Star Trek Trailer Description Online | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Trailer Description Online November 8, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Rumor,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

A couple of descriptions of the trailer for the new Star Trek movie have shown up online. If you cannot wait until next week and want some possible spoilers then look below.

 


AICN actually has two different descriptions, here is how the more detailed one starts out:

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

 Goto AICN to read the rest

TrekMovie has not been able to confirm the complete description, but has confirmed that all the scenes described are consistent with scenes in the final film.

Comments

1. A Mad Man In Love - November 9, 2008

Hopefully we’ll finally see some shots of the new Enterprise; lets hope they haven’t screwed around with the design too much!!!

2. Tony - November 9, 2008

From what I’ve read it’s nothing but FAN-BOY garbage to illustrate that classic trek is not good enough. Screw You JJ!!!!

3. DaiMonRon - November 9, 2008

The description sounds interesting…..can’t wait to see it!

4. Melllvar - November 9, 2008

Sounds pretty fun to me….although it seems like a second teaser, rather than an actual trailer. One other thing I noticed in the description…..sounds like we might have to wait a bit longer to see the Enterprise. I bet that doesn’t go over too well here. :-P

5. Reign1701A - November 9, 2008

Yeah where’s the shot of the Enterprise? Oh well, I’m still dying to see it!

6. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

So then how come Kirk doesn’t know how to drive a car in “A Piece of the Action”? Sounds like a silly plot element to me. Is he supposed to be James Kirk or James Dean? I am going to find this a little difficult to swallow as part of the back story for James T. Kirk.

#1 — Don’t get your hopes up about the design of the new Enterprise. Looks and sounds like they are taking a lot of liberties with a lot of things, and they haven’t been shy about “screwing around” with a lot of other things.

Hope they show Spock with his fanged teddy-bear, though … ;)

7. MDSHiPMN - November 9, 2008

I must see it. I wont see Bond, so the ‘net better act quick!

8. Vlasid - November 9, 2008

Very exciting… Cant wai’t to see actual trailer. The description sounds like a very new take on good old Trek, and I have nothing against it, especially if new movie succeed in revitalising the franchise and bringing Trek back to the TV and cinema screens.

What me worries most is the russian dubbing – this guys can completly screw the good movie, like they did with “The Dark Knight”.

9. Sean - November 9, 2008

The more I see and hear from this movie, the more skeptical I’m getting. Maybe I’m just getting nervous because so much is riding on this movie’s success, but I have this bad feeling that JJ Abrams is going to turn Trek into a shallow, shadow of its predecessors, like how the Star Wars prequels were so badly acted and scripted, tarnishing the original trilogy.

10. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

I can’t imagine that this is the entire trailer — especially now that they have released some photos of the cast in uniform and of the Apple i-pod store bridge.

If it IS the entire trailer, I believe that there will be a lot of pissed-off fans and some would-be fans going, “ho-hum.”

Star Trek XI: Rebel WITH a Cause (…?)

11. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

9 – Not to mention the Star Wars prequels (of which I saw only the third) being so badly acted.

12. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

7 – The ‘net will have the trailer the next day, just the welders one. Count on it.

13. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

My #12 should have read “just LIKE the welders one.”

14. Ryan - November 9, 2008

It doesn’t seem to have much of a plot.. pretty stupid.

15. Daniel Broadway - November 9, 2008

Can anyone confirm if the Enterprise is seen in the trailer? I would be highly disappointed if we had to wait until May to see the ship.

16. cd - November 9, 2008

If the description at AICN is true, I am extremely pessimistic about this movie.

17. Nick - November 9, 2008

Judge with thy own eyes me thinks.

18. trekee - November 9, 2008

Sounds fine so far. I’ll be away from the internets and cinemas when it comes out so will get the hoopla later.

Nice that we’ll see Leonard Nimoy too. Can’t wait for that.

Also good if they focus on characters rather than the toys, but remember a trailer tells you little about how good the final film is. Phantom Menace had an awesome trailer, Wrath of Khan as we seen, less so.

19. Al - November 9, 2008

I don’t know. Driving cars in the 23rd century? About as likely me getting my Brougham and pair out to go to the shops and riding my velocipede this afternoon.

It doesn’t ring right

20. The Galactic Battleburger - November 9, 2008

All I can say is “where in the hell is the Millenium Falcon when you need it?”

Still, sounds like there’s lots of potential in this movier. If it bombs, well, there’s always “Iron Man 2.”

21. The Last Maquis - November 9, 2008

What’s with all the Cars? Hover Cars are fine but the antique Vette thing
seems kinda silly to me.

22. Jon - November 9, 2008

Oh no, they are putting some real in my star trek, boo hoo cry cry!

23. Sci-Fi Geek - November 9, 2008

seems like bunch of ignorant people around here. just because they show him driving a corvette doesnt mean they still use them in the 23rd century. It could be something as simple as his dad keeps one as an antique and Kirk has decided to tinker with it and take it out for a ride. If you’ve read Shatners ‘Collision Course’ it clearly depicts Kirk as something of wizz kid who has a bit of a rebellious side to him. In the opening chapters of the book he steals a starfleet vehicle as a way of getting back at starfleet for accusing his girlfriend of theft. Judging from the trailers description the characters depiction seems consistant with how Shatner imagined Kirks adolecense to be.

24. Barmey - November 9, 2008

So far I don’t have the problem with what’s been described. This trailer (or as Melllvar at #4 said, second teaser) seems to be all about the action, and since it’s paired with the Bond film in the USA that makes sense, trying to grab an action-oriented audience and make them think that the new Trek movie is worth a look. I think we’ll see a full trailer in Spring 2009.

25. Nomad - November 9, 2008

A lot of people here are ready to write off the film, basing their judgement on an unverified description of a trailer-! No wonder JJ isn’t setting out to please the fans – what’s the point…??

26. karanadon - November 9, 2008

But…but…but…where’s the Enterprise?!?! *cries*

27. Adam E - November 9, 2008

Sounds like more of an extended teaser trailer instead of a full theatrical trailer.

As of right now I don’t plan on seeing “Bond” on release day. I hope this trailer goes online at or about the same time.

28. ucdom - November 9, 2008

Mmm, sounds okay, though not sure about potential Uhura boobage. Jesus, didn’t we have enough of that from 7-of-9 and T’Pol???
Oh wait…you all are straight.

Bugger

29. The Last Maquis - November 9, 2008

I think it Sounds F&%$in’ Silly, WHAT??? Yeah, What??

Anyone whoever thought about what a young Kirk’s life could be like
NEVER would have seen him Driving a Vette.

ignorant is Feeling free to express ones opinions, and assuming others are NOT entitled to theirs.

30. Darfyn - November 9, 2008

#28 ucdom , you’ve got me there ! I live Them Curves !! T’PoL , 7-of-9 , and plenty others ! Curvaceous is the most beautiful form in time space ! Come on , say it , Uhura !! Zoe Saldana !!!!

31. Jas in Perth - November 9, 2008

Ah, half the fun is the desire in wanting to see the Enterprise before May next year and in second-guessing the what, who, how, why. But, you know, why spoil it before the film is released? Of course, once you see it, there will be ineveitable disappointment because the desire is gone, the fun of second-guessing removed. So, if there is an awe-inspiring reveal of the Enterprise in the film, well, seeing it before that would kinda undermine the imapct of that moment. I’m happy to wait until the movie is released if need be, if that’s part of JJ’s marketing plan. It’s called patience. Otherwise, I’m pretty much over knowing every intricate detail about a film before you even see it. There was a time you went in to watch a movie and you knew absolutely nothing about it. I think much of Wrath of Khan’s impact is because most of us saw it knowing completely zero about the film. Every damn moment was fresh, right up to the startling end. I wonder how much of this new film will be fresh for us when we finally see it … ?

32. ucdom - November 9, 2008

Hey Darfyn

Sorry – I’m very bitter.

Actually, I care more than anything (yes even t*ts or c*ck) about the SCORE.
I need the score to be awesome. I live for the film music.
I’m really hoping for an amazing symphonic version of the TOS theme- and it’d be cool to have a smidge in the trailer…..

33. uss sydney - November 9, 2008

maybe a young rebellious kirk has stolen the vette from a museum and is being chased by a cop.

34. Bryan with Pointy Nacelles and a Large Dish - November 9, 2008

This supposed trailer/teaser sounds like typical movie-going fare to me, just what the genereation of video games and the like have come to expect. I’m too old (54) to get excited over this. I’ll wait to be surprised/moved or agitated that the movie isn’t your father’s trek. I’m saddened things cannot stay the same (original cast, aged, but intact).
Star Trek TOS thru ST6 is what I prefer for my serving thank you.
I’ll see the movie, but I feel it will really prove you can’t go back home.

35. The Wild Man of Borneo - November 9, 2008

This sounds so dumb. I’m sorry, but seriously…what the hell is Abrams doing?

36. Spocks Brain - November 9, 2008

everything about this movie is wrong….

poor TOS, they have destroyed you!

37. CardassiaPrimera - November 9, 2008

Will that alone we will see in the trailer?

38. Franbro - November 9, 2008

ah, young “angsty” Kirk. (sigh)

cliche time-big time… Isn’t ANY teen ever NOT angsty anymore…?

39. Crewman Darnell - November 9, 2008

I’m foreseeing the Corvette belongs to the young Kirks’ abusive, drunken uncle. (The character/plot previously leaked from the script.) If the “kid” looks to be age 13-14, one can rightfully gather that having witnessed his parents’ death on Tarsus IV, followed of course by legal custody with an unsavory uncle, could be enough to generate a rebellious gleam in young Kirks’ well-known sparkling blue eyes.

“I’ve had enough of YOU! ..I’m stealing your antique Vette, Uncle Frank!”

40. CanuckLou - November 9, 2008

Sounds very cool. Can’t wait to see it. Glad I’m getting numb to all the negative posters.

…and the adventure continues….

41. Dom - November 9, 2008

Sounds fantastic. Really looking forward to seeing this! :)

42. Mark - November 9, 2008

#6- If Kirk manages to drive the car off of a cliff, sounds like he doesn’t know how to drive on in the movie, either. Sides, if he cut his teeth on a corvette, that’s a far cry from a model T.

I’ll give the movie every chance. Can’t wait, and will reserve judgment until then. There will be changes, but that’s life. Can’t wait to see Kirk, Spock and McCoy in action again.

43. valdore3001 - November 9, 2008

now that sound cool as hell.

44. screaming satellite - November 9, 2008

39 – “enough to generate a rebellious gleam in young Kirks’ well-known sparkling blue eyes”

LOL!

45. Canonfornication - November 9, 2008

20 – The Falcons already been in Trek – here-http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Image:Akira_and_Millennium_Falcon.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/205Longbow/FalconBorg.jpg

46. Cervantes - November 9, 2008

I…JUST…COULDN’T…STAY…AWAY…FROM…THIS…TRAILER…SPOILER…SPOCK!

Okay, while I’ve now ruined the true potential for myself to be totally wowed or otherwise with a truly uknown trailer next week….I thought that the actual *structure* of this trailer (according to the spies) sounded good, and will be very appealling to a lot of cinema-goers, Some of the imagery seemed enticing, going by the description.

Personally, I hope it doesn’t give TOO much away, and that the majority of the new Enterprise is STILL kept under wraps until the Movie’s release. Although there will no doubt be man ‘merchandizing’ reveals by then unfortunately….

Anyway, I found some of the comments to all this at the AICN site to be very interesting, as well as hilarious at times. Here’s the direct link to them – http://www.aintitcool.com/talkback_display/39031#comment_2357523

47. Adam Cohen - November 9, 2008

Premature pessimism, people! (oooh, an alliteration!)

Look, I’m skeptical of the movie too, but to declare this movie fails because there’s a classic muscle car in it is a little silly. I know that many people thought the galley scene in ST VI was terrible too, but that did nothing to take away from my enjoyment of the movie. But to each his or her own. If you nitpick as a matter of practice, then nothing will ever change that. But seriously, call me when you’ve seen the perfect movie. I’d love to know what that looks like.

48. Paulaner - November 9, 2008

Sounds really cool. This is what Trek needs: new, fresh points of view. The beginning of a new era.

49. Gatortrek - November 9, 2008

Remeber he likes antiques. maybe Kirk fiqured out how to start the car, but doesn’t kow how to stop it. who knows. One thing is for certain the movie has been made and I for one am glad and looking forward to the film!!

50. BK613 - November 9, 2008

Obligatory quote:

“I strip away the old debris, that hides a shining car
A brilliant red barchetta, from a better, vanished time
I fire up the willing engine, responding with a roar
Tires spitting gravel, I commit my weekly crime…”

lol

51. Resident nEvil - November 9, 2008

I know, what the hell?

Kirk driving a car? What’s next? Kirk riding a HORSE?

Oh wait.

52. Holger - November 9, 2008

Are these sources reliable?

53. KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - November 9, 2008

WOW! Some of you REALLY need to lighten up. It’s a friggin movie folks. Sit back, relax, and enjoy it for what it is.

Frankly, I’m excited about the opportunity to bring these characters and stories to a new generation. Also, have you ever seen a trailer that faithfully depicts the look, feel and plot of the actual movie? Let’s take a deep breath, relax, and give it a chance. We know we’re all gonna see it no matter what :-)

Okay, sorry, rant over.

54. KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - November 9, 2008

50. LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know, that’s perfect Shatner after that line:

Wind……..In my hair………….Shifting and drifting…………Mechanical music………………..Adrenaline surge…

LOL

55. TK - November 9, 2008

#51 LOL!

56. 24th Century Rockstar - November 9, 2008

WHAT?!?!? There’s no Harry Mudd either?!?!?!?!?!?

F* that noise man – I’M NOT GOING!!!

That’ll sure show YOOOOOOU – Mr. Movie Studio Man!!!

(harumph!)

XP

57. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

Nothing in that description interests me. I don’t really want to know the “origin” of the crew or be told that Kirk was a naughty boy.

58. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

Don’t you all understand? The trailer is a metaphor for Kirk’s life and for all the TOS-missions to come. My god…really….is a little bit of abstraction really so difficult to understand?

59. S. John Ross - November 9, 2008

If this IS the new trailer (not sure how I feel about AICN’s reliability on this point), please let that voiceover crap be strictly trailer-only-voiceover-crap and not actual movie dialogue … because the word “trite” isn’t strong enough for that steaming pile of cut-and-paste waste material. “Maybe you were meant for something different, something … bigger.” Holy CRAP please be joking, AICN. Or just wrong. Joking or wrong, either one is fine :)

I don’t care if they futz with Kirk’s backstory (I don’t care two snots for canon), and I don’t care if they nick stylistic mojo from Star Wars (as long as it’s not the prequels) … but dear sweet Mudd don’t let the dialogue be cringeworthy. We’ve suffered enough in that department :/

60. Green-Blooded-Bastard - November 9, 2008

I don’t believe AICN. I think this is bs.

Not to mention I do know there is a Vette involved in Kirk’s younger years in this picture, though I don’t know where they are getting gasoline in a future of hover-transportation, or a mechanic to upkeep a Corvette for that matter. OR replacement parts.

Maybe I will wait for the trailer to hit the net and save $10 bucks.

61. CmdrR - November 9, 2008

The descriptions smell just a little off.
We’ll know in a few days!!!

62. Fizzbin - November 9, 2008

Geesh, how shallow. I’ve seen so many movies with awesome trailers that turned out to be crap and then some with ho hum trailers that were fantastic. Lesson learned: you can’t judge a movie by a frickin trailer. I’m going to see this movie on opening day and when I leave the theater, then and only then am I going to make a judgement about this movie.

63. Chris M - November 9, 2008

It sounds quite interesting. I’ll reserve judgement until I see the trailer for myself and see how accurate the description is!

64. Gary - November 9, 2008

I think everyone should take a big chill pill… It’s only a movie… Anyone over 50 knows that the Star Trek Franchise has run it’s course… there is nothing left to do but start over… Remember the TOS wwas about good stories not special effects… Let’s hope the story is very well written and makes sense… You have to admit TNG got way out of hand… and ridiculous..

65. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

@Gary
Only the TNG Movies got ridiculous!

66. Gene L. Coon was a U. S. Marine (Happy Birthday Marines, 10 Nov) - November 9, 2008

As to a glimpse of the E, you all may find that having is not so satisfying as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.

67. Dances With Klingons - November 9, 2008

Well, Gary…
I’m 40 years old and still love ST in all it’s incarnations and from the leaks it sounds fantastic!

In a time of uncertainty, with the economy in the crapper, the world view finally changing to peace, hopefully, it is good to believe in something that would make us feel the way we used to.

As for what the preview shows, and if info is accurate, it sounds like the story that we fans have been wanting for years.
I just wonder though how this movie and the new Shatner book if they will conflict alot.

Anyone remember the ST TOS book “The First Mission” where Kirk takes command of the Enterprise and has to transport some kind of circus act? Sorry been a long time since I read it, but it seemed kinda dumb. This new movie sounds like it should be a better way to envision the Past Future.

68. captain_neill - November 9, 2008

This trailer description sounds so unlike Star Trek

69. Neil - November 9, 2008

One of the things about this thread that amazes me is that a group of people intelligent enough to be Star Trek’s core audience can be so completely ignorant about something as easy to understand as the entertainment industry.

If you want canon, stick to your amateur fanboy productions that get downloaded by 7000 people.

If you truly want “The Franchise” resurrected, then have some respect for actual Earth entertainment industry canon, which shows that TOS was killed prematurely because – SURPRISE – they spent too much time catering to the fanboys and not enough time to a mass audience.

Star Trek has *always* done better when it remembered that not everyone has a pair of foam rubber ears in their sock drawer.

70. The Invader - November 9, 2008

Um….nothing about the Enterprise exterior.

WTF???!!!

71. LordCheeseCakeBreath - November 9, 2008

I’m starting to get a cheese feeling about this. The Apple Store bridge is a real disappointment. Why couldn’t they keep the same look but update the technology? They are going to do this Superman returns style where they “kinda” pay attention to canon.
They copied off Superman Returns with the costumes. Superman now has little superman logos through out the uniform. The same way the star fleet emblem is on all over the new uniform.

I wonder if the bridge will smell like apples?

72. Paulaner - November 9, 2008

#68 “This trailer description sounds so unlike Star Trek”

And this is a good thing, in my opinion. We need some different point of view on the whole Star Trek franchise. Keep the values, but bring something new.

73. Dab - November 9, 2008

Many of you seem to forget that a trailer is not meant to appease Trekkies. It IS meant to interest and attract a general movie–going audience. And from the descriptions, it sounds like it will do just that.

74. Xai - November 9, 2008

More assumptions based on here-say. If you have not seen it you can’t judge it.

75. Neil - November 9, 2008

#73 – Couldn’t agree more.

Fanboys will go to see this movie regardless, even if it’s only so they can poke holes in it and seem cool to their friends because of how much better they obviously are at making movies than JJ Abrams. (?!?!?!)

But at this stage, creating a more generalized buzz and eliminating the feeling of “I’m not a Trek fan, so this won’t appeal to me” depends solely on the trailer showing the Holy Trinity of the film industry: Car chases, boobs, and blowing stuff up.

76. trekee - November 9, 2008

I’m surprised by the overall negativity here to be honest. It’s got space battles and people dressed in Trek uniforms – what’s not to like? If true, the submitter is going to emphasize the unusual, Kirk in a Corvette, rather than the stuff the Canonites want ( the stuff that DOES look the same ).

There is no point in doing a remake of Where No Man Has Gone Before scene by scene. If we learn nothing new about Kirk and Spock then what’s the point?

77. Viking - November 9, 2008

Everyone calm down. I’m sure the Enterprise is in the trailer. Those two ‘spies’ of Harry’s were probably just low-wage studio drones who wouldn’t know the Big E from a pile of horse droppings. LOL That ship is the equivalent of the NFL’s Twelfth Man – you can’t hold a game without ‘em.

78. Neal - November 9, 2008

#6 – maybe the Vette has automatic transmission. You’ll recall that Kirk’s big problem was with the clutch!

79. naHQun - November 9, 2008

Hey, has anyine heard if Majel is in the new movie? I know all the buzz has been about Nimoy and Shatner, but really, can you do Trek without Majel?
She’s been in ALL SIX series! She’s been in both the TOS and TNG films. Can anyone confirm she’s
been in all 10?
She’s like our C3P0.

80. Daniel Broadway - November 9, 2008

“LOL That ship is the equivalent of the NFL’s Twelfth Man – you can’t hold a game without ‘em.”

Who? :)

But seriously, same thing. They don’t know that Enterprise, and I know nothing about sports.

81. SPB - November 9, 2008

Some OCD Trekkies never cease to amaze me… I honestly DON’T CARE about the updated looks of the uniforms, the phasers, the bridge, the Enterprise, fonts, eye color, hair, etc.

Just get the characters right, while adding interesting levels to Kirk and Spock, et al, that we haven’t seen before. And just don’t make the dialogue stupid, like that TRANSFORMERS atrocity.

Teens have always done rash and wrong-headed things… why wouldn’t teen/young versions of Kirk and Spock do the same thing? Use your heads people… the Starfleet vets of TOS weren’t born fully-formed.

82. Viking - November 9, 2008

#78 – Kirk didn’t impress me as a Powerglide kinda guy. LOL

83. c0mBaTkArL - November 9, 2008

I gotta say, watching those older trailers drove home the sense that the original cast was WAAAAAYY past their prime. They were just SO damned old. I’m actually looking forward more now than ever to seeing the original characters in the early years of their careers portrayed by fresh blood. Extensive back story origins don’t bother me one bit. In fact they will be key to setting up the anticipation required to sell the first appearance of these new actors on screen. I think the payoff will be tremendous once all of the elements are in play. My only reservation is having to endure annoying attention-whore canonites who will not remain respectfully silent through the film I’ve paid for. I may actually wait a week to see it, just to avoid encountering them.

84. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

Maybe they could make future crossovers between TOS and TNG with the new actors. Because by using new actors you could go to any timeline you want to!! WOW!!! Great times we live in! Just think of the great books and novels!

85. C.S. Lewis - November 9, 2008

One of the AICN comments hoped the dialog was not banal. I second that hope. I enjoy a good car chase as much as the next man, but I will not sit through 90 minutes of “what passes for” writing today.

Please, please, please, be written for high school graduates (who can read their diplomas) at least!

86. SPB - November 9, 2008

#83-

Too true. Their age actually worked for the films up until THE VOYAGE HOME, but the entire cast started to look more than a little silly in Part V, and really stretched credibility to the breaking point in Part VI.

87. Alex Rosenzweig - November 9, 2008

#64 – “Anyone over 50 knows that the Star Trek Franchise has run it’s course… ”

Really? Hmm…. Somehow I missed that memo. Or maybe I tore it up ’cause it’s unbelievable. ;) Not sure.

Either way, I think the trailer has some potential, especially in achieving what it’s designed to do, which is get the general audience excited and ready to plant their butts in seats next May. I also think that verbal descriptions are one thing, and actually seeing it quite another. Once the latter has happened, we’ll be able to discuss more fully, of course.

88. Devon - November 9, 2008

Those of you saying you doubt the descript, PLEASE read the final line of this report.

“TrekMovie has not been able to confirm the complete description, but has confirmed that all the scenes described are consistent with scenes in the final film.””

89. Devon - November 9, 2008

#68 – “This trailer description sounds so unlike Star Trek””

With all respect, most of the trailers for Star Trek, if you wrote it out, wouldn’t either.

90. DesiluTrek - November 9, 2008

With that Corvette, I didn’t know we were also getting a revival of “Route 66″ — Buz, Tod and now Jim. It would be cool if the car has a different kind of roar, one that implies it’s been refitted with a 23rd century engine that doesn’t run on gasoline, a hint that gas doesn’t exist anymore because we won the fight against climate change.

I am still waiting to hear from the production designer/art directors, the people listed here — http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/fullcredits. The fact we’ve heard almost nothing from them, combined with the few photos we have seen such as the limited views of that Apple-store bridge, has not inspired confidence. From what I can tell from their credits at IMDB, they have had extremely limited experience with science fiction, although that’s no requirement. Matt Jefferies had none, but his love of aviation helped enormously.

Any chance we can get interviews with these people anytime soon? As much as I want to see what they’ve done to the Enterprise, I want to hear them talk about their approaches and what their guidance was about respecting the original designs.

91. Alex Rosenzweig - November 9, 2008

#83 – “My only reservation is having to endure annoying attention-whore canonites who will not remain respectfully silent through the film I’ve paid for. I may actually wait a week to see it, just to avoid encountering them.”

Are you suggesting that people who care about continuity will, de facto, be disrespectful to other people in a move theater? Frankly, I find *that* a very disrespectful thing to say in and of itself. Equating people who care about continuity with deliberate rudeness is simply, well…sad, IMHO.

Now, I won’t vouch for what comments may be made once the movie’s over, and if TPTB have deliberately trashed continuity, I fully expect that they’ll be hearing from *me*. ;) (If they haven’t, they’ll hear from me, anyway, but in a whole different way. :D ) But I think that in terms of a moviegoing experience, you’ll have much more to fear in the theater from the teeny-bopper kids who go and just make fun of the film then you will from serious fans who care about Trek.

92. SPB - November 9, 2008

CASE IN POINT: “Space isn’t supposed to be fun, it’s aliens and phasers and death!”

I’m holding out hope for TREK XI and am not obsessed about the “changes” they’re making…

…but that’s one lousy line of dialogue. Aliens and phasers and death… oh my!

93. Devon - November 9, 2008

#92 – Remember that some of that is probably verbatum.

94. SPB - November 9, 2008

#91 –

Don’t forget, plenty of die-hard STAR WARS geeks sat through the “Special Editions” saying, “That’s new,” “That’s new,” “That’s different,” “That’s new,” “That never happened in the originals,” etc., etc.

You know and I know that there are some Trekkies like that out there.

95. CmdrR - November 9, 2008

Kirk on a hoverboard steals the Romulan sports almanac.
Sounds like a good movie.

ummmmm……

96. sean - November 9, 2008

#38

Welcome to real life, where most teenagers *are* angst-ridden. It’s part of the job description.

#57

Oh Stanky, I swear I could set my watch by your pessimism! ;)

97. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

I knew this was going to happen…

Yet fan-boys… of JJA, all moaned and whined when someone said they were skeptical about this movie.

Bottom line is that Sci Fi is Sci Fi… effects come cheaper today than a good story.

It’s how you tell the story that will eventually justify it’s genre. If J.J.A alters too much on Kirks past or personality, this will NOT sit well with any fan at all.

Kirk is Kirk, no need to justify everything he did or add something so stupid as what Lucas did for Vader as a background. Sometimes, the simplest truth is often the basis of that reality.

Kirk was pretty young on TOS as a Captain, now, if you look at the cast… already there, you’ll see a flaw… they all meet THAT YOUNG????!!!!

Makes NO sense, not to mention, the fact that maybe there’s a good reason why JJ (I think he lied about having asked Shatner) chose not to include an older Kirk. The contrast might be too great or obvious.

I loved Lost, till I recently was told by the executives that the main story pitched at the first meeting by JJA, is something that vaguely resembles the outcome of the show today. This once, more shines a new light on his pop culture celebrity status as a director. I liked Cloverfield, but it still wasn’t a big deal… He was just a producer in it if memory serves…

Furthermore, Mission Impossible was dreadful. The Fringe, his new TV series is the dumbest show I’ve seen in ages, with characters trying to be something they’re not, and a story that’s so dim and silly, it’s hard to imagine who’s actually watching this. (must be people who’re not aware that there were such shows as The X-Files etc. before this).

I’m my opinion, if JJA, in fact DOES stray off the character meeter of our favorite crew, he’s going to pay big time for this epic failure. Fans won’t forgive him and even worse, Star Trek will be set back more than 5 years, perhaps it will really die… and be reborn in 10 years.

Having seen small clips, shots and stories about this new film… (I don’t mean the teaser trailer), I can’t help by ask, questions throughout the movie… People who don’t know Star Trek will enjoy it… maybe. People who know Star Trek, will ask too many questions of WHY this, WHY that!

The bridge looks like a fancy Japanese bar, Kirk looks like a boy band singer, Sulu looks Korean, generally everyone looks like the cover of VOGUE magazine. Sad, really… they go for pretty people, instead of people with character… DeForrest Kelly had character, Nimoy had character and naturally Shatner was legendary.

I think if he’s going to mess with Kirk like Lucas messed with Obi Wan, we’ll see something that won’t match and then we won’t accept the story or the people in it.

We might as well be watching a manga story with real people…

We may be Star Trek deprived, but we are not stupid, we’ll catch a fake when we see one.

For now…. The new trailer is STILL just a trailer, we’ll have to wait to see the opening and closing shots of the entire movie, before we’ll make a final judgement… and please for the sake of all that’s good and decent in Star Trek… WAIT a few days before you post your final judgment… often times you come out thinking it was pretty awesome… then realize it was a load of Andorian gasbag.

Then you might hate it at first, and actually like it a few days later… either way… make sure you’ll judge it correctly once it’s done…

For me, I’m skeptical… mainly because I know JJ’s style and I’m sick and tired of pretty people replacing real people on screen… it’s Beverly Hills 90210 in space. :(

98. dav - November 9, 2008

This trailer sounds like it appeals to exactly the audience it should. MAINSTREAM. No offense to the diehards.. but this film is breaking away from that. This is showing Star Trek as something new and cool. Just as I’m sure people felt in 1960’s for the first time. The car is great for the simple fact that it breaks away from the same old and shows that this is something entirely different. They need to get the teen audiences in there.

99. Devon - November 9, 2008

“mainly because I know JJ’s style and I’m sick and tired of pretty people replacing real people on screen…”

Original cast were “pretty” too. But are you telling me that Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Quinto, and Nimoy are “pretty?” Eek!

“it’s Beverly Hills 90210 in space. :(

But that absolutely makes no sense. I’ve seen people say it before, but it’s extremely flawed.

100. Martin Anderson - November 9, 2008

#86

The Voyage Home, was all wrong (apart from the camping scene) but their ages worked in Star Trek 6, because they are veterans, coming to retirement, cynical and opposed to change. It is a more cerebral story, and not so focused on the action, which plays to their strengths.

101. Amanda - November 9, 2008

I’m not too excited about this trailer, but let’s not forget, sometimes they release second and third theatrical trailers. I’ll hope for that.

102. Kevin - November 9, 2008

97

So, based on your logic, “good-looking” people can’t be good actors and flesh out characters?

103. kirk's corvette - November 9, 2008

i am as excited about what this film is doing as i am overjoyed that “fans” who seem to think they own trek are outraged at what they imagine this film is doing.

these are the ones who cry for their candy then cry when they drop it because they are to stupid to unwrap it properly.

to announce “awful” based on a description of a trailer (from AiCN even) signifies vapid arrogance.

104. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

@#100
There is no camping scene in “The Voyage Home”, but in “The Final Frontier”…

105. Drew - November 9, 2008

#99 – I have a simple solution for you. Don’t see the movie.

“Kirk out”

106. Captain Blue Eyes - November 9, 2008

All I’m sayin’ is any of TOS fans out there who are clinging to the belief that this film won’t be a total reboot, are in for a boot-full of surprises. I personally don’t care about original cardboard sets or what side the actors hair is parted on, but I *do* care about how the original characters are portrayed, at least in the sense of big-screen film continuity. I remain optimistic, yet the more I learn about the new Trek movie, it sounds like most of the baby is being thrown out with a lot of the bath water.

107. Neil - November 9, 2008

Quick show of hands…how many of you think that Paramount is making this movie so that Star Trek fans will have yet another piece to add to their collections?

(counting)

And how many of you think that Paramount is making the movie that will sell the maximum number of tickets to the widest possible audience, based on a premise that has a passionate core base of fans that’s not quite large enough to be profitable on its own?

(counting)

Congratulations to those who raised their hands to Question #2. You win the “I Understand That It’s Not All About Me” prize.

For you Question #1 people…ugh, where to start. Okay. There’s this stuff called “money”…

108. Chingatchkook - November 9, 2008

The description of the Corvette was a bit of a surprise, but really, is that such a bad thing? First, JJ and company have said on many past occasions that they want this Trek movie to appeal to a wider audience, so having a car from our era makes sense. Second, who says that the Corvette is an authentic V8 gas burner? Is it so unreasonable to assume that the car is powered by some 23rd century version of a V8 that doesn’t use gas? Third, the very fact that there is a Corvette driving around in the 23rd century makes perfect sense. In our own time, we still pay tribute to the past with things such as antique car shows, medieval fairs, and historic style architecture just to name a few. I find it very hard to believe that the human need to hold onto things from the past doesn’t survive in the 23rd century. Having a Corvette there may seem somewhat ‘un-Trek’ like at first glance, but it makes perfect sense if one considers our current predilection to hold onto the past. I doubt that particular human trait would have completely disappeared by the 23rd century. Fourth, the image of a futuristic cop once again seems somewhat ‘un-Trek’ like, but I somehow doubt that the need for law enforcement personnel will completely disappear by the 23rd century. Its just another element that ties the Trek universe and times to our own. Perhaps it is part of the ‘appeal to a wider audience’ philosophy that the producers have stated.
And last but not least, this is only a few paragraphs worth of description of a trailer that none of us has seen yet. Is it really so wise to pass judgement on something that remains unseen? Have faith. Abrams, Kurtzman, Orci and company have produced very successful movies in the past, these people have experience and talent at what they do. I’m pretty sure that they will be bringing those talents to the Trek universe, and I look forward to the results.

109. dalek - November 9, 2008

The car that Kirk drives would have to be VERY different to a real Corvette in its operation. Captain Kirk is HOPELESS at driving real petrol engine, clutch pedalled vehicles, as demonstrated in Piece of the Action.

And I hope Kiddie-Kirk isn’t in the movie much. Trek and Children rarely ever mixed well, with the possible exception of Jake Sisko.

That said looking forward to the trailer….

110. Sam Belil - November 9, 2008

Based on reading all 85 posts and reading AICN, this should be obvious to ALL OF US — This movie is a complete RE-BOOT of the TOS Franchise. Remember the comments from the EW article — along the lines of ..”this is about changing everything that you have come to know”. I’m sticking to my theory (any challenges on this?) that as a result of “future” Spock going back in time, it completely alters the TOS universe as we KNOW IT!!! That would explain ….
1-Kirk in a Corvette
2-No Charles Garrovick
3-No Farragut
4-No Gary Mitchell
5-No Finnegan
6-No Lee Kelso
7-No Carol Marcus
8-No Ben Finney
9-No Dr. Piper
11-No #1 (or any of Pike’s crew for that matter, e.g. Boyce, Tyler, etc.)
12-“Doomed Captain Pike” — in this “new universe” he will be doomed to fate, OTHER than getting pelted by the delta rays on a Class-J Starship.
13-No Kodos (that was a major event in the life of young Kirk …)
14-Again not even a reference to the “Cloud Vampire” that killed more than half of the Farragut crew, including Kirk’s first mentor Charles Garrovick — a major/traumatic event in the life of young Kirk.
More than enough times we have heard that this is the first adventure of the original crew — that should be a hint of changes to come in itself. Because the “original crew” under Captain Kirk’s first command included only Spock, Scotty & Sulu from the TOS “series regulars”.
I can’t help but think ESPECIALLY AFTER LAST NIGHT watching the DS9 tribbles episode, “The Mirror Darkly” episode — they got things SO RIGHT in terms of “proper ST continuity”. Again, another reason while I believe that this not only a re-boot –but a COMPLETE OVERHAUL of the STOS universe as we know it. Having said that — ONCE we accept this new alternate timeline and believe me IT WILL be an alternate timeline, lets just sit back, relax and ENJOY it for what will hopefeully be a fantastic movie and exciting new beginning for us TOS fans and Kirk and crew!

111. garen - November 9, 2008

eh…

112. Neil - November 9, 2008

#108 – I agree with you. Kirk having a Corvette might very well be completely consistent with what we already know of Kirk, actually.

Think “Wrath of Khan”, and this line from Spock:

“I know of your fondness for antiques.”

113. c0mBaTkArL - November 9, 2008

#91 “Are you suggesting that people who care about continuity will, de facto, be disrespectful to other people in a move theater? Frankly, I find *that* a very disrespectful thing to say in and of itself. Equating people who care about continuity with deliberate rudeness is simply, well…sad, IMHO.”

I am indeed, sir. I’ll wager far more on sulky canonites protesting inconsiderately over remaining respectfully silent any day. Passionate fans on an opening night are not highly regarded for their discipline and self-control. Have you not attended a tent-pole opening night in a theater recently? It’s a circus for most films where the fan base is not as rabid as Trek’s. Clearly the canonites have made up their minds already, and I for one do not wish to have to pay to hear it aloud. I dearly LOVE all things Trek, and have my entire life. But I will choose to wait a week and not have to endure any unsolicited opinions in person. My movie experience will be blissful and unfettered by any such nuisances.

114. Andy Patterson - November 9, 2008

4

….”although it seems like a second teaser, rather than an actual trailer.”

Agreed.

I will say this for the first time, although I’ve thought it many times, …..this may be a good movie, I may enjoy it……I just have a feeling it’s not going to be my Star Trek. I maybe wrong, but there, – I said it. 11-09-08

115. Chad N. - November 9, 2008

A police officer on a hover bike? Like these?

http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Turbine

:-p

116. sean - November 9, 2008

#109

The less this movie attempts – in any way – to tie into ‘A Piece of the Action’, the better. Not one of Trek’s finest moments.

117. Andy Patterson - November 9, 2008

114

Would just like to add…..hope I’m wrong about that though.

118. Andy Patterson - November 9, 2008

“To finish, I’ll just say, it feels like what we WANTED when the new Star Wars movies were released – something old and nostalgic getting pushed to greater, more dynamic storytelling by improved technology. ”

Ok….that sounds encouraging.

119. Brad - November 9, 2008

I have never in my entire life heard so much whining from a bunch of Star Trek dweebies about something they can only speculating on. Why don’t you idiots get out of your houses instead of constantly watching episodes of TOS and DS9? Hell, you people haven’t even seen the new trailer and you’re already saying it sucks or that the movie sucks. Well, I think you suck for not being patient enough wait until you actually see it.

120. dalek - November 9, 2008

#116 neither was Generations which killed Kirk, but it didn’t stop them from using the fact it happened as a reason not to bring Shatner in, along with so many others. I wonder the fact that JJ recently said he insisted to Paramount that Nimoy was necessary, whether Paramount was the real objection to Shatner appearing. No doubt we’ll find out when a book is written.

121. Brad - November 9, 2008

How is it that Kirk can drive a corvette but not the cars from “A Piece of the Action”?

122. New Horizon - November 9, 2008

121- Maybe the corvette has an automatic transmission. lol

123. Chingatchkook - November 9, 2008

#121- obviously he wasn’t very good at driving either the ‘Piece of the Action’ car OR the Corvette. Otherwise the ‘vette wouldn’t have gone over a cliff ;-)

124. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@102 Kevin,

You’re logic doesn’t seem to work very well. How can you conclude that from what I said?

You’re either imagining things or you’re really sensitive about this.

Either way, I never said, you can’t have good looking actors be good actors, but when the entire movie looks like America’s Next Top Model, you’re bound to have some picked only for their looks to fit their vision of the movie’s texture…

Why do I even bother explaining this to you Kevin? You’re still not going to get it…

125. dav - November 9, 2008

Who says he was ever to drive a car again after this corvette incident. And I think there’s a difference between driving a car from the 23rd century and driving a car from the 1920’s. Hell, I probably wouldn’t be able to drive if I went back to the 1920’s.

126. Thomas Jensen - November 9, 2008

#110 If this is a total reboot, which it may be possible that the circumstances in the movie will produce, then I’m ok with it. I’d rather it be something completely different then Star Trek because there are too many continuity problems (as you mentioned) for them to overcome.

Star Trek consists of 79 episodes and six movies. Period. Game, set and match… (The original Star Trek).

No one can successfully replicate what was in the 60’s and eighties, with respect to the fact that the original actors are no longer able to get together as they once did.

So take the original characters and do it from the beginning. Something not related to the original, do it a new way and develop a new ‘future history’.

If at the ending of the movie we find a divergence between the reality of Nimoy’s Spock and the new reality which is being established, then I’m looking forward to seeing if it’s credible and fun.

It would be great if at the end of the film Spock goes back to his reality or time and we find that once again the older version of Kirk lives because of the events in the movie. And if that sets us up with a slightly different version of the history of the original crew, then great. If not, there’s a body of work out there which I still respect as the one and only original Star Trek.

127. cpelc - November 9, 2008

Remember what Bob Orci said….many will see the first few frames of the movie and shout Heresy! Well could be the Kirk driving the car sequence….

Just relax people. It’s a movie. Yes it’s exciting that Trek is coming back to the big screen.

Take an example from The Great Gatsby.

He built up in his mind what the relationship would be like…and then it never lived up to it.

Don’t expect this movie to be the best thing you have ever seen…but don’t expect it to be horrible either.

All you should ask for is a movie that for two hours of your life takes you away and makes you forget about everything that is going wrong in ‘our world’ today. Don’t limit the makers of this movie just because you have placed limits on yourself.

128. dav - November 9, 2008

“Either way, I never said, you can’t have good looking actors be good actors, but when the entire movie looks like America’s Next Top Model, you’re bound to have some picked only for their looks to fit their vision of the movie’s texture…”

But I think that’s the point. Who other than Chris Pine or Zoe Saldana look like America’s Next Top Model? Certainly not Simon Pegg, or Zachary Quinto, or John Cho..

And let’s not forget that Walter Koenig was originally chosen for Chekov because they wanted to appeal to young teenage girls with his resemblance to Davy Jones. And you don’t think that William Shatner and all those girls with short skirts were NOT chosen for their sex appeal?

129. Schultz - November 9, 2008

#119: Absolutely. It’s getting pathetic around here.

130. Mr. Bob Dobalina - November 9, 2008

Very cool! I’ll be there for the first showing of Bond so I hope my local theater is attachign Trek. Can’t wait to see it!

131. sean - November 9, 2008

#120

Come on, there’s a HUGE difference between a brief moment in an otherwise forgettable episode and a movie that centers its plotline around Kirk’s death. I’m not too fond of Generations, either, but I think JJ’s position is perfectly reasonable. I’ve said this elsewhere, but Kirk’s death in Generations was a matter of worldwide press. Shatner & Stewart were on the cover of freakin’ Time magazine talking about it. Entertainment Weekly & TV Guide devoted entire issues to the movie. Compare that to how many non-fans (and even some Trekkers/Trekkies) can remember that moment in ‘A Piece of the Action’, and I think you’ll see the considerable difference.

132. Matias 47 - November 9, 2008

The opening scene is even more stupid than I was fearing. 90210 meets Star Trek.

They’re going to turn Spock into an Emo kid, Kirk into a James Dean clone, then they run off together hand in hand.

133. Devon - November 9, 2008

#105 – I’m going to assume you meant that for someone else, as I’m #99.

134. G - November 9, 2008

I don’t buy it. Sounds like misinformation/misdirection. I don’t buy it at all. Sounds like a bunch of B.S. to me.

135. Kevin - November 9, 2008

124

OK, if I “still am not going to get it,” who would you cast instead?

136. George - November 9, 2008

A friend of mine that works on the Paramount lot has seen the trailer and he’s head over heels about the movie. Yes, some things don’t fit Trek cannon but from what he saw this will be one hell of a ride. As for my friend all I can tell you is that he’s a BIG Trek fan from as long as I can remember and I’ve worked with him on some TNG episodes and DS9. I trust his view on this, so let’s wait and see and remain with an open mind. Also since this is some what of a re-boot things will change, as long as it stays true to Robbenberry’s vision let’s embrase it and be thankful we have new adventures to enjoy.

