heard correctly that he had been asleep for 200 years. It is then confirmed that this is correct. That would place the time period of “Space Seed” at 2196–in the 22nd Century.
TMP (in establishing the age of the Voyager VI probe) and the TWOK-TVH trilogy retconned the often inconsistent Star Trek timeline to place the TOS-era/feature film era in the latter half of the 23rd Century. That superceded any contradiction to that prior to TWOK. However, with that in mind, Khan’s dialogue on Ceti Alpha V should have ackowledged that. Instead, Khan says, “On Earth, 200 years ago, I was a prince–with power over millions.” That implies that TWOK is taking place in or before 2196–which is–AGAIN– the 22nd Century. That, my friend, is a contradiction with its own establishment of a 23rd Century setting in the beginning of the movie, TMP’s implications that it is in the latter half of the 23rd Century, and finally, TVH’s confirmation that it is.
“His statement is flat out wrong and therefore cannot be trusted, neither as a gauge of 1701’s age nor as a gauge as to who could have commanded her.”
Why is it okay for the feature film series to retcon the timeline overall, contradicting numerous episodes of live action TOS, while it is not okay for TSFS to contradict a 25 minute Saturday morning cartoon (and thus supercede that “gray canon”)—which is the only evidence or mention of Robert April in the 42 year history of Star Trek? That does not make sense. Morrow’s statement is canon. If subsequent live action Trek were to contradict that, then it would no longer be, but nothing like that has occurred. Harve Bennett wrote that script, and Leonard Nimoy directed it. If Mr. Nimoy thought that it was necessary to depict the Enterprise as being older than 20 years, I have to believe he would have said so. He did not.
Morrow’s statement, to this day, is canon—whether it contradicts “The Counter-Clock Incident” or not. For there to be room for April’s command (again, only suggested by an animated Trek episode and never confirmed in live action Trek), he would have had to be off by 16 years. The Memory Alpha timeline places April taking command of Enterprise in 2245. That would mean that Morrow would have had to say that the Enterprise was 36 years old!
Unfortunately, Morrow’s statement also contradicts “The Menagerie”. Instead of 13 years before, the events on Talos IV would have to be a maximum of 5 years before Spock’s Court-Martial. The reasonable solution to this “canon dilemma” is to assume that Morrow was off by 8 years with his statement, thus preserving the basic chronology of “The Menagerie”. I could not care less about preserving the continuity of TAS, “The Counter-Clock Incident”— especially enough to assume that an Admiral (who actually just participated in a decision to decommission the Enterprise) would be off as much as 16 years in his recollection of her age.
As far as TAS goes, unless substantial elements of an episode are made legitimate by reference in at least one live-action Trek production (like elements of “Yesteryear”), then I don’t consider that information canon. The rest of you may do what you like.
Now, my intention was not to argue what contradicts what, but simply to point out that Abrams’ STXI will not be the first to ignore “The Counter-Clock Incident” and the notion that there was a man named Robert April who was the first Captain of the Enterprise (if STXI does indeed ignore it). Nimoy’s TSFS paid no mind to it either. It was also to remind those who say “it will be a disaster” if Abrams film contradicts any detail of TOS/TAS, that the World did not end with the contradictions in any of the previous Star Trek films. It will not as a result of this one either.
#196—Exactly…Number One and Boyce were officers under Pike’s command 13 years prior to “The Menagerie”. Either one or both of them could have been killed, moved on to another assignment, or (particularly in Boyce’s case) retired by the time we see any Pike commanded battle sequence (if that is indeed even accurate). It is quite possible that Spock is the only officer recognizable from “The Cage” other than Captain Pike himself aboard the Enterprise.
#196-I totally see your point. Having said that for “Fandom’s sake”, it would be nice to see some of “Pike’s crew” from the Cage in this movie — especially since their not only embedded in our minds but all have been featured in novels and comic books centered around Captain Pike’s adventures.
#197
Is the TWOK circu 2283ish (given the date of Romulan ale)? I assumed to joke there is that the drink was not old. If so, then subtracting 200 year from there gives you 2083 (our current century+8decades). Only 90 years off, I guess. If they said over 200 years ago or something like that it would have been at least say its close enough.
Maybe it had something to do with the Temporal Cold War. You know, screwed up the frakin timeline. I guess that is the only good use for that arc. An excuse for bad timekeeping :)
“This is no time to argue about time. We don’t have the time”. My favorite Trio quote……that and “Chocolate is serious business”.
