Star Trek Super Bowl Commercial (Officially) Online + TrekMovie Shot-by-shot Analysis | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Super Bowl Commercial (Officially) Online + TrekMovie Shot-by-shot Analysis February 1, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Marketing/Promotion,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

The new Star Trek commercial aired during the 2nd half of the Super Bowl, and now it is available at the official movie site. You can see the official version below. Plus, just like we did for the theatrical trailer, we have a full set of screenshots including a shot by shot analysis of the commercial, explaining what you are seeing. All that and more below.  

 

Watch it online:
The trailer is now available at the official site for the Star Trek movie, and embedded below. 


[HD sizes available: 480 | 720 | 1080 ]

Get to know the Star Trek Super Bowl commercial [SPOILERS]
Below are all the shots from the new Super Bowl commercial. They are presented in the same order as the commercial (which is not the same order as they are in the film).  The following scene description captions are based previous reports, analysis and other TM sources. Much of the new footage from the trailer comes from two of the four scenes shown during the Fall press tour: The Iowa Bar/ride to Riverside & The Romulan Attack On Vulcan (see TrekMovie analysis of those scenes for more details).

Click images to enlarge



Kirk (Chris Pine) on ‘Frozen Planet’ (where he will later meet Scotty and elder Spock)



Kirk gets into fight in Iowa bar (note Apollo 11 photo on wall)



(after breaking up fight) Capt. Pike gives Kirk a talk, urging him to go to Starfleet Academy



(immediately after bar scene) Kirk rides motorcycle to ‘Riverside Ship Yards’ where USS Enterprise is being constructed (later boards shuttle for Starfleet Academy)


Shuttles flying past Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, Starfleet Academy can be seen in along water’s edge



(shortly following Kirk riding to shipyards scene) McCoy (Karl Urban) introduces self to Kirk on shuttle ride from Iowa to Academy


Kirk leaves escape pod on Frozen Planet after Spock has ejected him from the ship



Kirk faces monster on Frozen Planet



USS Enterprise in combat (note new pulsating phaser effect)


Nero (Eric Bana) on bridge of the Narada



Sulu (John Cho) fights Romulan on Narada drilling rig which is slicing into Planet Vulcan below


Spock (Zachary Quinto) beams down to Planet Vulcan to save Vulcan Council and his parents



Narada attacks San Francisco Bay (seen from drilling rig and Starfleet Academy perspectives)


Kirk flirts with Uhura (Zoe Saldana) in Iowa Bar (shortly before bar fight)



Kirk in bed with Orion cadet (Rachel Nichols) while attending Starfleet Academy



Kirk awaiting go ahead to jump from shuttle above Vulcan (voice heard is Pike, flying shuttle, saying "good luck")



Kirk, Sulu and Chief Engineer Olsen (Greg Ellis) jump from shuttle above Vulcan to try and stop drilling rig


Kirk headed towards platform (voice heard is likely Olsen saying "woohoohoo")


Olsen (foreground, in red!) without parachute opening, Kirk and Sulu (background) have chutes open (guess what happens next)


Explosion in USS Enterprise sickbay during battle with Narada while at Vulcan


Spock not happy with Kirk


Narada firing missles


Kirk in command of USS Enterprise yelling "do it! do it!"



USS Kelvin under attack from Narada

Trailer analysis
And in case you missed it, check out our shot-by-shot analysis of the theatrical trailer.

Thoughts on the Super Bowl commercial – The Future Begins
The best thing about this new Star Trek commercial is that 100 million people were just exposed to an action-packed trailer for a new Star Trek movie. Paramount are literally putting their money where their mouths are with regards to making Star Trek big again in the mainstream. The Trek commercial joined a number of other ‘tent pole’ films, such as GI Joe, Transformers Revenge of the Fallen, Angels and Demons, and others. Like Trek, all the commercials were very action-oriented, which works for the Super Bowl audience and viewing experience.