BTW- my firend is not Richard Arnold if anyone was thinking that.

137. crowmagnumman - November 9, 2008

Hover bikes?

138. crowmagnumman - November 9, 2008

And Spock is actually trying to kill Kirk?

139. dalek - November 9, 2008

#131 If it happens on screen, significant or minute, it IS canon. Kirk couldn’t drive a car, Kirk died on Veridian III. Both happened. I agree the costmetics (look of the bridge, uniforms etc) can be open to interpretation based on our technology. But to revise something from what most consider to be one of THE classic comedy episodes of the shows run, is tampering with continuity.

I also agree that if the car he’s driving in the 23rd century, is not clutch, pedal, motor oil, then it does not step on any toes at all.

But one thing is clear. Roberto Orci is the fan here. Not JJ Abrams. He’s a star wars kid who only grew to love Trek, by his own admittance, working on the movie.

140. Matthew_Briggsuk - November 9, 2008

A covett. I though it would of been a Ford Fiesta, or is the Enterprise made by Ford

141. dalek - November 9, 2008

#136 George good to know. I wonder what Richard Arnold thinks of the whole project. I heard that JJ did consult with him, he said so at one of the conventions I believe. Arnold’s treatment by the powers that be, post Roddenberry, was absolutely disgusting. I think I still have the article from Dreamwatch somewhere, where he states how they slung him out of the Paramount lot, not long after Gene died. He’s a very generous and kind hearted man, and as a fan its always been a pleasure to talk to him.

142. Neil - November 9, 2008

I wonder…if this message board had existed when “Piece Of The Action” premiered, how many people would have expressed horror at the idea that a 23rd century man would know how to drive a stick. Now it’s the Holy Grail of science fiction?

It’s a TV show, kids. Settle down.

143. Neil - November 9, 2008

I meant if Kirk *did* know how to drive a stick in that episode. Sorry my fingers sometimes go faster than my brain.

144. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

42 – Mark, the scene plays out in “A Piece of the Action” such that Spock has to explain a clutch to Kirk. It’s obvious that the then 30-something-year-old Kirk has never before in his life driven any kind of car whatsoever. That’s a significant continuity problem with TOS if this film is meant to be a true prequel. There would be more continuity if Kirk rode a stolen horse (“Generations”) or shot firearms (many antique ones hange on his apartment walls in STII and III) to illustrate his “rebellious” youth. That’s all I’m saying. I’m also not so sure that even though Kirk is a headstrong commander that there is anything to indicate from TOS that he had a rebellious, impetuous youth. I always got the impression that at least from his academy days that he was a focused, goal-and-purpose driven man. Witness his repulsion at seeing Koridian butcher thousands as a young man. He always knew right from wrong and always sought a greater good, even if he had to bend a few rules to do so. Perhaps he is doing the same in this context. We’ll have to wait and see the film to know.

145. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

Er… I meant “hang” not “hange.” Whatever the heck “hange” means. Anybody else feel like making up word today?

146. DigginJim - November 9, 2008

Post 10:

‘Apple I-pod store bridge..’

I was wondering what that set reminded me of…

147. YASA - November 9, 2008

No one here has asked the very important question – where the hell can you drive a car off a cliff in Iowa?

148. Jeffries Tuber - November 9, 2008

Too bad Anthony doesn’t threaten to ban people for 7 days when they fulfill every last stereotype of a basement dwelling unwashed Trek fan.

Who among us has not speeded in a car or gotten in trouble with The Man as an adolescent? My oldest friend, with whom I have the most stories and heroically truthy tales to tell, started off as a jerk-off in an AC/DC T-shirt who I had to fight in the hallway of junior high. Likewise, many of the descriptors people would use for me would seem absurd or funny when compared to some of the stupider things I did growing up.

It’s called character development because our character’s are formed through affirmative and negative experiences.

Regarding the Corvette, the remark above about Kirk’s fondness for antiques [the eyeglasses and Kirk’s apartment in TWOK] is spot-on. But more importantly, America is a young country. It’s pretty safe to assume that 200 years out, America will be preserving and maintaining 20th C car culture the way that England does with castles, jousting and corsets.

Personally, I have never ‘bought’ the idea that replicators aren’t invented until the 24th C. A replicator is to a transporter what a phonograph is to a telephone. So immaculate 1966 Corvettes can be replicated for little more than energy costs.

It’s odd that the only two people who reported in on the Trek trailer don’t have ground level familiarity with the Enterprise… or enough to tell us that the trailer depicts the Enterprise, teases more looks at it, or can recognize ships like Nero’s and Spock’s that are clearly NOT 23rd C.

But seriously, haters and naysayers should post on AICN. The boards on that site have a culture of nastiness and sniping. I know we can do better.

149. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

139 — Good points. I hope JJ doesn’t turn him into James T. Skywalker.

150. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

146 – There also appears to be a hostess at her post to book your reservations. And many fans have plenty! ;)

151. Radioactive Spock - November 9, 2008

Well, from the description, I think it sounds, so far, very appealing to a wide audience, as well as to core fans. I’m really excited to see it for myself. How well this movie does may well come down to marketing. So far have toy lines and fast food and whatetver else. Should do very well. Just to make sure i’ll go see it several times. lol

152. dalek - November 9, 2008

#144 exactly, the proposition in piece of the action, and the comedy, is dependant upon this “out of time” starship commander, faced with a piece of technology that he is very unfamiliar with, for one, and has no clue how to operate, for two. It’s not insignificant at all. It was the beauty of what also made Trek IV work. The displaced crew in unfamiliar territory.

This is not Tom Paris from Voyager who finds a 1930’s pick-up truck in space after 400 years and it starts first time!!!

I also agree we should wait til we know more before condemning, but it is a concern.

153. T2 - November 9, 2008

Maybe it’ll all be in a holodeck…….

Nah I hope not….we saw ENT, TNG, DS9, VOY crews all come together…it’s only fair we get to see Kirk and crew come together. Not my fault they waited 42 years.

And not beat a dead horse, but I, too, would like some nice Enterprise shots, although that too may single-handedly discourage people from seeing the movie if they don’t like it.

154. dav - November 9, 2008

It is NOT a concern. Kirk KNOWS how to drive a 23rd century car. He does NOT know how to drive clutch or a 1920’s car. Simple as that.

155. Neil - November 9, 2008

#144 – Actually, I see the Kirk who would drive a Corvette off a cliff as a rebellious youth completely consistent with the Kirk who would reprogram the Kobayashi Maru simulator so he could win the scenario.

And by the way…since the clutch of the vehicle in “POTA” has become, in this thread, the Holy Grail of science fiction, doesn’t anyone find it objectionable that a 23rd century Vulcan would know how to operate the clutch on a depression-era Earth car?

I mean, if we’re going to slam the new film for things that don’t make sense, shouldn’t we also revisit some of the absolutely stupid, vapid, moronic, unbelievable things in TOS?

156. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

155 – Spock was an exceptionally intelligent and “well-read” character. I have no problem at all believing that he would know more about the mechanics and history of automobiles than Kirk. He was a science officer, after all. he would know something about the history of technological developments in various societies. As for all the moments in TOS that you find “absolutely stupid, vapid, moronic, unbelievable”: What’s a nice “fan” like you doing in a thread like this? ;)

And who the heck came up with the POTA clutch being the “Holy Grail” of science fiction, and what is that supposed to mean?

157. Andy Patterson - November 9, 2008

131

“Kirk’s death in Generations was a matter of worldwide press. ”

Maybe, but I didn’t accept it.

158. George - November 9, 2008

Richard and I have had our differences over the years and as far he being slung off the Paramount lot after Gene passed is true from what I heard. All I can tell you is in my dealings with him was for the most part good, but there were other times when I think his ego got in the way. There was one time I took a friend of mine on the lot and we were in the middle of a re-dress of the TOS movie bridge for an episode called “The gift” and he had some words with my friend. Now my friend at the time was getting some information for the art department that Mike Okuda had requested and this just turned into a mess on the set because Richard didn’t and him didn’t see eye to eye.

141. dalek – November 9, 2008
#136 George good to know. I wonder what Richard Arnold thinks of the whole project. I heard that JJ did consult with him, he said so at one of the conventions I believe. Arnold’s treatment by the powers that be, post Roddenberry, was absolutely disgusting. I think I still have the article from Dreamwatch somewhere, where he states how they slung him out of the Paramount lot, not long after Gene died. He’s a very generous and kind hearted man, and as a fan its always been a pleasure to talk to him.

159. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

154- The AICN description of the car implies that it is a mid-1960’s (they write “mid-60’s” and I believe most of us infer that to mean from the last century, not the 2360’s) Corvette. So it appears that is not a 23rd Century one.

Read more carefully before you criticize those who have. Indeed … simple as that.

160. Neil - November 9, 2008

#156 – Hehe – the Holy Grail thing was mine. I found the earlier debate on the clutch to be a little too passionate to be taken seriously.

And as a fan, I took the bad along with the good in TOS. I’ll put my TOS fandom up against anyone in this thread any day, and would likely kick some tuchas in a TOS trivia contest. However, I never lost sight of the fact that – as The Shat Himself once said – “It’s just a TV show.”

TV shows have flaws. TV shows have stuff in them that don’t make sense, that are put there simply because they were plot devices. After all, any commander who put his ship and crew in mortal danger as often as Kirk would have been busted down to Ensign a long time ago. But no one cared, because it was a TV show.

ST9 is a movie. If it’s a better movie by showing Kirk driving a Corvette recklessly, then who cares? Isn’t one of the goals here to keep Trek as a thriving franchise that has a CURRENT project on the front burner, instead of its current life as a geek-fest that pops up every few years and then goes away because nobody’s watching but the fanboys?

161. Spoctor McKirk - November 9, 2008

After reading all of the posts above I’ve concluded…

1. Most of you are so narrow-minded your heads can only be seen in profile.

2. Paramount is an entertainment company whose bottom-line is profit. They don’t care what aging fans think as they are not the target audience. Face facts. Most of you will be there opening day no matter what blasphemous scenes the trailer contains.

Will the film adhere to established canon? The word is ‘no’. I am therefore going anyway.

May the wind be at our backs.

162. DavidJ - November 9, 2008

I will second that some of the dialogue sounds a bit… cheesy, but everything else I’m perfectly fine with.

And why is it so outrageous to some people that Kirk was a bit of a rebel as a teenager?? Considering his repeated flaunting of Starfleet’s orders later on (and his unconventional solutions to problems), this makes perfect sense to me. I CERTAINLY never got the impression Kirk was some quiet, studious kid who was respectful of authority and never got into trouble. LOL

And it’s also been established already that it took a while for Spock to come to terms with his half-Vulcan/half-human heritage. In fact his hot-headedness here lines up very well with his more emotional demeanor in The Cage.

163. Holger - November 9, 2008

161: And whatever ‘Get A Life! Face Reality!’ posts are posted here, the fans will continue to discuss the subjects they like to discuss and express their fan opinions on the new movie.

164. Irishtrekkie - November 9, 2008

@161

“Will the film adhere to established canon? The word is ‘no’.” ???

you know this how ? , since as far as i know its taken place in a cannon blackspot in trek history with very little detail know, and with timetravel being brought into the story, it very possible we are viewing a diveation in the timeline. but not where so far have i seen anything that would not adhere to cannon

165. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@ 135 Kevin,

It’s a far too long discussion on who I’d pick as the main characters… I’d go as far as saying, I’d not even DO THIS film, but another Star Trek movie. This is just a cheap trick to bring something back cause it’s the basis of everything. Like Enterprise.

I guess new ideas are in short supply these days.

But I WOULD choose older more experienced actors to show some respectful appearance. I don’t my a few crew members shown as young kids, but NOT ALL of them… that’s reaching a bit in my opinion. Not to mention, it’s unrealistic they even met before they were picked as the main crew for the Enterprise.

That aside, it’s divided the movie into adults vs. kids. The Romulans are old, the crew of the Enterprise is the youngest in the history of the federation? Or let me make an educated guess… they were ALL, at the academy training, when suddenly they got thrown into this battle between the Romulans etc. And the movie ends with… “We’ll meet again….”

But then, does everyone keep forgetting Spock being way older than kirk?
Anyway…

It’s turning Star Trek upside down and making it into a flashy commercial with happy shining people… :(

Sorry… Star Trek should just be honest about what it is and not mess with it’s appearance… if it has a great story we’ll forgive them. If it doesn’t it’s doomed… and while it’ll bring in 80 mill, it’ll loose another 80 in the hardcore fan base if it’s not done well… and the sequel would only make 65 mil. Still missing the original fan base..

But you know…

We’ll see…

166. Gabriel Bell - November 9, 2008

Wow. Truly an amazing thread. I can only imagine the complete lack of cogency to come on Friday after everyone has ACTUALLY SEEN the trailer.

167. OneBuckFilms - November 9, 2008

144 – Could be Kirk’s Father’s car, and that it has 23rd century technology for driving it.

This would explain why kirk would not know about a Clutch: There isn’t one in this Corvette.

Besides, this is a minor Canon infraction. I mean, was it the United Earth Space Probe Agency or Starfleet the Enterprise is controlled by?

I’ll have to see the Trailer itself to come to any kind of conclusion.

168. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - November 9, 2008

Yeah man love the conclusion jumping on both sides based on “reports” by plants working for the Paramount spin machine in stunted intentional vocabularies aimed at MTV generation types.

Let’s see how it is for reels in a few days. Sure it will be cool

169. DavidJ - November 9, 2008

156

Sorry, but I think that’s a bit of a stretch. Spock is certainly an intelligent guy, but what use could a science officer onboard a 23rd century starship POSSIBLY have for knowing how to drive a car from 1930s America?? Does he know the name for every other part of the car too? Can he operate every OTHER vehicle ever created on Earth? lol

170. screaming satellite - November 9, 2008

looking foward to seeing SHATNERS well-known sparkling blue eyes peeping out the big screen at me in his nano second appearance in this trailer!

171. Shatner_Fan_2000 - November 9, 2008

Didn’t read any of the above. Can’t wait to see it spoiler free on friday!!

172. Holger - November 9, 2008

When I was watching the trailer for Nemesis in the cinema for the first time, I was thinking ‘Wow! This is going to be great!’ Well, the movie turned out to be the worst Star Trek movie ever, in my opinion. So I don’t give too much for trailers, and we have not even seen this one. (And I doubt these descriptions are accurate.)

173. trekee - November 9, 2008

“was it the United Earth Space Probe Agency or Starfleet”

That’s one part of canon that you HAVE to let them away with… apart from Season One of TOS, it’s pretty much been Starfleet for the other 7 seasons of the other 3 main series plus all the films.

The casual fan has to be catered for too.

I drove a sportscar in the US once. It was a 4.5 litre automatic with no clutch. I didn’t know that American cars actually had clutches post 1945? (Feel free to correct me, I’m interested if you can have a Corvette with a clutch?)

174. Odkin - November 9, 2008

Star Trek trailer? Is that like a fancy Winnebago? Is it aluminum?

175. NoRez - November 9, 2008

Sounds like a fun trailer, only I was waiting to read after the description of the shot of the cop’s boot “and you hear the intro guitar to ‘Bad to the Bone’.” Hey, nothing wrong with memes.

176. Thorny - November 9, 2008

UESPA was mentioned on “Enterprise”, too. Starfleet was either part of UESPA or an adjunct to it, they were vague about it, but did acknowledge it and I think they even showed a flag or banner of UESPA once or twice.

There’s nothing about the trailer review that will make me not see the movie, but I am getting a little worried. The corvette scene does seem contrived, even worse than Will Smith’s love of contemporary shoes in “I Robot”. And I still have a huge fear that they’re making a mockery of Scotty.

177. Zero - November 9, 2008

Amazing! I can´t wait for this!

178. Devon - November 9, 2008

165 – “I guess new ideas are in short supply these days.”

You won’t mind telling us what “idea” this movie is repeating?

“don’t my a few crew members shown as young kids, but NOT ALL of them… that’s reaching a bit in my opinion.”

Just you actually saying that is “reaching.” So… Simon Pegg, John Cho, Leonard Nimoy now look like kids? Just brilliant.

It’s AMAZING all of the things you find out on the internet these days. First, they are all from 90210 (you know, because we are seeing the Star Trek crew in High School with their snotty rich parents and what not.) Now, they all look “too” young like kids. Well geesh, maybe they should all start smoking just so they can age faster for some of you people!

“That aside, it’s divided the movie into adults vs. kids. ”

As we see with some of the postings anymore unfortunately.

“It’s turning Star Trek upside down and making it into a flashy commercial with happy shining people… :(”

I think you are jumping to waaaaaay too many conclusions here. What’s the use in putting out movies anymore when apparently you don’t need to see them to know anything or make conclusions about it? Just sad really.

179. mr. mugato - November 9, 2008

Let me preface my remarks by saying I want this to be a really great. I saw a video interview with Chris Pine and he seems like a really great guy, fired up and ready to go. I only wish the best for him.

Cars? Troopers? Alcoholics? Spock attacks? Wow. None of that sounds like Trek to me.

I’m starting to give a lot more credence to the “alternative universe” theory – that is – this is NOT Roddenberry’s Star Trek but something else: All this time traveling has somehow altered the TOS “timeline.” That’s the only way to explain these painfully obvious anomalies.

I’m not being negative for the sake of being negative. I understand fully that Roddenberry’s vision is utopian. That doesn’t make it something we can’t aspire to. However, I am also fully aware that action adventure sells (as does “sex” e.g. Uhura disrobing) and “Hollywood” is always frightened by anything too “cerebral.” I just hate to think this show is all about plastic toys and cheeseburgers but that’s the impression I’m getting.

Another point is that everything I’ve read or seen leads me to believe this is all about Kirk and Spock. Bones seems to be an afterthought. The characters of Kirk, Spock AND McCoy – as one so to speak – are a very clever metaphor and one of the primary things that made TOS so entertaining. This was diminished in the TOS era movies. If what I’m reading is true it may have been completely lost in this case. I hope not.

I want to make clear I am not a cannon-head in the sense that I’m going to jump on any little thing that doesn’t fit neatly into cannon. After all, there are plenty of these kinds of “mistakes” in TOS (was there or wasn’t there a nuclear war?) I would simply prefer more science fiction and less action adventure. I would like the show to portray the human race as much more evolved, more sophisticated, smarter and above all, more peaceful. I am certain that’s NOT what this show is about especially if Spock is trying to stab Kirk in the face with a “sharp object.” (Again, wow.)

The other disturbing thing I’m taking away from all of this is the impression that we’re dealing with some kind of proto-Spock and we’re going to be treated to his evolution. I’m sorry, been there done that – to death – literally. I never liked stupid Spock as seen in IV. I have no interest in meeting violent Spock. I mean, what was the neck pinch all about?

I’m sure I’ll go see this show when it comes out but I hope I don’t end up walking out of the theater feeling that bizarre Jar Jar kind of humiliation.

180. Neil - November 9, 2008

Spock stabbing Kirk with a sharp object could have been part of a dream or nightmare sequence as Young Spock tries to come to terms with his halves. No one said it was canon.

Therein lies the danger in trying to critique a movie six months before its release.

181. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@178 Devon…

TSK! How typical of a response really…

To your erroneous remarks and sad way of trying to justify why you’re right and I’m wrong… well… it’s people like you who just can’t respect other people’s opinion. I don’t care if you love or hate Star Trek, I’m talking about Star Trek as where it comes from. But then you’re offended and taking this way too personally… you have to understand that at the end of the day, you are NOT the center of the universe and people DO have opinions different than your own.

So… bite down real hard on that leather belt of yours and scream as hard as you can.

Stop acting like a child and respect what people think about JJ and this movie.

If you can’t see all the thing that’s wrong with what we already know (facts in pictures etc), then clearly you’re the type who will love this film… to that… well… whatever makes you happy…

For the rest who find this to be unsettling… We’re just going to have to see what this will do to the entire franchise. After all Devon, it’s not just ONE movie we’re talking about here… we’re talking about the future of Star Trek on TV and at the movies…

182. Andy - November 9, 2008

#6 i n”Piece of the Action” that scene was played for comedy, nothing more. Who cares if it doesn’t line up with each other.

183. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

169 – lol all you want. It is not a stretch. The scene played that Spock had difficulty recalling the names of parts (“I believe it was called a ‘clutch'”), but he would have not have been hard pressed to figure out simpler, more primitive technologies on which more sophisticated ones are based. And scientists do study the history of technological and scientific developments, the better to understand current ones. “A car, Captain? I’ve never heard of such a thing …” C’mon. Presumably even Vulcan developed ground transportation before it developed technological means of flight and, later, interstellar travel. As a Federation science officer, and supposedly the finest in the fleet (just ask Bones), he would have understood the history and development of scientific and technological developments and ideas of many and various Federation planets — including the one where he had attended the fleet academy. If he did not have such scientific and technological knowledge, THEN his character would be harder to believe. Plus, it was a scene in a futuristic ’60’s TV show written to garner some laughs. Nothing more or less. I believe the writers intended it as “character development and interaction” and humor. So maybe we should all lighten up a little. Okay?

184. SirBroiler - November 9, 2008

What’s the big beef with cars? Is it so hard to believe that that in the 23rd century, there won’t be car aficionados who tinker and drive antique vehicles? God, you people are so close minded about these things.

Let’s wait until we see the trailer to bash it – it could be amazing.

But for sure, you hardcore trek folks won’t be happy with anything – so this movie isn’t for you.

185. EM - November 9, 2008

I don’t want to see the Enterprise until it shows up during the course of the movie. Which, by the way, I think will be fantastic! I just hope that they don’t let canon get in the way of a good story.

186. sean - November 9, 2008

#139

Yikes, when did we start considering goofy stuff like A Piece of the Action as ‘classic comedy’? I must have missed that meeting.