#197-Why hate the Offical Trek site??? it says that April is the First captain of Enterprise and why the hate for TAS? if website and the makers of the Star Trek Encycopida have April as the First Captain then good enough for me…and this is the first time I have heard of Gene wanting to Scrap the five movies after TMP and the third season of TOS. I had heard that he wanted to make TNG a little diffrent from TOS.
THATS the problem
i think that this film is simply a show-boat for Quinto to prove that he is a good actor, apart from the other hereos on screen
and they just happen to use a dead format to flog it in.
Why do so many people determine the quality of this movie by these posters? The look of the actors is only part of the characters, their performances are what will really determine if the movie is good or not. All of TOS fans who are not going to see it should reconsider what the Enterprise crew and Star Trek is all about before they begin to crucify it.
After all, I don’t think Gene would have thought that the original cast is the only cast for these roles. In fact, Gene was thinking about doing a prequel to Star Trek long ago.
#200—I have no hate for TAS. I actually own the collection on dvd, and “Yesteryear” is one of my favorite Trek stories.
Yes. GR did, in later years, state that he did not consider the 3rd season of TOS to be canon because he was so unhappy with it. He also said that, one by one, he did not consider any feature films beyond TMP to be canon. Gene was often bitter about any Star Trek that he lacked control over.
The ST encyclopedia is also non-canon.
Last I checked, only events and dialogue appearing in live-action Star Trek series, plus the movies are considered canon. No books, no “fannon” not even TAS (which I did enjoy as a young teen) are considered to be official.
#201 John
That’s a hell of an expensive “boat” and if you don’t like Trek… why are you here?
#202 I agree that gene wouldn’t mind a revamped crew with younger Actors because no one stays young forever or lives on earth forever as far as we know….I for one will not Judge the movie tell I have seen it and I hold a lot of fath that what JJ is going to make a good movie.
#203 Who says what Cannon is??? the Offical site,the TV shows and movies and who makes that determanation? Fans,Producers,ect?
#205—”I agree that gene wouldn’t mind a revamped crew with younger Actors because no one stays young forever or lives on earth forever as far as we know….I for one will not Judge the movie tell I have seen it and I hold a lot of fath that what JJ is going to make a good movie.”
I’m in full agreement with you there. And GR’s hope that one day these characters would be revisited by different actors is on record.
“Who says what (canon) is??? ”
According to MA, Star Trek canon is defined as: all live action Star Trek and feature films released by Paramount.
While the Paramount release of TAS on dvd raises some question as to its canonical status, and therefore that definition which stood for decades unchallenged, ultimately the fans determine for themselves what is “canon” and what is “fanon” (like the reference books, novels, comics, etc.). I put TAS in the “fanon” category, unless it has been given legitimacy by reference in live-action Trek (like “Yesteryear”) was in DS9 and later, ENT.
Since Robert April’s mention in “The Counter-Clock Incident” was the cause for this debate initially, let me say this. There was a plan to reference him in ENT “In A Mirror, Darkly”. However, that reference was never made (as that material was scrapped). IMO, such a reference would have made him the legitimate first Captain of the USS Enterprise NCC-1701. But the truth is, such a firm canon reference has yet to be made (it has only been mentioned in the canonical gray area of TAS). If it is, I will accept that he preceded Pike in canon. If Abrams’ STXI does not recognize him, or continues to leave it open for debate, I will continue to recognize that Pike is the only legitimate predecessor of JTK in command of that vessel. That is my perogative. With that said, Abrams has every right to make April canon, once and for all. But if Pike is depicted as being the first to command her in STXI, I will be right there to argue that April’s command was never made canon by reference in live action Trek when some fans inevitably get upset about it, and therefore it would not be an actual violation.
The question in my mind is, is Paul McGillion’s “mystery character” Gary Mitchell or Robert April? Could it be someone else entirely, like Finnegan (I hope not) or Ben Finney? Could it be some other nugget character of Treklore not yet considered, like a young Matt Decker, Lee Kelso, Mr. Kyle, or (pardon me while I throw up) Sybok?
If McGillion shows up as a young Sybok I will rip up my Trek membership card, move to Mexico, and live in the hills collecting payotee buttons! Yikes!
Star Trek fans – GET BEHIND THIS MOVIE!!!!
I love TOS and all things Trek and I’m totally with everyone who’s prepared to give this new film its chance. I just can’t understand the fans (I can perhaps forgive sceptical non-fans) who seem to be rubbishing this project before actually seeing it.