But mixed in with the frenetic pace of new shots from the movie you do get a hint of what this movie is about, it is an origin story about the original crew of the USS Enterprise coming together. We see Kirk in both his rebelious bar-fighting "why are you talking to me man" phase, as well as years later confidently issuing commands from the captain’s chair of the USS Enterprise. Some Trek fans may not recognize the younger pre-Academy Kirk, but that is the point. Pine addressed this head on in a recent interview, saying:

There’s a scene where my character is in a bar and he’s definitely inebriated and under the influence of his own arrogance. It’s him becoming the Kirk everyone knows. In my book that makes the journey a little more interesting. If he’s a clear-cut leader from the beginning, you don’t have anywhere to go.

As noted in my analysis of the press preview, many things about this film are new and different, and if you solely view this new film from the perspective of ‘what is different’ you are going to have a hard time enjoying the movie. Some fans seem to be blown away, but there are those who mull over the details and are wondering why this or that is different than it was decades ago. This is a modern film, with a blockbuster sensibility. You see this in terms of the directing, dialog, and the CGI budget. JJ Abrams has often asked fans to view his film with an open mind and this commercial makes the reasons for that clear. I recommended that you give that open mind thing a try, you might actually enjoy it.

Comments

1. NCC-73515 - February 1, 2009

The attack on Corusan Francisco is like the verteron array beam in ENTs “Terra Prime”.
In the bar, there is a picture with Buzz Aldrin on the moon.
The Enterprise fires red pulse phasers.
A scene with Sulu on the platform is mirror-inverted.
You can see SF from orbit as it’s being attacked – a nice orbital view!

2. Daskill - February 1, 2009

FIRST! Yay! Trailer looks cool.

3. cellojammer - February 1, 2009

Looked good on TV but was a little fast. Thanks for the stills!

4. Dab - February 1, 2009

Very well written – thanks for the analysis!

5. Crazy Guy - February 1, 2009

Man, I just saw this commercial! My dad flipped out (in a good way).

It looks like going to see Star Trek may be a family outing in May.

And after being exposed to TV spots of Friday the 13th, seeing a new Trek trailer is a welcome sight.

6. Denise de Arman - February 1, 2009

Great screenshots Anthony! Thank you much!

7. kirk09 - February 1, 2009

Absolutely freakin incredible!!! And I say that as both a Star Trek fan AND a member of the MTV audience! One question though…it’s available on the startrekmovie.com site for viewing, but when will it be available for download on itunes?

8. David (Flaming Wings Forever) - February 1, 2009

SWEET shot by shot analysis. Learned 2 things I didn’t know (damn spoilers).

9. Enterprise - February 1, 2009

Xindi attack again!

10. jc - February 1, 2009

Chris Pine in his undies. Worth the price of admission.

11. Tango - February 1, 2009

I guess everyone else is watching the superbowl.

12. (K)night - February 1, 2009

I understand exactly where the marketers are coming from and we have to be willing to invite in new people. Trekkers right now are like Lord of the Ringers were before the films were made: we are understandably protective of something we love but we have to be willing to share Trek with the rest of the world. We may love the film, maybe not, but we will always have the shows, comics, books, movies, memorabilia, etc. Even if you hate the new movie I don’t see how we can be that upset when we have all the cool stuff from the Trek universe already!

13. kirk09 - February 1, 2009

actually tango im on my laptop on this site WHILE watching the Super Bowl in a bar LOL…WHEN WILL THE NEW TRAILER BE ON ITUNES FOR DOWNLOAD? LOL

14. SebiMeyer - February 1, 2009

This kinda mkes we wonder: if this movie really is as action packed as the trailers seem to make it out to be, how are they ever going to get back to making a TV version?

I love the movies. But the shows are so much better.

15. tribble - February 1, 2009

yay first one :)

cant wait for the movie !

16. Enterprise - February 1, 2009

That big monster thing looks like a giant lobster.

17. Carol - February 1, 2009

What they leave out is as interesting as what they put in. This preview is very Kirk-centric. I guess that’s who will appeal to the football crowd.