In terms of events on screen and canon – yes, I tend to side with that viewpoint. However, Trek has presented such wildly inconsistent ‘canon’ that at some point you just have to choose which dialogue makes more sense and ditch the rest. Otherwise, for instance, we’d have to believe TOS takes place in the 22nd, 23rd and 26th centuries simultaneously. I’m sure you’d agree that doesn’t make a whole heap of sense. Most of us stick with the 23rd century, because when weighed against all other dialogue, it just makes the most sense. The same goes for Romluan’s having no warp drive in Balance of Terror, or Kirk & Spock seemingly being unfamiliar with cloaking tech in The Enterprise Incident. Or all the times the crew managed to beam through the shields after it had been established that you couldn’t.

In terms of POTA vs Kirk’s Death – one clearly has greater weight than the other, in dramatic terms. That’s why I say one is a more significant piece of canon than the other. The event in POTA is a brief gag played purely for laughs, whereas Kirk’s death was a major plot point in Generations. Ask non fans, and I guarantee you more remember the latter than the former. That’s why I say JJ made the right decision in keeping what he did.

187. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@ 179. mr. mugato

I agree with what you are saying… but some people cannot stand negativity cause they live in a tiny little fragile bubble.

You’re not even being negative, it’s just people judging you as such. You’re questioning the outcome of this project, but that’s something some people cannot comprehend. For them a shiny CGI is all it takes to be won over by a lousy story.

Either way I understand what you mean and I agree, there are some things in this film that’s surfaced that just doesn’t feel right and any respectful Star Trek fan will agree that, it’s cause for concern when it comes to the future of Star Trek.

Star Wars was doing wonderfully before he made the new movies, now, it’s just become another pointless attempt to do something with something that once held such high standards.

At the end of the day, it’s not about who’s right or wrong, but what this film will deliver to the fans…

That’s all…

Will we love it or hate it?

That remains to be seen…

Since we’ve been asked to wait longer for this film to be released… it’s only fair to have such discussions as we’re having today…

188. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

182 – Who cares? Apparently those who appreciate consistency and continuity in a story arc in a, granted, fictional future setting that still has an established history.

What worries some fans is that this so-called supreme court on canon, which houses at least a couple of self-proclaimed die-hard Trek fans, are not adhering to some significant plot and character points that were set down four decades. This may be only a minor infraction, but what others will follow? They appear to be taking some liberties that Roddenberry might not have approved of and which he is no longer here to have a say in. That’s why some of us care.

189. mayday - November 9, 2008

#185

I’m in 100% total agreement!

190. sean - November 9, 2008

#188

Brett, Rodenberry objected to plenty of things while he was alive, and the producers, directors & actors did them anyway. I doubt the new team will disregard his wishes any more than most of the film series and Seasons 2 & 3 did. If Gene had his way all the time, a lot of us probably wouldn’t have liked Trek as much as we do.

191. Devon - November 9, 2008

#181 – “To your erroneous remarks”

Yeah, okay.

“and sad way of trying to justify why you’re right and I’m wrong… well… ”

Reaching again.

“you have to understand that at the end of the day, you are NOT the center of the universe and people DO have opinions different than your own.”

I find it rather amusing you’re making this about me (speak about erroneous, geesh.)

“Stop acting like a child and respect what people think about JJ and this movie. ”

Over half your post now is all about me. You’re obsessed.

“If you can’t see all the thing that’s wrong with what we already know (facts in pictures etc),”

The only thing I found wrong was that I didn’t like the bridge design. I don’t see “90210” or “Kids” on the bridge. Most of these people are in their 30s!

“For the rest who find this to be unsettling… We’re just going to have to see what this will do to the entire franchise. After all Devon, it’s not just ONE movie we’re talking about here… we’re talking about the future of Star Trek on TV and at the movies…”

Well in a few years should there be a sequel I’m sure the cast will look old enough for you.

192. SPB - November 9, 2008

EVERYTHING THAT’S WRONG WITH “TREK” FANDOM.

We’ve accepted that Khan recognizes Chekov in STAR TREK II, but now we’re going to get our Vulcan panties in a bunch because of some throwaway gag in “A Piece of the Action” that doesn’t gibe with the new trailer?

That gag was written over 40 years ago. Get over it, move on, and let’s just focus on whether or not Abrams has made a good movie, first and foremost. Kirk being able to drive a stick-shift in his youth is NOT going to make me lose any sleep tonight. For the rest of you, may I recommend Tylenol PM?

193. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 9, 2008

Would it have been so bad to stay with early established Trek characters, settings and plotlines?

194. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

The car in “piece of the action” was running with gasoline. I’m sure, the one in the trailer is just a good replica with 23rd century technology inside!! So it’s useless to compare apples and pears. My good, people! Just use your brain stop that hysteric behaviour! Still there’s no reason to complain about anything!

195. Devon - November 9, 2008

193 – “Would it have been so bad to stay with early established Trek characters, settings and plotlines?”

Nothing suggests they aren’t thus far. I.E. Pike, Sarek, Sam/George Kirk (well, which ever one was the brother.)

196. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@ 191 Devon..

I love you man… At least there’s still SOME fire going on between people who talk about Trek…

Let’s just forget about this… I’m sure we’ll both be cheering for the score Mike will compose during the opening scene… ;)

197. dav - November 9, 2008

“You know what would be great? We open a Star Trek film unexpected with this Corvette driving down a road.”

“Haha.. yeah! Who would be the driver?”

“Well, the driver turns out to be Kirk.”

“Yeah, that sounds like fun… oh but wait…”

“What?”

“We can’t.”

“Why not?”

“Because in the episode A Piece of the Action, Kirk can’t drive a car.”

“What?”

“In the episode, they go back to the 1920’s and Kirk can’t work the car.”

“What? Was that a major plot point or something?”

“No, just a funny little thing.”

“But it really has no bearing on his character or personality?”

“No.”

“Well then.. I don’t think people will really care.”

” We can’t! Message boards will go crazy over a 5 second scene in a pretty much forgotten episode. There will be anarchy in the streets. People will burn down the studio.”

“Really? … huh… well, let’s use it anyway. They’ll get over it.”

198. Regula One - November 9, 2008

It’s funny how the haters are usually the first ones to post anything, and it’s even funnier that it’s always the same people saying basically the same thing, it seems like they have nothing else better to do, it’s quite sad really.

That being said, I’m pretty excited about seeing teaser trailer #2 on friday.

199. Kev-1 - November 9, 2008

What about the story? Should the trailer give some idea of the story? That’s usually important for Star Trek.

200. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

I don’t know how anyone could complain about this when we’ve been getting garbage since DS9.

201. Trekee - November 9, 2008

@197 – pardon my geekspeakness but roflmao…

202. Mark - November 9, 2008

I keep reading about the “original fan base” as if they aren’t coming to see the new movie. Here’s a news flash– I’m part of the original fan base, and there will be a huge part of that fan base that will show up and support this movie if it is any good.

203. Kevin - November 9, 2008

199

It’s a trailer. It’s not supposed to tell you the story, it’s supposed to make people who might not know about the movie, or be on the fence about seeing it, or be completely against seeing it, see it.

I agree with those above who say this seems more like a second teaser, which would explain no real plot points. This, of course, assumes this is all real.

204. CMX54 - November 9, 2008

If the AICN descriptions are accurate, then this will be pretty awful.

IF…

205. mooseday - November 9, 2008

@197 LMAO

Wow, imagine if message boards were fully up and running for the other TOS films .. What Spock ISN”T DEAD …. he’s alive regnerated by mysterious waves? WTF? Time travel AGAIN? To find WHALES? GOD? on a planet?

206. Just another German trekker - November 9, 2008

Oh boy, I can’t wait to see it – but to be honest, I have kinda mixed feelings about it … I mean: Trek’s only car chase scene to date (the one in Nemesis) already seemed out of place and now? – Hoverbikes, future-cops… this ain’t “Thelma and Louise”!
I won’t start bashing on a movie from which I haven’t even seen the trailer but I certainly hope it will be neither a Star Wars-ripoff (hoverbikes…) nor some kind of coming-of-Age drama in Space

207. The Underpants Monster - November 9, 2008

Heeee, I’m giggling like a schoolgirl. I can’t wait! I’ve even talked my 007-leery friend into seeing QoS with me!

208. Buddykarl - November 9, 2008

okay, so I said it was a mustang and it is a corvette…lol…close enough as I said it was a classic car that Kirk drives off a cliff being chased by police…let’s see if I was right about the rest of it right;)

209. The A-man - November 9, 2008

To quote an other Sci-Fi franchise…

I have a bad feeling about this…

210. mr. mugato - November 9, 2008

#187 Thank you for your kind words.

What Paramount has never understood is that Star Trek is more than a television show or movie franchise. It was important social commentary taking its cue from classic literature. It actually changed the way people thought about things. It changed people’s lives. The stories supporting this are legion. I still hold out hope they have finally figured that out.

It also changed television.

Have you ever noticed how phrases like “beam me up” and “warp speed” have entered the lexicon? That speaks volumes as to what Trek is (not trying to be punny.).

Again, I want to be clear. I want this to be great – blockbuster – mega ultra boffo. But I also want it to be Star Trek.

211. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Why are people complaining about the cars of all things? Won’t cars still be around in the future? They’re around now.

212. Devon - November 9, 2008

#199 – That’s my thoughts exactly. Though perhaps the trailer still will, but I hope there’s some substanse to the trailer itself rather than “Boom! Star Trek.”

213. Newman - November 9, 2008

I wonder….will this movie reference Kirk’s time on Tarsus IV and / or Kodos the Executioner?

214. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

190 – I suppose you are right. And I guess that Roddenberry would believe that “Trek” to so many people now — legions of fans — not just him. I just hope that the core of the film stays true to his original vision. If it does that, then we should all be happy and grateful.

215. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

Previous post should read: “Trek” BELONGS to so many …”

216. Captain Otter - November 9, 2008

Space battles and Uhura boobage?

It’s like every teen-age dream I’ve ever had is coming true.

217. DavidJ - November 9, 2008

200

Ha ha, well said. If the new movie sucks, then so be it. We’ll just dismiss it the same way we now dismiss VOY and ENT.

I mean, I don’t hear anybody complaining about the ENT canon being violated by this movie, even though it’s just as “official” as that of TOS.

218. sean - November 9, 2008

#214

Agreed Brett!

219. Michael (The real one in Texas by way of Afghanistan) - November 9, 2008

I haven’t posted in quite a while, partially because of a Surgery, but also because there are too many negative comments for me, and I would end up saying something I would regret.
But, I have to comment on this one…
Why are people crying about not seeing the Big E in this trailer???
Considering their track record, I have NO faith in anything that AICN says.
I trust this site, & Anthony much more to give us the truth.
Don’t you people read this site?

http://trekmovie.com/2008/10/10/star-trek-trailer-coming-in-november/

“A source tells TrekMovie the theatrical trailer coming in November “is not a teaser, but a real trailer with footage from the film.” Edits are still being made, but it is expected to show the Enterprise exterior and the Enterprise bridge as well as dialog from movie.”

220. captain_neill - November 9, 2008

the description of the trailer seems to confirm that JJ Abrams is ruining our favourite show

221. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@210,

I know what you mean, I certainly hope this film will make all fans walk out of that cinema happy and proud to be a fan. I remember when I saw Star Wars, the new ones, I felt horrible when I came out of the first one, worst the second one and the third one just killed it for me.

But like Brett Campbell says “Trek Belongs to so many”, with that quote, I think it all pretty much sums it all up. The Star Trek Universe has now grown so big, so vast, that it has everyone of us in it, all being different, finding different things unique and special to Star Trek. That’s why we’ll all look for certain things to make us happy, things we love Star Trek for, things we know belongs in that universe. Some of us are just nervous that this might be another vicim of too much hype and Hollywood Mainstream regurgitated stories with polished CGI surfaces.

What we need is originality and a reason to ask for more. To justify that we want it back on the air and more movies should come of what little we’ve had.

When it comes all we need to do is forget the many months of conversations about the movie and be open minded, hoping that it will resonate well with us all.

If not, then it was just failed attempt in bringing Star Trek back.

I sure hope they’ll include some of Mike’s score to the film in this new trailer!!!!

222. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

218 – Hey Sean! I’m so glad we could agree on SOMEthing before the weekend is over! ;) Best to you. Be well!

223. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

I heard Kirk is a young boy on Tattoine in this one, and works on podracers.

224. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

Wow! Can’t wait for the film to finally come out so we can move past all this incessant sniping, teeth-gnashing and hand-wringing. Get a grip people!

#165 – But then, does everyone keep forgetting Spock being way older than kirk? Anyway…

I wasn’t aware there was a great disparity in their ages. Amanda’s comment to Kirk during ‘Journey to Babel’ was something along the lines of ‘Spock chose to join Starfleet instead of following in his father’s footsteps and it has kept them from speaking as father and son for eighteen years.’

If we assume the rift occurred at the time the decision was made, and Spock joined as an eighteen-year-old cadet (might have even been younger, he is quite bright), that would make him thirty-six during that episode. It was established in ‘The Deadly Years’ (also the same season) that Kirk was thirty-four – not a huge age-gap between them to my way of thinking…

BTW, I’ve been a die-hard TOS fan for 35 years and words cannot begin to express my excitement over this movie! If the characters are true to themselves, and the ideals that were Trek of the 60’s are intact, this movie will rock (sets and clothes and eye color notwithstanding)! Maybe my kids (who have agreed to go with me to see it) will finally understand what this franchise meant to me…

I, for one, am looking forward to seeing the events of the main characters’ youth that helped to shape the people they became when we were first introduced to them. Should be a great ride.

225. Kuvagh - November 9, 2008

I can’t say it doesn’t sound a bit more like a juvenile misadventure than the human adventure, but I’ll try to reserve judgement!

226. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Dr. McCoy dies in this one and is replaced by Jar Jar.

BTW, what’s with all these posts talking about people’s history with Trek? Who cares? It’s about the movie. Not about you.

227. the king in shreds and tatters - November 9, 2008

You fools! The Vette IS the Enterprise!

IT TRANSFORMS!

228. mikko - November 9, 2008

The descriptions suggest an ‘origin story’ for any number of comic book heroes — which take a certain ‘mythological’ approach to their storytelling.

This is what one sees in ‘Star Wars,’ too. Perhaps Abrams’ use of ‘Star Wars’ is stylistic. ‘The Human Adventure’ (as referenced in ST:TMP) is, perhaps, being converted to an epic tale of mankind’s future; the Abrams Trek may be more of sweeping literary gestures, rather than the adventure whose details we fans take so literally. Rather than an imagined fugure, Star Trek may be becoming a ‘space opera’ (without the singing) that so many people find appealing about Star Wars.

There isn’t anything wrong with that, really; it’s just utterly different from the Trek that I know and love. Star Trek, at its best, is grounded in our collective reality; TOS and TNG do that especially well, as do IV and VI (First Contact would make that list had it been made during this decade).

It’s worth giving the film a chance, but it may emerge that it’s a fundamental shift from what Star Trek has been. That’ll be for some, and not for others.

As a side note… I have never thought of ‘Star Trek’ as being about Kirk and Spock — but about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. It’s the three that make it really work at its best, and I am concerned that the film may neglect that.

Time will tell; a trip to the cinema in May shall be necessary to see this through.

229. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@ 224

Hmm interesting… I guess Spock took some time off and THEN joined Starfleet? But then wasn’t it 16 yeas before Kirk assumed command of the Enterprise that he already served on it?

I’m confused…

230. cagmar - November 9, 2008

I love this trailer’s description. I do, I really do. I love the car — Kirk has always had a fetish for antiques. That was one of the top 5 most important things about the ST universe to be derived from Wrath of Khan! Seriously, stop complaining about the car. It’s exactly right for Kirk.

This really brought a sigh of relief to me. I love that someone (Scotty?) says he’s having fun… Reminds me of Kirk’s last words. “It’s been fun.” It’s the joy, the passion, the love that drives the Enterprise.

I’m also glad the space battles are sort of whipped through quickly in flashes — hoping that means they aren’t going to bog down the plot.

This trailer (though it really does sound more like a teaser, still) is a major breath of fresh air. Thanks JJ, Orci, Kurtzman, et al!

Now let’s see it. :)

231. dalek - November 9, 2008

#158 thanks for that George, we are all human I guess. My dealings with Richard Arnold have been at cons and not a working environment. I guess we can all show our not-so-cordial side at work. Of that I’m definitely guilty myself :D

#186 I think you will find a lot of fans hold A Piece of the Action up as one of the better early comedy episodes, probably just below Trouble With Tribbles. The premise, was of course, later ripped off for a TNG episode which was The Royale if i remember correctly. That you find the comedy goofy is not the point. The point was that these men from the future, were totally unfamiliar with cars.

I’ll buy it more, if suggested, the operation of the 23rd century vehicle is completely different. I don’t care what a movie goer audience thinks. Nor did I care thru Star Treks 1 to Nemesis, all of which are guilty of canon violations and stupidity to differing degrees. My opinion on the content of this movie will be based on my judgement as a fan of Star Trek, not a fan of cinema.

JJ’s reasons for keeping the Shat out were not necessarily shared by the writers. Bob Orci previously stated that the scene they wrote for Shat, in his opinion, was not contrived. Again JJ is not a big Trek fan, he’s a Wars fan and a recent convert. His feelings towards the characters are not like most fans would be. And at the end of the day you can bet he’s picking up the biggest pay check for this movie!

232. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

226 – Perhaps you should work for Paramount. Without the fans and the people who want to see it, there would be no point to making the film. If you don’t want to hear about people’s relationships with the history of “Star Trek” then why do you bother to read these posts? For me, it’s one of the greatest pleasures in reading these threads: what Trek has meant and means to others and the commonalities we share.

233. Jordan - November 9, 2008

I’m so excited for this movie! I’m so happy we’re getting good ol’ TOS era Trek!

As for the trailer, it sounds fantastic and I can feel the modern vibe from it. I’m also looking forward to seeing more of the interior of the Big E.

234. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

re: 233
“As for the trailer, it sounds fantastic and I can feel the modern vibe from it.”

I give up :(

235. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

232 – there are many communities on the web for Trek, but I come here to read about the latest movie news. Most of people’s relationships with Trek are about the same across the board.

236. Xai - November 9, 2008

220. captain_neill – November 9, 2008
“the description of the trailer seems to confirm that JJ Abrams is ruining our favourite show”

What?
Captain… you so eagerly accept what you read on the internet and always believe the worst.
. The description confirms nothing. Trekmovie confirms these are scenes from the movie, but not from the trailer and it’s out of context AND from a mystery source.
I’d wait for confirmation of my own eyes. Quit letting other, possible false or incomplete, information make your opinion for you.

237. SPOCKBOY - November 9, 2008

#219
Sorry about the surgery man.
Hope everything works out all right.

:)

238. Vulcan has no moons - November 9, 2008

@234

ha ha ha ha I hear ya!!

to that I can only quote Spock:

“can it be that you and I have become so old, that we’ve outgrown our usefulness?”

239. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

I was kinda hoping the trailer would be Pine’s voice saying the, “Space . . . the Final Frontier”, along with scenes from the movie.

240. NoRez - November 9, 2008

I think some people should remember that the trailer isn’t to get US interested in the movie, but the non-US moviegoer. The opening sequence of the trailer (and who’s to say the ‘vette isn’t a reproduction?) will grab most guys and many girls, and then the reveal when the driver identifies himself is going to cause a HUGE reaction in theaters, as it sounds like there’s no way anyone could venture a guess that THAT’s where it’s leaing – “THIS IS NOT YOUR FATHER’S STAR TREK.”

I think it’s a fantastic way to open, a great marketing decision.

241. Xai - November 9, 2008

this description lacks a lot of information. I am skeptical about it’s accuracy.

242. Jeffries Tuber - November 9, 2008

When you consider all of the strange if creative things the novels have depicted the crew doing in their childhoods and free time, and Orci’s familiarity with them, I don’t think he’s going to shit the bed.

Anyone found accounts elsewhere… beyond AICN?

243. sean - November 9, 2008

#231

I know lots of fans, and I’ve never met one that thought THAT highly of POTA. I’m sure some do, fair enough. But the entire concept of that episode is so goofy, so absurd, I just can’t enjoy it (an entire society models itself after Chicago mobs because somene left behind a book? Good lord). That, and the awful Cagney accents everyone adopts throughout.

IMO, the car reference in the episode is so minor, so insignificant, I just could care less if they choose to ignore it. Any more than the hundreds of other references subsequent writers have chosen to ignore because keeping true to some tiny piece of minutae would restrict the type of stories they wanted to tell. If having Kirk drive a ‘vette as a kid is important to his development as a character in this film, I say ignore a throwaway reference in a 3rd-tier episode most people in the audience won’t even be familiar with. If you can ignore the fact that the Shuttlecraft from Starbase 11 had no warp drive, yet magically kept pace with the Enterprise while it was at warp in The Menagerie, then you can ignore a sight gag about Kirk not being able to drive a car.

“My opinion on the content of this movie will be based on my judgement as a fan of Star Trek, not a fan of cinema”

I think that’s where you’re going to run into trouble. This movie is for fans of cinema first, then for fans of Trek. If you’re expecting slavish recreations of the past, you’ll surely be disappointed.

244. Jeffries Tuber - November 9, 2008

I have several friends on the Paramount lot, and I’ll post on the board tomorrow to let you know if the ‘looping at the Paramount Theater’ thing is true… and or if I get in to see it.

245. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

As long as Kirk doesn’t say, “My name is KIRK and I’m a person!”

246. Emotionally Logical - November 9, 2008

Personally, I really don’t think the Vet is a big deal. Take a trip to NYC and you might see a couple of horse driven carriages, esp in central park. It’s not because NYC is 100+ years behind everyone else, its because people are nostalgic.

The idea of Spock trying to stab Kirk? now that bothers me!

247. Yulin - November 9, 2008

This information is completely useless. Why do they keep posting things that constantly tell us either nothing of value or the same thing over and over?