Don’t get me wrong, I have my reservations, BIG reservations about various aspects and I can understand the concerns about cannon and the nostalgia relating to the basic fear of our icons being played by a new cast – amongst many other worries… but it certainly won’t stop me from seeing it, and hoping before hand that it rocks!
True, if it sucks then Star Trek may truly be dead but if people are so negative that they stay away from the cinemas then “that will be that” as they say (at least as far as big budget “Hollywood” movies go). I know JJ Abrams is hoping to attract a more “mainstream” audience with this, hopefully he will succeed where other Treks have failed – but if the fans duck out…it’s game over. If this failed following on from Nemesis then it will be highly unlikely we’ll see another Star Trek film for years…if ever… and look what happened to Enterprise via fan neglect….
So, BOLDLY GO…..if it’s bad then look at like this…you’ll be able to fill weeks, if not months of your time moaning about it on message boards ……but apart from a few pounds/dollars and 2 hours what have you got to loose? and it surely won’t be any worse than the other slightly disappointing resurrections of 2008 (Indy IV or X-Files 2 anyone?) which, although shadows of their former selves in my opinion, were still worthy of a trip to the movies and entertaining enough in their own right – if separated from the sometimes old enemy of fan nostalgia.
Look on the bright side…if time travel is truly a main plot device in the new film then maybe it won’t be all that bad…as the two most successful films (Star Treks IV and VIII) both depended heavily on its use and were both commercial hits and fan favs (if not, perhaps, the best of the series which surely has to be the mighty TWOK).
Live Long & Prosper!
Steve did an excellent job of adding some vibrant and realistic colors to these posters… But I just thought I’d take a stab at playing with the colors, to see if I could try and make it look a tad bit more realistic to my eyes. I also made Scotty’s eyes brown instead of dark bluish, and changed Chekov’s eyes to a greenish brown (since the original Chekov had bright brown eyes and Anton Yelchin has greenish colored eyes.. at least from what I can tell)
Here it is & let me know what you think:
http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/9919/trekposter2colored1gn6.jpg
Please note I edited Steve’s work and did not start from scratch, so he still deserves the credit! =)
197
These are the quotes regarding the passage of time in Space Seed:
“Two centuries, we estimate.” “Did I hear it say I had been sleeping for two centuries? ” “You have 200 years of catching up to do.”
This is conversational English and not precise measurements. In conversation people tend to round their numbers. How much wiggle room does that provide? Would 180 years be close enough? 190? How about 210 or 220?
In TWOK we see the same tendency. Just prior to
“On earth, two hundred years ago, I was a prince, with power over millions”
we have
“Save your strength, Captain, these people have sworn to live and die at my command two hundred years before you were born.”
So where do we measure forward to? The events of TWOK? of Space Seed? of Terrell’s birth? We don’t measure to any one of these with precisely 200 years because the “two centuries” of time is an estimate of what has passed, not a precise calculation.
Which brings us to “In the 23rd Century…”
All that is necessary for this line to be true is for the events of Space Seed to occur after 2185 (or after 2184 for those of you who think the 23rd century begins in 2200.) In other words, adding the 15 years of exile to 2186 (2185) results in 2201 (2200), the first year of the 23rd century.
Then there’ that “date” on the Romulan Ale, which I touch on in my response to 199.
(BTW I did not offer my comments at #190 about Morrow as a defense of April’s “canonization.” There is simply no way to reconcile his comment with any other comments about 1701’s age and therefore must be wrong. 1701 is no less than 28 and possibly no more than 46 at the time of TSFS. BTW this upper limit is from The Cage. The 18 years of the survivor camp coupled with “You won’t believe how fast you’ll get back. The time barrier’s been broken. Our new ships can-”)
199
Would a bottle of Romulan Ale that has been smuggled across the Neutral Zone have a Terran date on it? No, it wouldn’t.
————————–
All the above is speculation though, an alternate way of looking at the “facts” presented in the TWOK and Space Seed. Not arguing that it is “canon.” IMHO, however, it is more consistent than the superficial interpretation that made its way into the subsequent movies. And I personally think that haviing the time frame of TWOK just barely into the 23rd century really plays into the psychology of the movie. Putting a younger crew on the ship, Kirk feeking his age etc.
#58. Mammalian
Yeah I was getting really inspired, I wanted to try and make the Bridge module turn back slightly towards the Camera all Sexy and stuff, and have
that port Nacelle looking downward with a bit of cockiness to it. The fin on the Starboard one was Mutilated somewhat and the mid part of the saucer was looking straight ahead, Emotionless yet eager almost. Ah well, I don’t want to be a Purist here or anything. oh and thanks Buckaroo.