Looks good

18. James Heaney - Wowbagger - February 1, 2009

Just saw it. FANTASTIC!

I continue to be pumped.

Incidentally, did 20 of us just post at the same time?

19. Robert H. - February 1, 2009

Still wrapping my head around what is going to happen in the whole movie. DEFINITELY going to see the movie, and was already hyped up over the movie in the beginning.

20. CardassiaPrimera - February 1, 2009

Excelent Trailer.

21. Enterprise - February 1, 2009

Kirk will never look at seafood the same way again.

22. Nikos - February 1, 2009

Thanks for the stills!!! But wtf is wrong with the Narada? Its like a huge piece of junk

23. Spock with a Crowbar - February 1, 2009

That romulan that Sulu is fighting looks oddly like a Klingon… if you look at a clearer still from the longer trailer, you can clearly see a Klingon disruptor at his side, and very Klingon-y clothing…. anyone else thinking the same?

24. Captain Dunzel - February 1, 2009

Chills.

25. Chris M - February 1, 2009

Once again this is freakin awesome!! :)

How good does the Enterprise look in action?!!

26. TechTrekker - February 1, 2009

I was cheering at the end of the trailer! Can’t wait till May!

27. Fast Attax - February 1, 2009

GREAT TRAILER!
The Enterprise looks awesome!
This will be a fantastic movie for all Trek fans and new ones alike!

28. Kmt guy - February 1, 2009

How many times must San Francisco be attacked before Starfleet learns its lesson?

29. Denise de Arman - February 1, 2009

Enterprise#21- LOL!

30. Josh - February 1, 2009

awesomeness

31. Tango - February 1, 2009

21. Maybe Kirk caught the space crab from the Orion girl.

32. Charles H. Root, III - February 1, 2009

Great trailer… Paramount marketing definately targeted it at the football & neocon crowd, ha ha.

33. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

LOVE IT!!!!!

thank god Paramount had the frakking balls to approach JJ Abrams & his team to reinvent Star Trek!

34. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

Let’s face it: There is a definite disconnect between the version of 23d Century SF seen in TMP and the one seen in this new movie.

However, I’m not one to let this affect my feelings toward this film.

Bring it.

35. Denise de Arman - February 1, 2009

Tango#31- She is so hot he probably thought it was worth it.

36. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

Narada reminds me of the Replicator Sattelite weapon from Stargate: Atlantis!

37. Lord Garth, Formerly Of Izar - February 1, 2009

#23

I agree I thought this character was a Klingon months ago when we first saw the image. My guess is Nero’s crew is made up of a mixed bag of criminals he busted out of the Klingon prison with. I say that’s a Klingon

38. TechTrekker - February 1, 2009

I agree with #25! The Big E does look awesome.

#28 – I count only two other times. In DS9 by the Breen and in STIV (which doesn’t really count because the probe attacked the entire Earth). Am I missing one?

#9 – Yeah, it sort of reminded me of the Xindi attack but with much better camera angles. But I’m going to reserve judgement until we see it in context. That’s the optimist in me.

39. Stanky McFibberich - February 1, 2009

“This is a modern film, with a blockbuster sensibility. You see this in terms of the directing, dialog, and the CGI budget. JJ Abrams has often asked fans to view his film with an open mind and this commercial makes the reasons for that clear.”

Ah, yes…the old “view it with an open mind” statement…also known as “view it with your pocketbook open”

40. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

LOVE that Alias-alum Rachel Nichols is an Orion babe!!

41. Weerd1 - February 1, 2009

Cool, thanks for the analysis. How ’bout them Steelers?

42. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

12 – I think I can get behind that.

Star Trek must evolve. It has reached the limits of its own universe, and it must evolve.

43. Sean - February 1, 2009

The “drill” reminds me too much of the Xindi attack in Enterprise… couldn’t they have come up with something that hasn’t been done before?

I actually like the pulse phasers on the Enterprise. That’s how it was on the Constitution refit Enterprise in such classic space battles as the Enterprise vs. the Reliant in Wrath of Khan.

44. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

I am going to see if I spot a “Dharma Initiative” symbol anywhere in this film, cause you know it’s gonna appear somewhere!!

the way Young-Kirk talks reminds me of Sawyer from LOST, another JJ Abrams masterpiece.

45. Y EN A MARRE! - February 1, 2009

You guys are just a bunch of cheerleaders for this film (Anthony, I’m looking at you).

Promo looks nothing like the shows we know and love… and why is Kirk’s face still bloody on the shuttle from Iowa? So he gets drunk, gets in a fight, and gets invited to the Academy the next day? Doesn’t he at least have to take the SATs or SOMETHING?

46. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

39 – You have to open your wallet to view it, regardless of the mind being open or closed.

47. rag451 - February 1, 2009

Pretty neat, guys…

48. Devon - February 1, 2009

Terrific trailer IMHO.

49. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

45 – This site is called TrekMovie.com, and is meant as a source of information and news for the new movie.

As for being a Cheerleader for the movie, I have to ask, why not?

After all, none of us want the movie to stink and fail.

We want it to be great and do well critically and at the box office.

I take your dismissal as a compliment.

50. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

45 – He takes competency exams there, and might have been invited by Pike specifically.

51. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

trailer needs more Tholians in it!!!

52. Paul B. - February 1, 2009

Here’s a thought this trailer sparked: Do Spock Prime and Captain Pike have a scene together?

After all, Spock was so fond of Pike that he risked the only death penalty in the Federation just to give the man an illusion of happiness. He even lied to Kirk and left him behind without saying a word. He STOLE THE ENTERPRISE from Kirk in order to help Pike–something Kirk did years later to help Spock.

I am not going to condemn the film if it doesn’t go there, but I would love to see even a brief moment of old Spock (Nimoy) seeing both of his old captains. Kirk is his best friend, but Pike was clearly like a father or mentor to him.

If they have such a scene (even just old Spock seeing Pike, if not speaking), it would show a subtle understanding of Trek that would please me immensely. If not…well, it’s a missed opportunity for a nice character touch, but not the end of the world. Or the end of canon.

53. dalek - February 1, 2009

Looks great.

Small point: Before any of the trailers came out etc. We were told this was a Spock story, and a movie heavily focused on Spock as apposed to Kirk.

Nearly all the marketing points to this being a coming-of-destiny type story for Kirk, and more of a Kirk-centred story.

54. MORN SPEAKS - February 1, 2009

Wow! Just Wow! Speechless!

55. konar - February 1, 2009

what’s wrong with being a cheerleader for a film that you are excited to see? And don’t give the old “Anthony should be impartial” bull** — despite being called treknews, this is a blog. We read it for news and the unique take of the contributors. Oh, and also to laugh at people who have little or no perspective on the difference between entertainment and life.

Let’s have fun! Let’s want to like it! Let’s want it to succeed! What a bunch of Rush Limbaughs!

56. Anthony Pascale - February 1, 2009

45
82% of visitors of this site are grading this trailer with an A or B (mostly A). I make no apologies for being excited about this new film.

Regarding Kirk going to the academy, well actually your concern is answered in the scene. Pike talks to kirk about how his scores rank him at the top but how he hasn’t gone to the academy. This again shows the point of the open mindedness being important. Again, I suggest you try it out.

57. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

52 – I doubt it.

58. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

trailer needs more Cylons in it!!

59. Mary K. Hallen - February 1, 2009

As an original Trekkie, I am looking forward to seeing the film. I’ve read many prequels about the life of the Trio before serving on the Enterprise and I’ve also had the pleasure of attending a lecture by Gene Roddenberry on his thoughts of the “before times.” It will be interesting to see a new fresh approach and I welcome any journey along the Star Trek Univers(al) road. It should be w-a-a-a-y cool!

60. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

56 – here here !!!