248. dalek - November 9, 2008

#243 Maybe so, but like myself, your opinion of what you will accept as canon is based on your enjoyment as a fan also. And no doubt every single person on this site will be judging the movie primarily on the basis of their enjoyment of Star Trek of the past, and what it means to them and they have got from it; not as a standalone cinema movie based on characters they have yet to form any feelings over. I’m not saying if they do violate canon, that I won’t enjoy the movie. As a fan it will be fun to point out its shortcomings to people less familiar with Trek. I’ll either be enjoying it along with them (if its good). Or saying “you aint seen nothing yet” and lend them my TOS dvds :D

Bottom line is this movie is do or die for Star Trek. I hope its a “do”. And although I’ll be annoyed if it steps on what I consider to be established characteristics, I won’t let it ruin the story.

249. Xai - November 9, 2008

Yea,
this this trailer is on a loop at Paramount.

If you believe this, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you…

250. Thomas Jensen - November 9, 2008

#190: “If Gene had his way all the time, a lot of us probably wouldn’t have liked Trek as much as we do.’

That is so true.

251. Ampris - November 9, 2008

220:

No. As I recall, production for Star Trek (TOS) wrapped in the late nineteen-sixties, so it’s hard for me to believe that these movie-makers are actively ruining said TV show. :P

Here’s what I feel about this: Star Trek can stand on it’s own. If the movie sucks, that in no way will reflect on the show. It’ll be a bad movie, and we’ll still have our show. Star Trek will NOT be ‘ruined,’ it’s good enough on it’s own. As evidenced by the STV trailer thread, it’s actually pretty easy to pretend that certain things (movies, episodes, etc.) never happened! (Or were better than they’re perceived as, whatever.) If the movie *adds* to the show, the mythos or the universe or –the big one, imo– brings even more to the characters, then great! I’ll be ecstatic. But it if doesn’t, well, what? Who cares? One more sucky movie. Big deal. We’ll always have the original series to watch again and enjoy. Nothing this movie does can affect that.

(After all, what’s the worst that can happen? The general public might see Trek as something geeky? Silly? Clearly a product of it’s time? Oh wait…)

And it’s REALLY HARD to not read these spoilers. I admit, I trust the AICN people as far as I can throw them, but there’s still the chance that this report is true and, personally, I’d much rather experience it for the first time in a theater. (Even if I have to theater hop to see it. Bond = ick.) Re-watch, scrutinize, pick apart, screecap, and discuss the online version repeatedly for the next few months, sure, but I want to be surprised and –with luck!– blown away by seeing it for the first time on the big screen. (I missed the teaser again and can only imagine how cool that must’ve been. Don’t want that to happen again. ): )

252. CarlG - November 9, 2008

The trailer description does sound kind of sketchy, but if it’s done half as well as the first teaser (which definately made this trekkie shed manly tears), it should be pretty spectacular.

I don’t know about Uhura (?) taking her top off, though. I loves me some fanservice, but I’d rather Uhura be given something to do in the story besides look hot. Which she has down pat already.

I think it would be funny though, if Kirk’s “antique” car turned out to be a 1980’s minivan. :)

@32 ucdom: Trust me, do *not* worry about the film’s score. Google “Michael Giacchino” — you’ll see from previous evidence that his score for Star Trek is going to rock. A lot.

Canon Schmanon!

253. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Is this movie about Tom Paris, or James Kirk?

254. YARN - November 9, 2008

I guess the Vette is an automatic?

Kirk was rather baffled by a manual transmission in Piece of the Action “I think it’s called a clutch, sir.”

Oh, and the trailer sounds absolutely horrible.

Sounds like Muppet Babies meets Back to the Future.

Spock trying to stab… ….anyone?

255. mr. mugato - November 9, 2008

# 243 “If you’re expecting slavish recreations of the past, you’ll surely be disappointed.”

Then why didn’t they just create new characters thereby eliminating the obvious problem with the approach they went with?

I look forward to hearing from you.

256. Neil - November 9, 2008

(applauding NoRez for post #240, the most intelligent one in the thread so far…)

257. Ryan - November 9, 2008

#240 & 256 – Then wouldn’t they have shown the trailer in front of the UK showings of QoS if it was meant for non-US moviegoers?

258. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

@#119 & @#240
Full Ack

259. Neil - November 9, 2008

Ryan – far be it from me to speak for NoRez, but I think “non-US” meant “people who aren’t us”. I think it was the word “US” capitalized for emphasis rather than an acronym.

I say this because NoRez capitalized the word “US” in the paragraph before.

Or maybe I’m wrong.

260. mr. mugato - November 9, 2008

I will be disappointed, very disappointed, if this movie sucks because I want new, good, smart, exciting Trek. I really enjoy Trek at its best. So, if this sucks, I will be bummed. If it bombs it will be a long time until we see new Trek. That’s my main concern.

261. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

@#255
New characters? Star Trek had 4 sequels on TV and in the end the last two shows copied things that had been done before (= > AKIRAPRISE). Star Trek copied itself!! You know what they say about cloning? Ok? So, this is a try to introduce the ORIGINAL STAR TREK to a complete new audience by using a modern point of view and productions values of 2008!

262. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

243 – Sean: “I know lots of fans, and I’ve never met one that thought THAT highly of POTA”

Huh?! I LOVE “Planet of the Apes” (1968 version)! ;)

263. Neil - November 9, 2008

#261 – Agreed. Look what a “reimagining” did for Galactica.

264. YARN - November 9, 2008

Kirk – He’s young. He’s cocky. He’s a rebel. He has great hair. He thinks outside the box. He’s a really bad driver.

Spock – He’s conflicted, emotional, and prone to stabbing people.

Scotty – “Plucky comic relief”

Uhura – Proof positive that we have made great strides in race and gender – Uhura is no longer a minor member of the bridge crew, but is a sexy soul sister, who doesn’t mind removing her shirt. Or maybe this takes us a few steps back… …whatever, kids will dig it!

McCoy – He’s the grumpy one, right?

265. Xai - November 9, 2008

260. mr. mugato – November 9, 2008
“I will be disappointed, very disappointed, if this movie sucks because I want new, good, smart, exciting Trek. I really enjoy Trek at its best. So, if this sucks, I will be bummed. If it bombs it will be a long time until we see new Trek. That’s my main concern.”

Sorry, that’s stating the very obvious on this site. Who here DOESN”T want to see what you describe?

266. MDSHiPMN - November 9, 2008

#83, I agree.

I look forward to seeing the characters at a believable age, and with a fresh approach.

Bridge looks high-tech, good action, looks fast paced, women may do more than answer the space-phone…

267. S. John Ross - November 9, 2008

#69 says: “One of the things about this thread that amazes me is that a group of people intelligent enough to be Star Trek’s core audience […]”.

Dude, half of the people who post here are so dim they don’t know the difference between the words “canon” and “cannon,” so I think we can (with all haste) dispense with the myth that hardcore Star Trek fans are somehow required to be intelligent.

#75 says: “Fanboys will go to see this movie regardless […]”

Another myth that needs to be discarded. I’m a fanboy and I skipped the last two Trek films … and I’m damned well capable of skipping this one if it doesn’t look worth the ticket price.

And when you take these two myths together what a fascinating image “We are all highly intelligent sheep.” :)

268. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

So, this is a Route 66 remake and not a Trek movie?

269. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

@229 – Vulcan Has No Moons

During ‘The Menagerie’ Spock says those events depicted happened thirteen years ago. Spock was a Lieutenant, a rank which in our Navy takes about two years (more or less) to attain, with someone generally remaining at that rank for another two years before being promoted. If the Academy is a four-year program, add two to four years to his age of twenty-two at graduation, and he’d be between 24 and 26. Plus 13 years puts him between 37-39. That’s assuming he was not promoted early, but given his intelligence and dedication, he might have been. Age 36 seems appropriate…hope that helps ;-)

270. Xai - November 9, 2008

267. S. John Ross – November 9, 2008
#69 says: “One of the things about this thread that amazes me is that a group of people intelligent enough to be Star Trek’s core audience […]”.

“Dude, half of the people who post here are so dim they don’t know the difference between the words “canon” and “cannon,” so I think we can (with all haste) dispense with the myth that hardcore Star Trek fans are somehow required to be intelligent.”

-Sitting in judgement of fellow fans? How superior of you, dude.
A misspelled word does not qualify anyone as “dim”.

271. S. John Ross - November 9, 2008

#270: They’re not misspelling it.

272. YARN - November 9, 2008

#271 They’re not misspelling it.

So, you are saying they don’t know the difference between a tube designed to fire projectiles and “offiicial” shared facts connecting a group of stories?

273. Neil - November 9, 2008

Personally, I’m angry at Shatner.

The episode “The Deadly Years” **clearly** showed what he was supposed to look like as he got older, and LOOK at him. Shatner looks NOTHING like Kirk did by the end of that episode. How is that even POSSIBLE?!?!?!

In his personal life, Shatner is commiting a heinous violation of Trek canon and should be banished from Trek Nation forever.

Blasphemy, I tell you, blasphemy!

274. Xai - November 9, 2008

271. S. John Ross – November 9, 2008
“#270: They’re not misspelling it.”

Then you are reading different posts than I. The posts I read know what they mean (canon) and type it as if it had a fuse and gunpowder(cannon).
Either way, it does not excuse the “dim” comment.

275. Neil - November 9, 2008

And WAIT a minute – now that I think about it, why didn’t Kirk age the same way in the Trek MOVIES that he did in that episode?

Roddenberry HIMSELF violated canon! Great Bird of the Galaxy indeed!

276. Craig - November 9, 2008

Product placement is he drinking Pepsi? or Coca Cola? After niping to McDonalds?

Seriously the TNG comic news got me mildly optimistic but this description sounds … I’m hoping the 24th century element plays a huge part in this film perhaps the trailer show Picard talking to Spock in the E’s ready room prior to his time travel

277. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

re:273. Neil – November 9, 2008
“Personally, I’m angry at Shatner. The episode “The Deadly Years” **clearly** showed what he was supposed to look like as he got older, and LOOK at him. Shatner looks NOTHING like Kirk did by the end of that episode. How is that even POSSIBLE?!?!?! In his personal life, Shatner is commiting a heinous violation of Trek canon and should be banished from Trek Nation forever. Blasphemy, I tell you, blasphemy!”

Well done.

278. YARN - November 9, 2008

#273 & 275

Well, if canon does not matter at all – then who cares about anything?
Make it a story about a quilting circle in the 19th century.

Not every detail matters, but lose too many details and it isn’t Star Trek.

The Vette detail is not the end of the world – but, Spock sounds out of character in that description. If there was one thing Spock would not do, it would be to resort to physical violence due to emotional frustration. He might announce that the substance of the week was hardest ever found, but he wouldn’t wig out and lunge at somebody.

279. Neil - November 9, 2008

#278
That’s why, about a billion posts ago, I suggested that it could have been a dream sequence in the film that made its way into the trailer.

And 273 and 275 were tongue-in-cheek, but with a point: Kirk ages differently in the movies than CANON decreed that he would from the “Deadly Years” episode.

I must have missed the outcry over that transgression, though.

280. dalek - November 9, 2008

#279 actually Kirk aged about 7 years in the space of a few months — so the deadly years virus was still in him.

Star Trek 2 was set only months before Star Trek V in the timeline.

281. harris250 - November 9, 2008

does it seem odd to anyone else but me that after so much secrecy, they would be playing the trailer on a loop for all to see and report on?…where is the bootleg version?…I’m not sure I believe this report!!

282. Neil - November 9, 2008

#281 – It’s not all that outlandish for a movie trailer to begin airing six months or more prior to the release. And why not give the staffers a chance to see it before the general public? Especially if there’s a chance it might set the fanboy world aflame?

283. YARN - November 9, 2008

281.

I hope it’s a fake – but this site is usually pretty good at weeding the fakes out. I don’t think Anthony would have posted it here w/out good reason.

284. classictrek - November 9, 2008

you just cant go by a description given by someone else. the thing is we wil all visualise it a lot differently as i dod with the description on the 1st teaser trailer. My imagination dreamt up something a lot different to what i actually saw when it came out.

we have to wait and see for ourselves before passing comment i recon. although im a TOS purist i acknowledge that some things will have to be different and i have to accept that. Im ready.

Greg
UK

285. mr. mugato - November 9, 2008

Yes. I used the wrong word. For this I deserve the agony booth?

286. S. John Ross - November 9, 2008

#273: You sir, are brilliant :)

287. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

#278

Spock sounds out of character in that description. If there was one thing Spock would not do, it would be to resort to physical violence due to emotional frustration. He might announce that the substance of the week was hardest ever found, but he wouldn’t wig out and lunge at somebody.

Are we so sure? Is there anything in canon to say he was unemotional all his life? In the TAS episode ‘Yesteryear’ Sarek reprimands him for fighting in the street. In ‘The Menagerie’ we see a much more emotional Spock (the Women!) – could have been them trying to find the right fit for the character, or could have been Spock trying to find himself. Maybe his desire to disobey his father and join Starfleet went beyond just wanting to leave Vulcan – maybe he wanted to explore his emotional human side. Maybe Sybok *cringe* had an influence on his personality at the time. Throughout the series and the movies, we watched Spock struggle with his identity, his dual nature (almost painfully so). Adolescents delight in rebelling against their parents. Why would Spock be any different? Point being, we just don’t know. And that’s the beauty of this film – it takes place BEFORE all the norms are established for these characters. We get to watch them on their journey to who they ultimately became. Woot!

288. Gibnerd - November 9, 2008

as if i wasn’t excited already….
this movie is going to mess me up. proof? i just watched the Spock’s pain scene in STV while thinking about the pain of young Spock. I got misty eyed.
i don’t care if the bridge looks like a hair salon or if Spock has an emotional outburst as long as it is TREK and it is FUN again. I remember seeing all the original cast films in the theater as a kid, reading the DC comics and think Trek was #1. Why? because those movies were FUN.
As for emotional Spock, remember we are seeing a Spock at a time in his life we have NEVER really seen before (Smiling in “The Cage” anyone..?) Who knows what effect old time traveling Spock has on him….

289. Myrth - November 9, 2008

OMG. To every person crying foul at driving a Corvette in the future, should I never ride my horse again because they rode them 4 hundred years ago? Should I tell my friend in the engineering department not to ride his penny farthing because they are form the 1800’s? Come on, just because things are not used for everyday transportation does not mean they have disappeared completely.

290. sean - November 9, 2008

#255

Star Trek isn’t slavishly dedicated to its own so-called ‘canon’, so why should anyone else be?

The reality? After 5 television shows, 10 movies and 40 years of ‘fanon’, we needed to trim the fat. Why not return to the characters that serve as the basis for the whole thing? Keep the broad strokes, ditch the minutae and deliver us a rip-roaring good time. I’d say that’s why JJ is doing what he’s doing.

#262

Now Planet of the Apes, that’s more like it! :)

291. barrydancer - November 9, 2008

No Number One, Boyse, Jose Tyler. Doomed Captain Pike. Everyone onboard, but Kirk in some mysterious black uniform which seems like he’s not in command. (Like a rebel, since he’s been since he stole Dad’s Corvette)

I think the lack of any of Pike’s crew looks like a total reworking of the early years of the Enterprise. We won’t know til the film comes out, but it seems like everyone’s assigned to the ship under Pike (including that rebel Kirk), and doomed Pike gets killed or injured and (rebel) JTK has to take command, ala Picard on the Stargazer, and he’s given the ship afterwards.

This is just me, but for a board that often feels like a TOS only club, I’m surprised at the number of posters who are all “We love Star Trek, and only TOS…but go ahead and change anything you like.”

Again, and this is just my pessimism, but have we ever heard this film referred to in other media as anything but “J.J. Abrams’ ‘Star Trek?'”

Cop: “Who are you, Boy?”

Kirk: “I’m James Tiberius Kirk!” (Or, my name is Anakin, and I’m a person!”)

But, this film is written by the same folks who had Bumblebee “lubricating” on government agents…

Sorry, but I’m losing my enthusiasm with every news item. I do believe I’ll be Netflixing the new film.

292. YARN - November 9, 2008

#278

“Are we so sure? Is there anything in canon to say he was unemotional all his life? In the TAS episode ‘Yesteryear’ Sarek reprimands him for fighting in the street.”

Well, if it happened in the animated series, then by all means…

I seem to recall a lunch pail that also depicts Spock with a rather distressed facial expression… LOL

“In ‘The Menagerie’ we see a much more emotional Spock (the Women!) – could have been them trying to find the right fit for the character, or could have been Spock trying to find himself.”

Yes, that scene where Spock stabs Capt. Pike was quite moving.

“Maybe his desire to disobey his father and join Starfleet went beyond just wanting to leave Vulcan – maybe he wanted to explore his emotional human side.”

Thank you Dr. Freud.

Spock was always depicted as being more emotional than he would admit, but he was also very much in control of his behaviors – much more so than his human counterparts.

“Maybe Sybok *cringe* had an influence on his personality at the time. Throughout the series and the movies, we watched Spock struggle with his identity, his dual nature (almost painfully so). Adolescents delight in rebelling against their parents. Why would Spock be any different? Point being, we just don’t know. And that’s the beauty of this film – it takes place BEFORE all the norms are established for these characters. We get to watch them on their journey to who they ultimately became. Woot!”

What we do know is the trajectory of Spock’s character through the series. He goes from being super uptight to plain old uptight over the three years.
We learn about his character and the character of his species/culture. Unless he is in heat or in the grips of an alien intelligence, Spock does not lunge at people.

It is Prima Facie NOT Spock to do so.

293. NoRez - November 9, 2008

Neil – thanks, and you are correct, sir. US as in ‘us,’ not U-period-S-period (hence the lack of periods in what I had typed.)

Lack of coding abilities can be cumbersome at times ;)

294. harris250 - November 9, 2008

where is my bootleg…in the past we’ve had people hanging from trees taking pics on location…also I’d like to second an earlier post…lets cool it…Treks back…lets have fun…from what I’ve been reading this won’t be the last trek movie…many posters here are buzz kills

295. Boborci - November 9, 2008

291. barrydancer – November 9, 2008

“But, this film is written by the same folks who had Bumblebee “lubricating” on government agents…”

Good Times!

296. sean - November 9, 2008

#292

Actually, from what we know of Spock (from The Cage to WNMHGB to TOS) is that he started out a whole lot more emotional than he was later (smiles, emotional outbursts). The Spock in this film is even younger, and likely not fully in control of his emotions. All your assumptions are based on Spock as depicted later in life (a life where he wasn’t exactly a pacifist either, despite being controlled).

And ‘Yesteryear’ is widely regarded as canon, despite it being an episode of TAS. It was written by DC Fontana, who had a fair grasp on the character. I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.

297. Duncan MacLeod - November 9, 2008

6. Brett Campbell – November 9, 2008

So then how come Kirk doesn’t know how to drive a car in “A Piece of the Action”? Sounds like a silly plot element to me. Is he supposed to be James Kirk or James Dean? I am going to find this a little difficult to swallow as part of the back story for James T. Kirk.

Brett…

Do you know anything about antique cars?

I guarrantee you i could drive a 60s vette with no problems

i could NOT drive a car like in “piece of the action” its a completely different skill with a car from a different era. Maybe the vette is automatic whilst the piece of the action appears to be a manual.

298. NoRez - November 9, 2008

Hey, uh, Spock-stabbing-hatahs?

We do not know the circumstances that lead up to Spock attempting to stab Kirk. It’s illogical to debate something without knowing the pertinent facts. We have a variety of series with a variety of episodes showing main characters acting against their natures due to a variety of influences.

Something this shocking would not be in the film, much less considered, unless there was a plausible explanation for it. All the things they’ve tried to be careful about and you think they’d put in a scene like that without a logical basis?

299. Xai - November 9, 2008

#291 barrydancer..

you are basing your opinion on second-hand knowledge…. and comparing Transformers to a different franchise.

300. c0mBaTkArL - November 9, 2008

#295 – “Good Times!”

You, sir, owe me a new keyboard.

/golf clap

301. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

#292

Spock was always depicted as being more emotional than he would admit, but he was also very much in control of his behaviors – much more so than his human counterparts.

What we do know is the trajectory of Spock’s character through the series. He goes from being super uptight to plain old uptight over the three years.
We learn about his character and the character of his species/culture. Unless he is in heat or in the grips of an alien intelligence, Spock does not lunge at people.

It is Prima Facie NOT Spock to do so.

That’s my POINT!! He was this way in what we know, what we saw in the series and movies. We don’t really know what he was like before that. Maybe there was some event in the past (like stabbing Kirk) that made him super uptight, made him reign in his emotions (we all know he has them). I know I’m a much different person now than I was in my youth. Certainly more open-minded and less rigid in my thinking…

302. Thomas - November 9, 2008

282. Neil
“It’s not all that outlandish for a movie trailer to begin airing six months or more prior to the release.”

That’s true. When I went to see The Incredibles in 2004, they debuted the first teaser for Cars along with it, and that movie didn’t even open until Summer of ’06.

303. YARN - November 9, 2008

#296

“Actually, from what we know of Spock (from The Cage to WNMHGB to TOS) is that he started out a whole lot more emotional than he was later (smiles, emotional outbursts).”

Part of that (obviously) has to do with Nimoy finding the character. Sure, he smiled once or twice. Yes, was more verbally abusive when presented with human “laxness/imprecision” (hence, my characterization of him as more uptight). We also know Spock’s character (which, at its core, is stable) and the Vulcan character. We know of the Vulcan disdain for violence.

“The Spock in this film is even younger, and likely not fully in control of his emotions.”

Spock would not be famous for his coolness if he had lunged at his future Captain in the presence of all the Muppet Babies.

“All your assumptions are based on Spock as depicted later in life (a life where he wasn’t exactly a pacifist either, despite being controlled).”

Yeah, I skipped over the years he spent as a cage fight fighter for UFC.