#207—-”If McGillion shows up as a young Sybok I will rip up my Trek membership card, move to Mexico, and live in the hills collecting payotee buttons! Yikes!”
Thanks, Harry. I have coffee all over my keyboard now!
#210—”So where do we measure forward to? The events of TWOK? of Space Seed? of Terrell’s birth? We don’t measure to any one of these with precisely 200 years because the “two centuries” of time is an estimate of what has passed, not a precise calculation.
Which brings us to “In the 23rd Century…”
It’s all a moot point. TVH, which is the conclusion of the same trilogy and story-arc, firmly places the timeframe in the late 23rd Century–which conforms to much more traditional interpretations of when the stories take place.
“I did not offer my comments at #190 about Morrow as a defense of April’s “canonization.” There is simply no way to reconcile his comment with any other comments about 1701’s age and therefore must be wrong. 1701 is no less than 28 and possibly no more than 46 at the time of TSFS.”
I don’t doubt for a second that Morrow’s dialogue in TSFS is an unintended error. Bennett and Nimoy screwed up. But that was the whole point. In the grand scheme of things, no one is accusing Leonard Nimoy of “raping their childhood” by allowing such a contradiction/canon violation in that film, so why should JJ Abrams be held to such a higher standard in STXI?
As for April, it just has not been made legitimate, as opposed to some of the other elements of TAS. If anything, it has been contradicted by the timeline later. Furthermore, a case can be made that, since all live action Trek is considered canon, the most recent edition should take precedence whenever a contradiction inevitably comes up (and actually does). After all, there is no way to reconcile the timeline being completely all over the place in the first season of TOS anyway.
It was the films which established once and for all that Star Trek took place in the 23rd Century (and TVH which really narrowed it down to the “late” 23rd Century for sources like Memory Alpha and the like). All future spinoffs were based upon that, starting with TNG. So the question is, why is it okay for TVH’s establishment of the timeline once and for all to supercede everything prior, but not okay for TSFS to contradict “The Menagerie”/”The Cage” and other episodes from the first season? That makes no sense….
#210—It’s all a moot point. TVH firmly places the timeline by that point at the “late 23rd Century”, and all future Trek is chronologically based upon that. Since that has obviously been accepted, my question is this:
If it is okay for TVH’s one line of dialogue to supercede everything prior to that which may have been seen as a contradiction, then why is it not okay for Morrow’s dialogue in TSFS (which Bennett wrote and Nimoy directed) to supercede anything in “The Menagerie”/ “The Cage”? The first season of TOS is one big timeframe mess anyway. On episode even places the TOS-era as much as 800 years from 1966! I don’t see the logic.
In any case, my initial assertion still stands firm. I have no doubt that Morrow’s dialogue in TSFS was an unitentional error in the writing and directing department. Yet you do not hear any fans claiming that Leonard Nimoy “raped their childhood” by contradicting “The Menagerie”.
Why should Abrams’ STXI be held to such a higher standard?
I realize that it wasn’t you who implied that, but it is the general idea of what the post you first responded to was about.
Sorry. I thought that post #212 got “LOST”.
This looks awesome. Re-imagining was more what I was looking for, despite my great affection for TOS, but I definitely give them credit for keeping so much of the original look.
As for the purists, well, some people will never be satisfied.
I can’t believe people are STILL WHINING about canon issues. It’s SO pathetic.
#216—There are still those who believe that anything STXI does to contradict past Treklore will be disasterous, despite the fact that such contradictions have been a part of Trek since the beginning–unfortunately.
Canon is supposed to be fun, which for me, it is.
217
I like canon too. I like discussing it, arguing about it (both pro and con), and speculating other interpretations of the same “facts.” Even sandboxing an incarnation like I did with the Khan story arc and seeing if the superficial interpretations bear up under scrutiny. Or could the future of ST at that point gone a different way?
I would like to point out that ST 2 thru 4 is not a trilogy in the traditional sense. There was no preplanned beginning, middle and ending in place before TWOK started shooting. In fact ST3 might have been a Spockless outing if Paramount hadn’t let Nimoy direct. Who know’s how that would have fared?
#218—Agreed, but that IS how it turned out—one giant story with several subplots in between its introduction and conclusion. Whether or not it was preplanned (and I have no doubt that it wasn’t) is irrelevant.