“And ‘Yesteryear’ is widely regarded as canon, despite it being an episode of TAS. It was written by DC Fontana, who had a fair grasp on the character. I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.”

And Fontana also wrote “To Serve All My Days” where Chekov dies. You can call TAS canon, but I don’t accept this as evidence.

304. HT - November 9, 2008

In “Generations” Kirk refers to his uncle’s barn in Idaho. I suppose the corvette could have fallen off a cliff there.

305. Boborci - November 9, 2008

303. YARN – November 9, 2008

“Spock would not be famous for his coolness if he had lunged at his future Captain in the presence of all the Muppet Babies.”

LOL!

306. barrydancer - November 9, 2008

295 Boborci: Touche, sir. Touche. :)

Also, I apologize if I caused any offense. I get passionate sometimes, and am just venting my frustration with what I’ve seen so far. Who knows, it might blow my socks off!

307. Pete359 - November 9, 2008

Everything sounds great, I’m not too fussed if we don’t see a glamor shot of the Enterprise. But didn’t he say there was a quick battle scene? They didn’t say which ship so we may get a glimpse.

The one thing that bothered me is the description of an “angsty” Kirk… was he listening to Linkin Park in the vette? Please god no! But I think it’s just to show he’s being rebellious so it more then likely plays into the rest of the film.

I’m glad they aren’t revealing to much to be honest. I remember when the trailer for Lord of the Rings The Two Towers came out… I watched it over and over and over and over and when it finally came to watching the movie those “big” moments lost all impact.

We’ll see in a week.

308. Boborci - November 9, 2008

306.

No offense taken! Please, I respect and value genuine reactions. You are not the first to tell me how much they HATED the idea of a robot leaking oil on a fascist government agent.

Don’t mind me.

309. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

Tiny Toons
Muppet Babies
The Flintstone Kids
Star Trek XI
A Pup Named Scooby Doo

310. Michael (The real one in Texas by way of Afghanistan) - November 9, 2008

#237. SPOCKBOY
Thanks! Healing very well.
The thought is much appreciated.

311. Pete359 - November 9, 2008

Speaking of Transformers Bob O, I heard that Steve Buscemi was Michael Bay’s first choice for that Sector 7 agent. Any plans to have Steve in a future installment? He rules, am I right?

Also, it’s great that writers from the films interact with fans, what other movie can claim that? Kudos guys!

312. barrydancer - November 9, 2008

#
308 Boborci:

My good man, you’ve just gone up +10 on my coolometer.
(And overall, I really did like Transformers. If only we could have gotten Frank Welker, eh?)

313. Paulaner - November 9, 2008

I can’t believe we are arguing over a Corvette and a line of a single TOS episode. This is what Ron Moore was saying about the issues with Trek canon: if a writer has to deal with 40 years of canon when writing a sci-fi episode, he feels encumbered and tied to the ground. The canon thing denies fresh ideas and plots.

314. VOODOO - November 9, 2008

Kirk and I drive the same car.

I keep telling everyone we are very similar.

315. Xai - November 9, 2008

309. Stanky McFibberich – November 9, 2008
“Tiny Toons
Muppet Babies
The Flintstone Kids
Star Trek XI
A Pup Named Scooby Doo”

and another complaint *before* anything is seen in context.

316. Boborci - November 9, 2008

311. It’s true about Buscemi. We worked with him before, and he’s truly unique. But you can’t go wrong with John Turturro.

317. Pete359 - November 9, 2008

# 316. Boborci – November 9, 2008

311. It’s true about Buscemi. We worked with him before, and he’s truly unique. But you can’t go wrong with John Turturro.

I agree, he did brilliantly. So how about Buscemi as the Federation President? ;)

318. Boborci - November 9, 2008

317 or harry mudd?

319. Pete359 - November 9, 2008

#318 Haha! There you go.

Thanks mate, it’s great that you chat with us here. Much appreciated!

320. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

re:315. Xai – November 9, 2008

I can somewhat appreciate your wait and see outlook. I really can, but…

Mr. Xai, Is it hypothetically possible that after you see the movie in context and IFit turns out to be “not so good” or worse, that I can look forward to you unleashing with a diatribe of astronomical proportions right here on TrekMovie?

Conversely, I can honestly say that if I like the thing, I have no qualms about eating crow and saying so right here.

…and really, how do you know that what I wrote was a complaint? I merely mentioned some shows that later went back and explored the early days of their characters. One should not assume or have the preconceived notion that everything I write is going to be negative or a complaint. Tsk Tsk. :)

321. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Bob, after Kirk drives the car off the cliff, is he wearing a seat belt?

322. Brett Campbell - November 9, 2008

297 –

“Brett…

Do you know anything about antique cars?

I guarrantee you i could drive a 60s vette with no problems”

No sir, I do not know much about them. My point was that the scene from PotA plays like Kirk had never driven a car before in his life, so this idea of him driving a ‘Vette in the film doesn’t tie in with what was once established about him.

And for everyone calling this one a forgettable episode — it’s one of my favorites. It set the stage for the comic timing between Shatner and Nimoy that carried on for another twenty-five years in the films.

Right? Check.

Check? Right.

I advise ya’s to keep dialin’

And, pardon my colorful metaphor, but double-dumbass on anyone who doesn’t like this episode. It’s a very fun one.

Well, I’m off to go for a swim in my concrete galoshes …

323. Xai - November 9, 2008

#320 Stanky
If it’s bad in my opinion, I will say so and why I felt that way. I won’t do that until I see it. I am cautiously optimistic, yes.. but things can go bad quickly. Time will tell.
And as for assumptions… very true. I’ll watch that, but you must admit 99% of your comments since the movie was announced have been of the negative nature. That is a lot of circumstantial evidence.
You must be quite a fan of saturday morning cartoon… er, animated film.

324. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

# 318

LMAO!! Have him gain about 100 pounds and he’ll be perfect! I have such high hopes for this film, and I’m optimistic that you guys will do it justice. May 2009 can’t get here fast enough…

325. YARN - November 9, 2008

# 313

“I can’t believe we are arguing over a Corvette and a line of a single TOS episode. This is what Ron Moore was saying about the issues with Trek canon: if a writer has to deal with 40 years of canon when writing a sci-fi episode, he feels encumbered and tied to the ground. The canon thing denies fresh ideas and plots.”

Seeing as how Ron Moore managed to butcher his own version of BSG with retconning, ranomly dropped plotlines/characters, and outright contradictions, he is not exactly a good authority on picking the middle path.

Kirk with a Vette – no biggee (although it seems to imply Kirk is a bit of a loose cannon – which is a rather naive depiction of his character. Kirk is very much a military man and is big on discipline and chain of command – he is usually conflicted with a sense of duty – not with a sense of rebelliousness – we’ll have to see how it all plays out)

Spock lunging at Kirk – party foul (On its face, this is a non-Spock thing to do – and you can stow the developmental apologetics.)

If they violate canon, they should do it the same way they did in the original series (as a way to set up a detail that would allow a particular plot to move forward). It should not involve violating the character of the main characters (in the end, they aren’t real people, so they only thing that exists of them IS the character), there should not be too many of them (this indicates laziness rather than an artistic rejection of restrictions), and it should not contradict what we can only call the spirit of the original.
Whatever they do, it should feel like a Star Trek story with characters and a story we can identify.

326. Andy Patterson - November 9, 2008

My what a lot of posts. ….. It’s full of stars.

327. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

re:323. Xai – November 9, 2008
“You must be quite a fan of saturday morning cartoon… er, animated film.”

Not a fan of the particular shows mentioned. Those shows violated too much canon from the originals :)

I did spend a number of hours in the 60s and 70s in front of the TV on Saturday mornings, though.

99%? Come on…It’s barely above 90.

And may I mention “New Coke”? :)

328. Xai - November 9, 2008

#327 Stanky

Play fair… the new Coke comment is just you dangling bait in the water from a moving boat.
What’s that called….???

;-)

329. Xai - November 9, 2008

and where did you hide Closettreker?

330. sean - November 9, 2008

#303

“We also know Spock’s character (which, at its core, is stable) and the Vulcan character. We know of the Vulcan disdain for violence.”

Again, we know his character post-adolescence. Of course, I can also cite numerous examples of his adult self committing violence, as well. And you seem to be ignoring the key point – Spock is half-human, and thus will not act strictly within Vulcan norms. ‘Unification’ establishes the fact that as a boy – his age is never specifically mentioned – he would frequently disobey Sarek, even after being punished. We know that the two ‘cool, uptight, stable’ characters had such a severe schism between them that they would not speak for 18 years, and Sarek would not even acknowledge Spock on his first visit to the Enterprise. Spock also spoke of the intense nature of Vulcan emotions in ‘Amok Time’.

Does none of that, in your mind, allow for a young Spock to be somewhat different from the adult Spock?

“Spock would not be famous for his coolness if he had lunged at his future Captain in the presence of all the Muppet Babies. ”

Who says he’s famous for it, outside of TOS? In other words, what dialogue on screen ever established that as a 20-something cadet, Mr Spock never lost his cool? Who’s to say that Cadet Kirk hasn’t made a snide remark about his revered Captain Pike, causing the youthful Spock to lash out? Of course, we don’t even know what context any of this takes place in, since we don’t even have the trailer yet (let alone the movie).

“Yeah, I skipped over the years he spent as a cage fight fighter for UFC.”

Sarcasm is a really nice way to avoid the subject, dontcha think? ;)

“And Fontana also wrote “To Serve All My Days” where Chekov dies. You can call TAS canon, but I don’t accept this as evidence.”

And what precisely does that mean? She was going to kill Chekov in a story so her insight into Spock is nullfied? Also, I never called TAS canon (I think most of it is far from it). What I said was that elements of ‘Yesteryear’ were considered canon, even amongst the TOS & TNG writers (as events from the episode have been referenced in both).

Look, in the end, all I know is the character I’ve seen develop over the years. And a big part of that character’s maturity was his conflict between his Human and Vulcan selves. It was not until much, much later that he seemed to have resolved that conflict (TVH). So to me, a younger version of that character SHOULD be less in control. That only makes sense. But if it doesn’t make sense to you, I guess you’d find it distasteful.

331. Alex Rosenzweig - November 9, 2008

#110 – “Based on reading all 85 posts and reading AICN, this should be obvious to ALL OF US — This movie is a complete RE-BOOT of the TOS Franchise.”

It may be, it may not. It certainly is a visual revamp, to be sure. As for the rest, I think the jury’s still out.

“Remember the comments from the EW article — along the lines of ..”this is about changing everything that you have come to know”. I’m sticking to my theory (any challenges on this?) that as a result of “future” Spock going back in time, it completely alters the TOS universe as we KNOW IT!!!”

You may yet be right, though the list you gave isn’t quite so obvious a set of evidence to support the claim. ;) Allow me to explain…

“That would explain ….
1-Kirk in a Corvette”

Last I checked, whether Kirk had a restored 1960s antique automobile or not had never been established, though to be fair, it’s likely that he probably wasn’t ever very good at driving it, given what we saw in “A Piece of the Action”. ;)

“2-No Charles Garrovick
3-No Farragut”

Oh, this one’s easy. If we assume that Kirk served on the Farragut sometime between when he left the Academy (presumably after his graduate studies and service on the Republic, lets’ say in 2255-56, and when the Farragut was attacked by the cloud creature in 2257, that still leaves 8 years until he gets command of the Enterprise and begins the 5-year mission. It’d be pretty easy, I’d have to say, for the movie to focus on events in that 8-year period and not have to deal with the Farragut at all. No showstopper there, even if we assume that there isn’t even a mention of the Farragut or Garrovick in the script, and unless you’ve read the script and know that already, I’d say the jury’s still out on that one.

“4-No Gary Mitchell”

Are we sure there’s no mention of Gary? And again, even if he’s not mentioned, does that mean he *couldn’t* have been there?

“5-No Finnegan”

Same question. Do we know there’s no Finnegan? And even if he’s not mentioned, perhaps if we pick up with Kirk as even a second- or third-year student at the Academy, Finnegan might already have graduated and no longer be an issue.

“6-No Lee Kelso”

So? We know the Enterprise had multiple helmsmen, and navigators, too, for that matter. We didn’t see the whole flight staff in each episode. Why would we have to see Kelso in this film?

“7-No Carol Marcus”

While it might be nice to see Carol, it wouldn’t really be that hard for the events of the film to take place at a point where she’s not around. I think it’s another artifact of how much open time there is in the pre-TOS period.

“8-No Ben Finney”

Was it ever established when Finney showed up on the Enterprise, or even if Kirk and Finney were inseparable through Kirk’s time from the Academy to his command of said vessel? There’s plenty of opportunity for Finney to have been elsewhere during the events of the film.

“9-No Dr. Piper”

Piper is a bit more of a challenge, though we could always fall back on a rationalization as old as James Blish’s adaptation of “Where No Man…?” in 1968, to wit, that McCoy was on leave at the time of the episode and Piper was filling in. It’s not really all that hard to reconcile. ;)

“11-No #1 (or any of Pike’s crew for that matter, e.g. Boyce, Tyler, etc.)”

Oh, that’s even easier. >:) Assuming I’m right, the film isn’t going to be showing us Pike’s command of Enterprise at the time of “The Cage”. (I base this theory on the fact that Bruce Greenwood is significantly older now than was Jeffrey Hunter in 1964.) If so, the simple answer is: folks move on, get promoted, get reassigned… The only person who really needs to be there is Spock.

“12-”Doomed Captain Pike” — in this “new universe” he will be doomed to fate, OTHER than getting pelted by the delta rays on a Class-J Starship.”

See, that’s probably the weakest of them all. All the EW article said is that he was doomed. If the writer knew of Pike’s fate in “The Menagerie”, he could very well have been referring to that. The article doesn’t say anything about Pike being doomed *in the film*, let alone anything to suggest his fate is different than what happened to him previously. For all I know, the film might portray that never-seen incident. (I’d bet not, ’cause it seems like it might be extraneous to the story being told, but I don’t know… :) )

“13-No Kodos (that was a major event in the life of young Kirk …)”

Well, again, it all depends on whether or not they flash back to that particular point in his life. For all we know, the mean ol’ uncle, shortly after one of the flashbacks to Kirk’s early teens, ships him off to Tarsus IV, but we don’t see that particular set of events. For all we know, the result of Kirk’s “joyride” in the ‘vette might be him getting kicked offworld for a while.

“14-Again not even a reference to the “Cloud Vampire” that killed more than half of the Farragut crew, including Kirk’s first mentor Charles Garrovick — a major/traumatic event in the life of young Kirk.”

And again, have you seen a script? Do you know it’s not mentioned? ‘Course, even if it isn’t, y’know, it took more than 45 episodes for them to get around to mentioning it in TOS. Who says it necessarily has to get mentioned in this film? ;)

“More than enough times we have heard that this is the first adventure of the original crew — that should be a hint of changes to come in itself. Because the “original crew” under Captain Kirk’s first command included only Spock, Scotty & Sulu from the TOS “series regulars”.”

Do you know that? Have you seen that roster? There have been several non-canonical “first mission” stories that have featured most of the series regulars. Who’s to say that this canonical one couldn’t?

Look, as I said, I don’t know for sure that they’re going to do it right (read, retain basic continuity) vs. screwing it up (read, throwing out continuity) {and, yes, I stand by those definitions, as I’ve said many times on this site and others}, but so far, the list of items you gave are all potentially explainable for an in-continuity story. We may yet learn other things that make your case, but until that happens, I’m still willing to believe that Messrs. Orci and Kurtzman are not lying to us and that the end result of this movie will still be intended to be part of the Trek world we know. (Perhaps what Mr. Lindeloff means, after all, is that when we see the various potential alternate universes, as we’re told will be seen in the film, when all is resolved and the smoke clears, we’ll look at the established Trekverse in a fresh way. That would be a laudable thing for storytellers to seek to do, wouldn’t it?)

332. Lil' black dog - November 9, 2008

# 330 – Sean

Amen!

333. Paulaner - November 9, 2008

#325 “Spock lunging at Kirk – party foul (On its face, this is a non-Spock thing to do – and you can stow the developmental apologetics.)”

What about seeing clips of Amok Time out of their context? :)

334. Stanky McFibberich - November 9, 2008

re:328. Xai – November 9, 2008

If people choose to latch onto something I say, that is their problem.

335. Paul - November 9, 2008

#Boborci

Bob, so is the Shatner issue totally over now as in he will not be in the movie at all even in a cameo??

Previously you said on here there are always possibilities……

336. trekmaster - November 9, 2008

@#331
FULL ACK

337. lostrod - November 9, 2008

Are there cliffs in Iowa?

338. YARN - November 9, 2008

#330

“Again, we know his character post-adolescence.”

And we know Vulcan character/culture and we know his reputation withing Starfleet (and we know that Spock’s reputation is well-known within Starfleet). Development is one thing. Non-sequitur is another.

“Of course, I can also cite numerous examples of his adult self committing violence,”

Yes, rational and measured acts of violence. Violence not as an emotional outburst, but as a logical means to an end.

“And you seem to be ignoring the key point – Spock is half-human, and thus will not act strictly within Vulcan norms.”

Spock notoriously claims his Vulcan half, not his human half. Spock calls himslef a Vulcan, espouses Vulcan philosophy, and often acts beffuddled (in his early years) at human displays of emotion.

” ‘Unification’ establishes the fact that as a boy – his age is never specifically mentioned – he would frequently disobey Sarek, even after being punished.”

Did he lunge at Sarek with “a pointed object”?

“We know that the two ‘cool, uptight, stable’ characters had such a severe schism between them that they would not speak for 18 years,”

Exactly! When Vulcans get pissed, the MOST they will do is give each other the silent treatment. Sarek comes aboard the Enterprise and simply asks for another guide for his tour. Spock rather casually announces to Kirk that Sarek and his wife are, in fact, his parents.

“Sarek would not even acknowledge Spock on his first visit to the Enterprise.”

Yes he does, he tells Kirk that he gave Spock his first lesson in computers.

“Spock also spoke of the intense nature of Vulcan emotions in ‘Amok Time’.”

Which is precisely why Vulcans are so vigilant about controlling their behaviors. They often leak “tells” of emotion, but they don’t wig out.

“Does none of that, in your mind, allow for a young Spock to be somewhat different from the adult Spock?”

No, it does not. Young Spock should be more uncomfortable around humans. He should be more uncomfortable with their emotional displays. He should be more uncomfortable with himself. He should NOT lunge at Kirk with “a pointed object.”

Who says he’s famous for it, outside of TOS? In other words, what dialogue on screen ever established that as a 20-something cadet, Mr Spock never lost his cool?

ALL OF THE DIALOGUE, Sean, where McCoy and Kirk and the rest try to goad Spock into FINALLY revealing that he had human emotions in TOS.

If they had seen Spock majorly freak out at the academy, they would not need the proof and they would remind him of it when he lectured them about their emotions. Indeed, they might not push so hard, because they might be wary of his emotional side.

“Who’s to say that Cadet Kirk hasn’t made a snide remark about his revered Captain Pike, causing the youthful Spock to lash out?”

See above. Rinse and repeat.

“Of course, we don’t even know what context any of this takes place in, since we don’t even have the trailer yet (let alone the movie).”

Right, so we have to offer evaluations without that context. We are talking about the alleged ad in this thread, so are limited to the spoiler data.

Now, in what context does it make sense for Spock to lunge at Kirk?

a. Pon Farr

b. Spock under the control or influence of an outside force.

Now, that the ad DOES (apparently) feature a Spock freak out without any context is a way of saying “See our emotional young Spock! This is not your father’s Trek!” – and this is not a promising sign.

“Sarcasm is a really nice way to avoid the subject, dontcha think? ;)”

It’s also a nice way to make a point.

In the same way that my joke is an exaggeration of your (intended) point, so is Spock lunging at Kirk with a pointed object (after yelling that he will not be lectured at) a gross exaggeration of any of the known outbursts associated with Mr. Spock. It is simply out his character.

“And what precisely does that mean? She was going to kill Chekov in a story so her insight into Spock is nullfied?”

Fontana never wrote an episode of TOS where this insight is displayed.

“Also, I never called TAS canon (I think most of it is far from it). What I said was that elements of ‘Yesteryear’ were considered canon, even amongst the TOS & TNG writers (as events from the episode have been referenced in both).”

So you cite something as being regarded as canon, even though even you don’t accept it as canonical – check.

“Look, in the end, all I know is the character I’ve seen develop over the years. And a big part of that character’s maturity was his conflict between his Human and Vulcan selves. It was not until much, much later that he seemed to have resolved that conflict (TVH). So to me, a younger version of that character SHOULD be less in control. That only makes sense. But if it doesn’t make sense to you, I guess you’d find it distasteful.”

Yes, because it is the exact opposite of how a young Spock should act.

339. Christian S - November 9, 2008

My two cents:
I can see it working. I can actually see the trailer working very well. It will apparently introduce us to all the principal characters (to a certain Extend) and it introduces an interessting conflict (Kirk -Spock) that many people, even the non Trekkers will, will recognize as “odd” and thus creating interest as to how the friendship came to be.
It has the necesarry amountof “KAWUUM- Effects” to get the action crowd interessted plus apparently a whole bunch of images from various scenes throughout the movie to keep the devout Trek community guessing (and judging by the comments above cursing) for month to come.
So I am anxiously looking forward to upcoming friday and would ask all the haters out there to CHILL DUDES!!!

@Transformers: I enjoyed the movie as a whole but it imho also had its little flaws. For once the movie did not take itself seriously enough. I love Shia in it and I also love the comic moments (its based on a cartoon after all) but especially in the second half you should have done away with them. I am not talking about TDK depressing, but just up the stakes. I was on the edge of my seat because of the effect extravaganza (which was mind blowingly good) but the too frequent comedic insertions kinda ruined the mood for me. I only realized that when I watched it for the fourth and fifth time on DVD. I hope for my share of comedic elements in Trek but I also hope that they are left behind once the plot has fully developed.

Like I said, my two cents… ;-)
Now bring on Nov. 14.!!!!

340. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

MAybe this is Tuvok’s real dream from that Sulu epsiode? He read about Kirk’s early adventures, and thought he was the one going over the cliff?

341. Xai - November 9, 2008

337. lostrod – November 9, 2008
Are there cliffs in Iowa?

Yes, but only a few over 200 feet if that. I can think of one right now on the Des Moines River in Ledges State Park. It is possible, but unlikely. I am not familiar with the Riverside, IA area.

342. TL - November 9, 2008

Trailer description sounds really stupid!

343. richpit - November 9, 2008

I couldn’t read all the posts in here…I just had to say that I don’t believe anything AICN has to say. Haven’t they proven time and time again that they’re full if shizzit?

344. THX-1138 - November 9, 2008

OK, just come out and say it, ya’ great bunch of D-bags.

“JJ Abrams raped my childhood!”

I got sick to my stomach reading half of these posts. I certainly can appreciate someone not wanting to see this movie. Th U.S. just finished a Presidential election where two opposing ideologies squared off. But the twits who come in here saying things like “Poor TOS! JJ killed you!” How stupid is that? You have only the DESCRIPTION of the trailer to base this on. Gotta love that hyperbole.

I think it sounds good, but then again, I’ve been jazzed about the prospect of this movie since I first heard it was going to happen.

345. sean - November 9, 2008

#338

“And we know Vulcan character/culture and we know his reputation withing Starfleet (and we know that Spock’s reputation is well-known within Starfleet). Development is one thing. Non-sequitur is another.”

You say non-sequitur, I say reasonable change.

“Yes, rational and measured acts of violence. Violence not as an emotional outburst, but as a logical means to an end.”

The logic of some of his actions could be argued and has been argued within several episodes. Oftentimes, Spock simply deflected by saying he believed his actions to be logical, but that logic was sometimes questionable.

“Spock notoriously claims his Vulcan half, not his human half. Spock calls himslef a Vulcan, espouses Vulcan philosophy, and often acts beffuddled (in his early years) at human displays of emotion.”

And yet, he displays a number of those beffuddling emotions early on as well. Like smiling, yelling, etc. Whether he chose to be Vulcan or not, he continues to struggle with the inner conflict of Vulcan vs Human for the next 25 years. It’s a core definition of the character, that inner conflict.

“Did he lunge at Sarek with “a pointed object”?”

I don’t know. Perhaps that’s what led to 18 years of silence? Or some of those infamous punishments.

“Exactly! When Vulcans get pissed, the MOST they will do is give each other the silent treatment. Sarek comes aboard the Enterprise and simply asks for another guide for his tour. Spock rather casually announces to Kirk that Sarek and his wife are, in fact, his parents. ”

All we know is that’s how Sarek and Spock chose to deal with it. It doesn’t provide the basis for ALL Vulcan behavior.

“Yes he does, he tells Kirk that he gave Spock his first lesson in computers.”

Initially, Sarek does not acknowledge Spock in any way, even asking for a different guide. He was clearly uncomfortable even being escorted on a tour by his son. It’s an emotional reaction, regardless of what Vulcan’s like to claim. The mention about Spock’s childhood education isn’t until later.

“Which is precisely why Vulcans are so vigilant about controlling their behaviors. They often leak “tells” of emotion, but they don’t wig out.”

To the best of my recollection, Spock is the only Human/Vulcan hybrid we see in TOS. His behaviors WILL be different than that of the average Vulcan. In TMP, Spock is moved to tears without being in Pon Farr or under the influence of an outside force. And before you say it – V’ger wasn’t controlling him or manipulating him, merely calling to a kindred spirit.

“No, it does not. Young Spock should be more uncomfortable around humans. He should be more uncomfortable with their emotional displays. He should be more uncomfortable with himself. He should NOT lunge at Kirk with “a pointed object.”

You say he should. He didn’t seem all that disturbed by it in The Cage, and was even moved to smile when presented with a pretty flower.

“ALL OF THE DIALOGUE, Sean, where McCoy and Kirk and the rest try to goad Spock into FINALLY revealing that he had human emotions in TOS.

If they had seen Spock majorly freak out at the academy, they would not need the proof and they would remind him of it when he lectured them about their emotions. Indeed, they might not push so hard, because they might be wary of his emotional side. ”

And I could argue that McCoy, as a human, simply found Vulcan control distasteful and liked to take it out on Spock via teasing. Plus, we have no idea if McCoy or any other TOS crewmember (besides Kirk) is even present when this supposed outburst occurs. I could also argue that they don’t reference the event later because, deep down, even McCoy wouldn’t be so cruel as to rub something in Spock’s face that he felt such embarassment about.

If I took your same position, then logically McCoy & Kirk should have stopped after The Menagerie, where Spock clearly – despite his protestations of logic – displayed fierce loyalty and affection for his former Captain

“Now, that the ad DOES (apparently) feature a Spock freak out without any context is a way of saying “See our emotional young Spock! This is not your father’s Trek!” – and this is not a promising sign.”

If you choose to take it that way, that’s up to you. I don’t see anything overtly lacking in promise in that description.

“In the same way that my joke is an exaggeration of your (intended) point, so is Spock lunging at Kirk with a pointed object (after yelling that he will not be lectured at) a gross exaggeration of any of the known outbursts associated with Mr. Spock. It is simply out his character.”

I don’t know how many times I can say this – the Spock of this movie is NOT the Spock of TOS. He is younger, less experienced and from all accounts (including those of Leonard Nimoy, who does know the character better than anyone) not as controlled as his latter self.

“Fontana never wrote an episode of TOS where this insight is displayed.”

Really? So ‘Journey To Babel’ (which provide almost all the basic foundations of the character), ‘This Side of Paradies’ or ‘The Enterprise Incident’ provide NO insight into Spock? Because they were all written by DC Fontana.

“So you cite something as being regarded as canon, even though even you don’t accept it as canonical – check. ”

You’re being deliberately obtuse. I explained myself very clearly. ‘Yesteryear’ is considered canonical by many fans and the TOS/TNG writers – the rest is not. Pretty straightforward, and contradiction free. The fact that it’s written by DC Fontana, someone who clearly understands the character (despite whatever reservations you seem to have about her) helps that point.

“Yes, because it is the exact opposite of how a young Spock should act.”

Obviously that fact is a subject of some debate.

346. montreal paul - November 9, 2008

all I have to say is, get a life people… seriously. I am a huge Trek fan.. but come on.. this is an old 60’s TV show and this is only a movie.. not a religion. Geez.. at least go see the movie before you bash it.

347. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Is Kirk driving around with Carol Marcus?

348. harris250 - November 9, 2008

this is great, 334 posts about a trailer description thats obviously a plant. I won’t reprise the arguments here but many posts at AICN are very convincing. Anyway I’m looking forward to being the first on my block to see the real trailer. Then we can really get into it…Oh ya I doubt you’ll see the Big E until the movie…think of the suspense….I see heads exploding some time in April….

349. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Kirk and his buddy Gary Mitchell are driving around town.

350. Third Remata'Klan - November 9, 2008

NO ENTERPRISE!!! PLEASE!!!

351. Xai - November 9, 2008

Yep, No Big E… you all were bad, bad kids so NOW you have to wait until May.

352. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Kirk is driving through a small town where he stumbles on a Hanger named Area 51. He stumbles inside, and discovers crates upon crates in the large hanger. One crate is smashed, and a golden crate is seen inside. Kirk looks around and finds out the Enterprise is being built underneath the hanger.

353. angry but i'll get over it - November 9, 2008

#346….i have seen many things in the world, i can pretty confidently tell you, that i’m sure there may be a trek religion out there…with fans who do follow religiously. though you have a point….see the movie first…if the trailer is true, it still can be very misleading about the movie itself.

And I’ll join in on the fun…
maybe the car is a time machine, and young kirk discovered it and was curious…maybe it was put there by someone who wants to get rid of him….maybe….i just don’t care enough to speculate until i’ve actually seen this teaser.

354. YARN - November 9, 2008

#345

“You say non-sequitur, I say reasonable change.”

Indeed.

“The logic of some of his actions could be argued and has been argued within several episodes. Oftentimes, Spock simply deflected by saying he believed his actions to be logical, but that logic was sometimes questionable.”

Really, this was only when it came to his closely guarded affections for his friends (like his joyous outburst in amok time). You’re really stretching here.

“And yet, he displays a number of those beffuddling emotions early on as well.”

Yes, like when he says (with a smile) “Irritation? Ah yes, one of your Earth emotions.” – He denies emotion even when he hemorrhages it. There is a big difference between betraying emotions and having a massive wig out.

“Like smiling, yelling, etc. Whether he chose to be Vulcan or not, he continues to struggle with the inner conflict of Vulcan vs Human for the next 25 years. It’s a core definition of the character, that inner conflict.”

And it is a core aspect of his character that in this struggle he never loses control of his emotional balance except under coercion or extreme biological duress.

“I don’t know. Perhaps that’s what led to 18 years of silence? Or some of those infamous punishments.”

The reason is on the record. It was his choice to join Starfleet.

“All we know is that’s how Sarek and Spock chose to deal with it. It doesn’t provide the basis for ALL Vulcan behavior.”

It is the most immediate evidence we have on hand. And we have abundant testimonials (from within and without) of Vulcan emotional control, restraint, and disdain for emotional unbalance and violence.
Moreover, within the episode, Spock lectures his mom about how the way he and his behavior toward his father is Vulcan in nature. And Spock’s Mom, in turn, tells Kirk that Spock and Sarek’s relationship, however, awkward is very Vulcan in nature.

“Initially, Sarek does not acknowledge Spock in any way, even asking for a different guide. He was clearly uncomfortable even being escorted on a tour by his son. It’s an emotional reaction, regardless of what Vulcan’s like to claim. The mention about Spock’s childhood education isn’t until later.”

And the point is, that is as far as a Vulcan emotional reaction goes.

“To the best of my recollection, Spock is the only Human/Vulcan hybrid we see in TOS. His behaviors WILL be different than that of the average Vulcan.”

So he isn’t Vulcan enough for you. RACIST!

Everyone on board took him to be prototypically Vulcan.

“In TMP, Spock is moved to tears without being in Pon Farr or under the influence of an outside force. And before you say it – V’ger wasn’t controlling him or manipulating him, merely calling to a kindred spirit.”

That moment in TMP is a defining moment in Spock’s life. It is this point where he finally reverses himself from trying to repress all emotion. He is at ease with himself in TWOK. In the next few films he is unbalanced again as he just returned from the dead, but he is clearly at peace with his human side and the limits of logic in Undiscovered Country.

The perepity we get in TMP would not make sense if it were revealed that Spock were historically invovled in such displays.

“You say he should. He didn’t seem all that disturbed by it in The Cage, and was even moved to smile when presented with a pretty flower.”

There is a big difference between smiling at a flower and yelling at another person before thrusting a pointy object at them.

“And I could argue that McCoy, as a human, simply found Vulcan control distasteful and liked to take it out on Spock via teasing. Plus, we have no idea if McCoy or any other TOS crewmember (besides Kirk) is even present when this supposed outburst occurs. I could also argue that they don’t reference the event later because, deep down, even McCoy wouldn’t be so cruel as to rub something in Spock’s face that he felt such embarassment about.”

McCoy said plenty of cruel things to Spock (“You green blooded, inhuman…”), and was always willing to press a point if it meant proving Spock actually had emotions. If he’d known about the freak out – he would have brought it up. And even if it is only Kirk who was there – that he had to use two hands to fend off an attack from Spock at Starfllet Academy would be all the proof he needed.

“If I took your same position, then logically McCoy & Kirk should have stopped after The Menagerie, where Spock clearly – despite his protestations of logic – displayed fierce loyalty and affection for his former Captain”

Hardly

“If you choose to take it that way, that’s up to you. I don’t see anything overtly lacking in promise in that description.”

Hence our present disagreement.

“I don’t know how many times I can say this – the Spock of this movie is NOT the Spock of TOS. He is younger, less experienced and from all accounts (including those of Leonard Nimoy, who does know the character better than anyone) not as controlled as his latter self.”

I too feel exasperated. In particular, by your failure to see that it is simply not in his character – be it his early 20’s or late 60’s to scream an outburst and then attack a peer with a sharp object.

“Really? So ‘Journey To Babel’ (which provide almost all the basic foundations of the character), ‘This Side of Paradies’ or ‘The Enterprise Incident’ provide NO insight into Spock? Because they were all written by DC Fontana.”

Spock is not a real person. Fontana does not have insights into a person who really exists “off the page” somewhere. As for the insights revealed about Spock on the page (on the show) NONE are indicative of this sort of behavior (save for coercion or extreme biochemical imbalance).

“You’re being deliberately obtuse. I explained myself very clearly. ‘Yesteryear’ is considered canonical by many fans and the TOS/TNG writers – the rest is not. Pretty straightforward, and contradiction free. The fact that it’s written by DC Fontana, someone who clearly understands the character (despite whatever reservations you seem to have about her) helps that point.”

Again, I don’t accept TAS as canon, so there is no use in appealing to this as evidence. As for Fontana’s insights into the character – See above.

“Obviously that fact is a subject of some debate.”

Now THAT IS something Spock would say. ; )

355. Enterprise - November 9, 2008

Nero sabotages the bakes on the car, and that’s why it goes over the cliff, right?

356. Xai - November 9, 2008

Yarn and Sean,

Seems you are arguing over an emotional Spock. May I point out…
While there is a photo of a Kirk/Spock conflict, you don’t know what the context is and you can’t depend on this AICN report to be accurate. At best, it’s second-hand knowledge and at worst, a sham.

357. YARN - November 9, 2008

# 356

If this description is accurate,

[i]”We then see a bunch a quick shots of the crew walking around the bridge of some starship and we see a 20-something Spock angrily pointing at a 20-something Kirk and saying, “I will not be lectured by you!” and an angry Kirk getting in Spocks face saying, “Why don’t you do something about it!?!” We then see an enraged Spock trying to stab Kirk with something pointed I couldn’t quite make out. It was a quick shot and Kirk is shown using both hands to fend off Spock and hold the object away from his face.”[/i]

there is cause for concern.

If this is AICN fakery, then there is not.

At any rate, I don’t either one of us really care that much if the report is true.

Sean is arguing about what might be consistent for Spock’s character, arguing a develomentalist POV, where I deny the developmentalist analysis on the grounds that the behavior would be too far beyond what Spock would do and that the develomental arc that we do have would indicate that Spock not act in this way.

Even if the report is bogus (crosses fingers), we can still have a debate about what is within the range of Mr. Spock’s early behavior.

I am not getting my blood into a boil over it and I doubt Sean is either – this is just internet geekery and I love it.

358. Supervisor 194 - November 9, 2008

This business about the car is unreal. Nevrtheless, I’m going to jump in on it as well: All we know about the Iotians from POTA is that they copied the VISUALS from the book about Chicago Mobs (I doubt the book would have had detailed intstructions for manufacturing cars). With that in mind, it’s entirely possible that the cars (as well as everything else they fabricated) only LOOKED like the 1920s and their inner workings may have been, indeed probably were, substantially different from their inspirations. Ergo, Kirk still has the difficulty driving and the seemingly all-important comedy bit from 40 years ago is saved.

359. Spock - November 9, 2008

I hope that is Uhura getting her gear off in the trailer. Finally, I can knock one out over Uhura without thinking ‘she’s 70 in real life now’.

360. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 9, 2008

I’d like to see McCoy in a high position at Starfleet HQ.

Perhaps in his opening shot he could be presenting his final findings into the health and psych scores of the graduating cadets. At the meeting he reviews the profiles of the top cadets for open bridge positions onbard the Enterprise.

He could then be drafted (STTMP style) to replace the departing Dr. Boyce because there is an “impending emergency,” where the Enteprise is the only ship available to provide a defense — But where McCoy is also needed to monitor the newly appointed cadets. Spock specifically. Perhaps McCoy is a spy for Star Fleet after the Nero secret!

The general audence would then have a good grip on McCoy’s character and his medical authority in his position on the ship, as well as a quick professional profile of each of the main characters.

I guess an intro in the characters early lives “may be” being told so as to provide a solid identity and link with the characters and audience. This could provide a nice story arc, but it does seem to be reaching a bit when considering the limited screen time.

I am still hoping for the best on this Trek.

Bring the real trailer fast!

361. Kirk's Bong - November 10, 2008

344 and 346: Thanks; well-said.

“Spock lunging at Kirk”…Maybe Kirk dropped the “elf with a hyperactive thyroid” line on Spock?

And folks on this board are up in arms about a *rumor* of what the next trailer *may* be? If Jim Kirk could have a Commodore PET computer, complete with Cassette Tape Drive in his home, then why couldn’t someone he knew as a kid have a ‘vette? Again, it’s more people looking for more things about this movie to poke holes in.

No wonder people love to make fun of Trekkies.

362. YARN - November 10, 2008

#344

“OK, just come out and say it, ya’ great bunch of D-bags.

“JJ Abrams raped my childhood!”

I got sick to my stomach reading half of these posts. I certainly can appreciate someone not wanting to see this movie. Th U.S. just finished a Presidential election where two opposing ideologies squared off. But the twits who come in here saying things like “Poor TOS! JJ killed you!” How stupid is that? You have only the DESCRIPTION of the trailer to base this on. Gotta love that hyperbole.

I think it sounds good, but then again, I’ve been jazzed about the prospect of this movie since I first heard it was going to happen.”

Since when does any disagreement make one a D-bag?

You don’t have to like the posts any more than we have to like (or dislike) the spoilers on the trailer.

And you don’t have to be “canon-wanker” to feel uneasy with some of artistic choices that appear to be on the way.

363. Enterprise - November 10, 2008

Emotional Spock – Spock is half human – problem solved.

364. Geoffers - November 10, 2008

Read most of these postings, and you will read most of the reason why Trek was nearly killed during Enterprise.

For gods sake people, a lot fo folks here can not be “fans”… you are so ready to slag it off,so ready to see it as sh*t before you see it as good… I really do think a lot of people here, decided a long time ago they don’t like anything about this new film, and will take whatever they are given, as more proof that they are right not to…. just like the same folks dd with Enterprise… I give up!

365. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

236-

I hope your right, we will know for certain by the end of the week.

But if the trailer ends up being like this i will not be happy. From the pics and Abrams interviews it is clear Abrams is changing Star Trek to fit his own style.

Why do I get the feeling he is crapping on our beloved show?

366. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

I want to love this film I really do as it is new Trek.

but at the same time I don’t want it to be totally different

367. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

I have no probelm with a corvette but it seems to imply a different kind of movie all together.

Than opening scene in trailer feels more like a Rebel film than a Star Trek film. Kirk had a fondness for antiques but don’t make Kirk a problem child, he was so serious in his youth.

I want to love this film, and I probably will but it will not be the best movie. These actors will never take the place of the originals.

368. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

explosions, tits, shouting and cliched dialogue. Is that what it takes to attract a mainstream audience. It is a criticism I have with Hollywood in general.

Mainstream these days means a constant reliance on dumbing things down. I really despise this mentality in todays market. Roddenberry was smart to realise that the audience did have intelligence. That was one of the things that made Star Trek special and that was it was intelligent and had great ideas.

TV shows these days are too fast paced just so that today’s kids odnt switch off. Scenes are too short so they dont have to think.

Keep it cerebral.

369. magnumpc - November 10, 2008

#20: “Still, sounds like there’s lots of potential in this movier. If it bombs, well, there’s always “Iron Man 2.”

Honestly, there are no other movies on my radar except this one. So, I hope for 2 things:
1. It doesn’t suck.
2. I don’t get plot-spoiled…

P.S.: I have an open mind about the tinkering with the Big E design, so, I won’t be upset by anything like that.

370. JL - November 10, 2008

For the first time ever, I refuse to spoil my experience by clicking a link like the one above.

In fact, I also do not want to read your comments for fear of spoilers.

It takes a lot of willpower but I think I can do it!

371. Cervantes - November 10, 2008

#370 JL

Good for you. I wish I had too. Curse my human condition….

372. Cervantes - November 10, 2008

Just a thought – Is it better that the upcoming Movie has been written by a die-hard Star Trek lover, but directed by a die-hard Star Wars lover who wasn’t invested in Star Trek…. OR ….would it have been better in some ways for the upcoming Movie to have been written by a die-hard Star Wars lover who wasn’t invested in Star Trek, but directed by a die-hard Star Trek lover instead?….

373. Alex Rosenzweig - November 10, 2008

#367 – “Than opening scene in trailer feels more like a Rebel film than a Star Trek film. Kirk had a fondness for antiques but don’t make Kirk a problem child, he was so serious in his youth.”

Perhaps, but there’s ample precedent for folks seeing things differently about Kirk. The writers have talked about the novel Best Destiny as an inspiration for them. Well, Diane Carey’s take on Kirk as a youth was very much in keeping with some of what we’ve heard about for this film. So was Bill Shatner’s, in Collision Course. So while this film might be offering a different slant from Kirk’s description in “Shore Leave”, or even “Where No Man Has Gone Before”, it’s not something that these writers invented out of whole cloth themselves.

#372 – I’d rather have it written by a Trek lover and directed by a Star Wars lover than the other way around. At least then there’s less chance of it going off the rails, script-wise.

374. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

372- Ideal if both writer and director were Star Trek fans

But as long they did their homework on Star Trek it should not matter.

Obviously it seems Abrams wants to bring a Star Wars mentality to Star Trek. And from the pics it seems he has completely changed our favourite show.

I want to love this film but it seems the pics are lowering my expectations. I hope to love this film when it comes out but I believe hard core fans are being short changed. I understand that to save Star Trek it has to become what we hate in Hollywood these days.

375. cpelc - November 10, 2008

Excuse Me, I have a question.

Are there many cliffs in Iowa?

376. captain_neill - November 10, 2008

373- I guess so!

But I think it seems to be doing a cheesy coming of age story with Kirk turns it into a completely different kind of feel all together

377. Wrath - November 10, 2008

People will always love automobiles. Just because technology advances, doesn’t mean hobbies die.

Meyer gave Kirk books, and he gave Kirk spectacles. The future empowers us to embrace technologies, but people will always love what they love. Petrol heads will not be killed off by the shuttle craft.

378. JimJ - November 10, 2008

#375-Yes, there are hills with cliffs in Iowa (both in western and eastern Iowa). My dad has had more thqan one cow plummet to it’s death off of one. BTW-Iowans love convertibles such as corvettes, mustangs, etc.

-Native Iowan raised in the Loess Hills

379. sean - November 10, 2008

#354

YARN, to paraphrase the Joker – ‘I think we could do this forever’.

“I am not getting my blood into a boil over it and I doubt Sean is either – this is just internet geekery and I love it.”

That I definitely agree with you on! :)

In the end, I think this just comes down to personal expectations and interpretations of the character. As someone who does accept ‘Yesteryear’ as a valid piece of Trek history – given its subsequent validation by way of reference in other Trek, and DC Fontana’s *critical* involvement in creating the character we have come to know over all these years – I am open to a Spock that isn’t fully in control. His strained relationship with Sarek, his inner conflict – these are all character traits that make more emotional outbursts from a young Spock perfectly acceptable to me. I’m not saying it would be the norm or even typical, only that they would be possible from a juvenile not fully in control and not yet certain of his place in life.

I’m reminded of the exchange between McCoy and Kirk in ‘The Menagerie’ – “It’s impossible, Jim; Spock is a Vulcan. He is utterly incapable of lying,” “Yes, but he is also half-human. That human part of him is capable of lying.” Indeed, Spock does lie, physically assault several unwitting crewman and steal a starship in order to pay tribute to his old commander in that episode. When I hear that exchange, it only confirms – in my mind – that Spock is not typically Vulcan, and fully capable of rather un-Vulcan actions at times. In fact, if we’re to assume Kirk has known Spock longer (and that it’s possible McCoy isn’t present during the so-called assault) one could even interpret that scene in a new light to mean Kirk is intimately aware of what Spock’s ‘human half’ is capable of.

Conversely, everything you see leads you to believe this possible (again, we don’t know if the trailer description is valid, or what context the scene takes place in – the fact that we’re debating it reveals our true geek blood!)portrayal would be completely unacceptable unless an alien from the planet Melmac had forcibly taken over Spock’s body and forced him to do it. Fair enough. I do understand where you’re coming from even though I don’t see it that way.

380. ME - November 10, 2008

All you guys complaining about kirk/piece of the action/cant drive/etc.

How many of you have driven an old car like that. Trust me, compared to my firebird, its a completely different animal. Stick and all. try it before you whine about it. LIghten up.

Also, How many of you can still do the monkey bars? Bet you could when you were 11, how bout now?

Ya feel my point here?

381. spencer - November 10, 2008

Get over the car thing. Abrams is trying to tie our present era to the future which takes the camp out of the sci-fi. That’s a good thing.

And the guy who said that the opening vette scene is a metaphor for Kirk’s life is apparently the only other person on this board besides me who understood that. How can you be a Star Trek fan and not see that immediately? Morons.

382. dalek - November 10, 2008

#381 If you want your point to be taken seriously (which wasn’t a bad one), then I suggest you stop insulting those who differ in opinion to you nor suggest you are a truer Star Trek fan because your views differ.

383. Closettrekker - November 10, 2008

I didn’t read anything there which affects my opinion and excitement over the release of this film at all.

I don’t have any problem with Kirk being portrayed as a somewhat rambunctious youth. In fact, I would have been surprised if he wasn’t.

384. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

There is no abyss near Riverside, Iowa. Maybe it’s his uncle’s farm in Idaho. Completely ruins the movie and just proves tha JJ has no idea what he’s doing. I’d rather download it than give Paramount one red cent.

Anyway, enough picking nits. It’s been brought up here that Krk must have been a fairly wild youth, which is consistant with the line in TWOK that “Jim Kirk is many things but he’s definitely not a Boy Scout.” This is a person who free climbs mountains. Yes, it’s in the future, but again is his family not allowed to have an antique Corvette? Is this any different than someone on this board keeping a two hundred yr old family heirloom? And this scene fits right in with Spock’s line about Kirk’s driving skills. Of course he doesn’t know how to drive a car, how else do you explain the fact that he wrecks it?

385. JimJ - November 10, 2008

I bet Kirk is both smart, cocky, and a bit of a rebel. It pretty much is dead on if you look over his career. A stack of books with legs who is good and knows it, to the point of being rather annoying to a whole lot of people. I imagine a lot of Starfleet captains got tired of hearing his stories of which alien he had “wooed” into bed and into surrender!!! lol

Makes perfect sense that he drove a corvette, annoyed Spock (especially if Spock admired Pike), and befriended McCoy (mint julip, Jimboy?). I think people are getting way too worked up over nothing. Plus, it DOES sound Indiana Jones-like in that opening scene they mention, which I suppose is bad in some people’s eyes. Not mine, though. I’m a die-hard original series fan since 1970 (when I was 4 years old). Give it a chance, people!!! It’s got to be better than what we’ve been getting fed over the last 12-15 years.

386. Jorg Sacul - November 10, 2008

I, for one, figure since I’m seeing the trailer with my own eyes, for real, later this week, I’ll wait to pass sentence on it. Then, I’ll wait until I’ve seen the entire film once or twice, at least, to come up with a personal opinion and response. This constant “OMFG CANNON RAPERS!!!” (spelling intended) prattle really is a bit much. We will know facts, not supposition, in May.

Until then, we’re all just mushrooms in the basement, because we’re all in the dark and the BS is thick.

387. Xai - November 10, 2008

375. cpelc – November 10, 2008
Excuse Me, I have a question.

Are there many cliffs in Iowa?

See #341

388. Mark Lynch - November 10, 2008

So many posts on so little information… :-)

I think that I shall wait for the trailer itself before making comment. Unless I hear it is a bit heavy on the spoilers and/or shows too much of the ‘revamped’ E. In which case I don’t know what I am going to do.

Actually I know full well what will happen, because I am too weak. ;-)

‘Damn this Internet thingy, damn it all to hell.’
Apologies to Charlton Heston for the previous sentence.

389. Xai - November 10, 2008

#357 Yarn

It’s still out of context. IF it is real, what’s the reason? That’s the key.

390. John from Cincinnati - November 10, 2008

I can’t wait to see the trailer for myself.

391. Neil - November 10, 2008

…and forgive me if someone answered this, I stopped paying attention 100 posts ago.

How many of the things in the trailer occur in dream sequences (ie the Vette, stabbing Kirk, Uhura boobage etc)?

392. John from Cincinnati - November 10, 2008

385. “It’s got to be better than what we’ve been getting fed over the last 12-15 years.”

I agree with you 110%

Added note: it’s hard for me to believe they’ll have Corvettes in the future but no one knows who Clark Gable was. I guess I always pictured our idealized future as having no pop culture connections to contemporary times. If this is my biggest complaint about the new movie then I will be a very happy camper.

393. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

There aren’t cliffs per se around Riverside, Iowa (where Kirk will be born). But if by abyss it is meant ravine, then that fits the landscape. There are a lot of hills with windy roads there, so it’s possible that if you aren’t paying attention you could drive off into a 30-50 foot ravine.

394. boborci - November 10, 2008

393

Or a quarry?

395. Neil - November 10, 2008

Oh no, it’s worse than I thought.

Kirk’s Corvette is actually a remodeled DeLorean, and he needed to drive it into the quarry as part of the ultimate cross-promo bonanza – join us as the crew of the Enterprise travels back in time and joins up with Fred and Barney to prevent Bam-Bam from taking over the universe.

396. Neil - November 10, 2008

…in an episode titled “The Trouble With Pebbles”.

397. boborci - November 10, 2008

393
Perhaps the great earthquake of 2201 has created some abnormalities in the topography?

398. Xai - November 10, 2008

#394 boborci

Ok, I’ll bite. If your kirk in a ‘vette scene takes place in Iowa (and it’s too bad it wasn’t filmed here), near Riverside, it is possible for a quarry to be part of the land features. Riverside lies in Washington County near the English and Iowa Rivers. The carea does have sandstone/flagstone of good quality, so….
if your hint is for real, it’s possible. I just hope you didn’t make it too deep. How deep is it?

(“deep enough” is not an acceptable answer.. ;-) )

399. Xai - November 10, 2008

great quake of 2201?

Nearest nasty faultline near Riverside is the New Madrid in the extreme SE part of Missouri.

Old Xindi weapons scar maybe?

400. ShawnP - November 10, 2008

I’m curious. Does anyone actually read the really long posts? I tend to just scroll past them.

And I will begrudgingly go see the new Bond film just to see this trailer on the big screen. There’s just something about seeing something on a movie screen theater that makes a difference. Case in point: I love The Goonies but have never seen it on a big screen…until Saturday night. What an awesome experience.

401. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

397 – Which was caused by the Iowa Hawkeyes actually winning a national championship in something other than wrestling.

402. Daniel Broadway - November 10, 2008

# 400

tl;dr

403. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

394 – That would be right. It’s hard to know what’s meant by abyss, but a quarry would nail it. There are limestone quarries around there.

You know you’re a geek when you spend time debating the topography of Iowa 300 years in the future.

404. Anthony Pascale - November 10, 2008

Maybe the Borg created the Earthquake? In 2063 their time vortex extended to 1974 and sucked Charlton Heston, Lorne Greene and Victoria Principal into the future of 2201, creating a sequel to Earthquake” (1974)

hi Bob

405. Chris Doohan - November 10, 2008

397.

Good answer. :)

406. Chris Doohan - November 10, 2008

Iowa cliffs, just in case you’re interested.

Bald Point
Eagle Rock
East Bluff
Fire Point
Floyds Bluff
Horseshoe Bluff
Kellys Bluff
Nezekaw Point
Point Ann
Pulpit Rock
Sergeant Bluff
Steamboat Rock
Tower Rock
Wantea Point
Wildcat Bluff

407. boborci - November 10, 2008

404

Hiya — it’s gonna get crazy around here, I think…

408. boborci - November 10, 2008

406

LOL!

409. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

406 – Forgot Pike’s Peak

410. Gustavo - November 10, 2008

Hi Bob

I just wanna say that I am crazy to see your work in star trek….I loved Transformers and M:I 3

greetings from Brazil

411. Dennis Bailey - November 10, 2008

#393: “There aren’t cliffs per se around Riverside, Iowa (where Kirk will be born).”

There will be after World War III. :-)

412. Closettrekker - November 10, 2008

#407—-“it’s gonna get crazy around here, I think…”

Bob, I think we’re way past that already!

413. Xai - November 10, 2008

406. Chris Doohan – November 10, 2008
Iowa cliffs, just in case you’re interested.

“Floyds Bluff

Sergeant Bluff”

Actually these are the same formation. I drive by them at least twice, 5 days a week. This hill overlooks the Missouri River on the south edge of Sioux City, IA. It is named for the man who’s grave stands on it, Sergeant Charles Floyd. He was the only man to die on the Lewis and Clark Expedition and a large obelisk stands there.

And at least 4 hours from Riverside, IA.

Hello Chris.

X

414. Closettrekker - November 10, 2008

I’ve never been to Iowa, but I have an old Marine drinking buddy who is from there…Sioux City, I think. I’m not sure if he is still around that part of the country.

415. Daniel_83 - November 10, 2008

hey, has anyone already seen this? They added a countdown to the official Trek XI site :)

416. Pat - November 10, 2008

It’s a bloody trailer!
Since when has a trailer been anything concrete…hell just look at the previous trek trailers…then as for other movies i.e. Cloverfield…I thought that piece of garbage movie was going to be a lot more than it was.
Did I agree that cloverfield was crap? Yes. BUT i’m not going to pass judgement on something until I see the movie.
If Kirk is driving a car then f**k me whats wrong with that “boo h-h-hhoo, they *stutter* they *stutter* they didn’t mention that he drove a car off a cliff in TOS” Just wait and see
And to say that “ohhh nooo Pike isn’t there, so’n so isnt there” wait and bloody see…and then maybe you might enjoy the film without being so caught up in what he didn’t do specifically for you

417. Jamie - November 10, 2008

In the new Batman and Bond films, the characters do not act in “typical fashion” in the first film. Bond fell in love. We saw Bruce Wayne before he knew anything about martial arts, etc.

If you do an origin story, I think you’re allowed to show character development. I think that’s kind of the point of doing it.

If I went to see this Star Trek origin story, and every character was fully-formed, on the Enterprise, wearing the TOS uniforms, right at the start, I would consider it a massively missed opportunity.

418. Captain Robert April - November 10, 2008

409 – Pike’s Peak is in Colorado.

419. Captain Robert April - November 10, 2008

Keith DeCandido has an excellent article in the current Star Trek Magazine regarding this legend of Kirk being a “maverick” and how it’s all a bunch of hooey. While he sometimes got creative in his interpretation of the Prime Directive, he was, by and large, a by-the-book officer.

Add in the two descriptions we have of him at the Academy, namely Mitchell’s “stack of books with legs” crack and Kirk and McCoy’s chat in “Shore Leave” (“And of course, you being the serious young student –” “Serious? I’ll make a confession, Bones, I was postively grim, which delighted Finnegan even more.”), and frankly, this rebel without a clue routine just doesn’t fit.

420. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 10, 2008

409 – The Colorado one is more well known than ours. The Iowa Pikes Peak is just outside McGregor, Iowa. It was named by the famous explorer Pikes Peak (actually Zebulon Pike). It’s a state park now.

421. Alex Rosenzweig - November 10, 2008

#419 – Ahh, but who’s to say that his seriousness at the Academy wasn’t a reaction to events in his early teens that changed him from a rebellious youngster into a maybe-too-focused Academy cadet? Maybe first-year Kirk is trying really, really hard because he needs to be away from the events that preceded his entry into the Academy, and by the time he’s a graduate student and instructor to Gary Mitchell, he’d been through quite a bit, I bet. (Heck, maybe while he was an instructor/graduate student, he was on probation after his stunt with the Kobayashi Maru, and was being real careful.)

Later on, as he grows older and more experienced, he starts to find the balance between following the rules and creatively bending them where necessary.

Sure, I’m speculating here, but it’s not like it couldn’t be made to work.

422. cpelc - November 10, 2008

so we are to presume that the smelting factory(per report 1) is the one from the shuttle pics?

I remember info from that set saying that Chris Pine rode up on a motorcycle.

423. Anthony Pascale - November 10, 2008

407/bob
yes it will get crazy…we are ready for it

This debate is already bordering on the ‘was the enterprise built in orbit’ debate, and people haven’t seen the trailer yet.

I point fans to our Q&A with Bob after the last trailer
http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/19/interview-orci-answers-questions-about-new-trek-trailer/

here is an excerpt that probably applies as well now as it did then

TrekMovie.com: Looking at the reaction from this one little thing, are you now thinking about what it will be like for all the other judgment calls you made?

Roberto Orci: Not really. The main judgment call is going to be whether or not the theory of the movie works. And the theory sort of encompasses it…either you buy the movie or you don’t. So we aren’t going to sweat every little detail. We are going to sweat whether or not you buy our interpretation of it. But this is not a surprise. When we were constructing the trailer we knew that many were going to criticize it. We have our eyes wide open I think. But again, of course it is terrifying. I think I said on your site that in those times when canon is fuzzy, then we are ‘The Supreme Court’ right now and the court has to rule one way or the other.

Without putting words into the mouths of the team, I think I get what these guys are shooting for. Although there will be lots of ‘continuity nuggets’ and character moments that hearken to the past, this film will not solely feed into expectations…what fun would that be? These guys want to challenge audiences and provide surprises as well.

424. Mac - November 10, 2008

Sounds like JJ is screwing up trek.

425. Xai - November 10, 2008

#424 Mac

When did you see the trailer? Give it time, then we see…

426. Xai - November 10, 2008

419. Captain Robert April – November 10, 2008

“Add in the two descriptions we have of him at the Academy, namely Mitchell’s “stack of books with legs” crack and Kirk and McCoy’s chat in “Shore Leave” (”And of course, you being the serious young student –” “Serious? I’ll make a confession, Bones, I was postively grim, which delighted Finnegan even more.”), and frankly, this rebel without a clue routine just doesn’t fit.”

He got to the academy and after the Kobyashi Maru experience, hit the books hard and became a serious student cadet.
His Kobyashi Maru solution WAS NOT by the book, btw

427. Bob - November 10, 2008

Why don’t you idiots wait for the trailer then the movie. Stop yer bitchen.

428. The Vulcanista - November 10, 2008

#399 “Old Xindi weapons scar maybe?”

That would be cool!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:- |

429. Spock of Ages - November 10, 2008

Re: Corvette. It’s been established in TWOK that Kirks always had a boner for antiques…

430. JB - November 10, 2008

I’m gonna buy a Corvette!

431. The Quickening - November 10, 2008

If anyone is interested in hearing another review of the upcoming TREK trailer before Friday, go to:

http://zeroroom.libsyn.com/

It’s a mp3 podcast and the review is a positive one. Beware, it is not spoiler free.

432. captain_neill - November 11, 2008

424

I share your pain

Clear that JJ is taking too many liberties

I want to love this film and I intend to go and see it and be wrong in my worries.

If JJ screws it up then I stick with my past movies and episodes and as protest never watch anything by JJ Abrams again.

433. Craig - November 11, 2008

glamourising underage joyriding? maybe censors will be a problem

434. Descrição do trailer de Jornada pela AICN « Startrekbr’s Weblog - November 12, 2008

[…] Fonte: TrekMovie […]

435. Zeiram - November 15, 2008

I recently saw the ‘NEW’ Star Trek Teaser (not trailer, its only about one-minute and ten seconds long) and here are some observations and thoughts for all you fans out there. I’ll try to be as accurate and brutally honest as I can about my first impressions:

1) The intro to the trailer is pretty exciting, probably the best quality about the whole thing. Like people have said, we see a young boy driving an old-fashioned corvette convertable along a dusty yet scenic road. The horizon is filled with unfamilar-looking futuristic architecture. Rest assured, it looks epic and unique, not like other CGI effects before it. So far so good.

2) On the downside, the emerging of Chris Pine as Kirk is painfully underwhelming, Pine doesn’t really look anything like Kirk, nor does he sound like Kirk. However, judging from the footage, Pine seems to have the character down. It should be an interesting performance, just don’t expect a Shatner revival or even a mild channeling, which fans would like to have seen (much like an idealized young Anakin, unfortunately, those movies didn’t really do that too well).

3) The effects of the spaceships and battles & planets are frankly, not what I was expecting. I don’t necessarily mean that in a positive way. Many people have been saying that Abrams Trek would resemble a more gritty feel, ships would be metallic-like, brooding and menacing. The fire and explosions would be classic Trek universe, we would feel like part of this epic world. Unfortunately, at first glance, this is a completely re-imaged atmosphere. The effects look at lot like the one’s in Speed Racer, Transformers and Star Wars Episode I. Dare I say they look ‘fake’, but that seems to be the case. It is all very cotton-candy like, all bright and colorful. Perhaps this isn’t such a bad thing, but I didn’t recognize any technology that would feel ‘at home’ so to speak in terms of Rodenberry’s Trek. This is clearly Abrams’ and company’s creation. This is slightly disappointing.

4) On the plus side, the story looks to be pretty interesting. A lot of hints at setting up dualities and complex themes between Spock’s quest to be more human and Kirk’s rebellious nature. Also, there seems to be something momumental happening, something like a giant war, the birth of the Federation or the invasion of a planet, thus forcing Spock’s parents to give him up and join the Federation. Kirk also seems to have been thrusted into the mess, the whole movie judging from the trailer has this feel of being a kind of coming-of-age or loss-of-innocence story, which is fantastic news. This should flesh out the characters and provide much humor and action.

5) On the negative, judging from this brief trailer, the new actors are a huge disappointment; particularly Chekov, Uhura, Bones and mostly Spock. I found Zachary Quinto to be underwhelming. Not only did he sound sort of whiney and high-pitched like an actor from the CW on channel 7 but contrary to popular hype, he doesn’t really look like Leonard Nimoy. Karl Urban does not sound anything like Dr. McCoy, heck, he doesn’t even seem to be trying to emulate him; he just sounds like Karl Urban. This was a dissapointment. On the plus, Simon Pegg seems to be immersing himself into the role of Scotty. Expect a perfect portrayal with lost of comic relief. PLEASE NOTE: This is only judging from the small clips, we can’t know how good they’ll really be until we see them.

6) Lastly, the costumes and make-up seemed underwhelming in the trailer as well. It frankly looked like the shows you see on WB, like Smallville or Supernatural. Uninspired acting set up against some chessy blue-screen. After the trailer was over and Eric Bana delivered that corny one-liner, the audience seemed to be braindead and gave no reactions, not even little grins or chatters.

7) My final thoughts on the trailer is that the story seems epic and grand, the special effects somewhat mediocre, some of the performances off, though Kirk and Scotty seem fine. While the scenery is great, the effects and ships themselves look fake. This looks to be a complete re-imagining of Star Trek rather than a Prequel or re-incarnation. I was hoping for the latter, rather than the former, but I’ll just have to wait and see. Some of you may see this trailer and totally dig the new-look and feel, that’s all well and good but like I said before, its WAY too early to make any judgements. Just hope for the best and look forward to what perhaps will be the best film of next summer.

436. Fanged Teddy-Bear - November 19, 2008

Sorry, but I gotta say it lost me with the Corvette scene. While true, a Corvette isn’t a Model T, Kirk would still know what a clutch is. When there’s a continuity problem with the first 30 seconds of the trailer, then I have to wonder what other glitches I’m going to see.

Does it have to be faithful? Heck, yeah! If you didn’t invent it in the first place, then you better be careful about the kind of license you take with it.

I’m still excited about it, though. I don’t know what that says about me…

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.