61. Xplodin' Nacelle - February 1, 2009

I gave the trailer a C. It wasn’t perfect, but it wasn’t horrible either. I got more of an appetite for the film from the theatrical trailer myself. I seriously belive that they should’ve left out the ice monster, Nero, & the Kelvin explosion. Those three scenes need to be de-emphasized!!! They scream Nemesis to me, & I’m a die hard Trekkie. I’ll still show up to support the release, but I hope that the casual fan, & the general public doesn’t dismiss the whole film because of these scenes. It truly worries me.

62. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

FREE Grand Slam breakfast this Tuesday at Denny’s.

63. Paul B. - February 1, 2009

This trailer is great, I love it, and I am 100% on board for giving this film a chance. But to paraphrase Picard, does anyone remember when they were explorers?

Strange new worlds (Not just saving the same old Earth all the time)
New life forms (or more Vulcans and Romulans)
New civilizations (or more Vulcans and Romulans)
Where no man has gone before (unless they’ve been to Earth)

Again, not being a hater, just wishing Trek could find its way back to being about exploration. Why does it always have to be “save the world?” That’s not the Enterprise’s mission; she is an explorer first, warrior a distant second.

I guess curiosity isn’t as big a box-office draw as violence. Oh well…still going to be thrilled to see a Trek movie–a TOS film–on a big screen again.

Good luck, Abrams and team!

64. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

Now that Trek has made its presence known, Paramount’s publicity department is doubtless hard at work on a number of other projects to promote this film. Besides product placement, I would hope that they are working on advance interviews and featurettes to air on entertainment news shows, as well as TV commercials and the inevitable long trailer.

With all of that to come, it’s harder and harder to keep plot points concealed from the general public. Nevertheless, they are the experts….

65. Captain Pike - February 1, 2009

And more cowbell.

66. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

61

Nero & anything Romulan should be cut out from all trailers PERIOD!

as soon as you mention Romulan, okay! that’s it, goodbye! bad memories of that horrible Nemesis movie come up.

67. Brett Campbell - February 1, 2009

35 – Rachel Nichols is cute, but IMHO Diora Baird is much hotter.

68. AJ - February 1, 2009

56:

Thanks for the casual spoiler about Kirk’s Academy test scores, Anthony.

What ELSE can you tell us? ;-)

69. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

68 – He’s seen 20 minutes of it, so I’d imagine quite a lot ;-)

70. Orignal Trekkie - February 1, 2009

Nemesis who?

71. Denise de Arman - February 1, 2009

AJ#68- Rachel Nichols has Kirk’s lovechild – green, but no pointed ears. So close!

72. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

I’m curious which other Felicity, Alias, LOST, and Fringe alumni will make cameo’s in the movie!!

73. Brett Campbell - February 1, 2009

62 – Denny Crane’s? ; )

74. Anthony Pascale - February 1, 2009

68
well this article and therefore the comments are spoiler zones, and the test scores thing was making a point…that sometimes when people ask questions here like ‘x doesn’t make sense because of y’ that maybe sometimes ‘y’ is the wrong assumption. Which again gets to the whole open mind thing.

as for more 20 minute screening spoilers, reread the descriptions here:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/20/anthonys-thoughts-on-the-la-star-trek-movie-presentation/

The above commercial has a lot of clips from the iowa scene and the vulcan attack scene described in that article, although pictures (and now video) are worth thousands of words.

anyway back to the game

75. Kirk's Revenge - February 1, 2009

Cool!
Iron Man is in the orbital dive.
;)

76. Dennis Bailey - February 1, 2009

Looks great.

77. Stanky McFibberich - February 1, 2009

re: 63 Paul B. “just wishing Trek could find its way back to being about exploration”

Another vote here for exploration

re: 46. OneBuckFilms – February 1, 2009 “39 – You have to open your wallet to view it, regardless of the mind being open or closed.”

People who say to view something with an open mind really mean that they want you to think like they do and in this case throw money at it. And you can view this comment with a closed mind if you wish.

78. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

trailer needs more Winona Ryder in it!!

79. rag451 - February 1, 2009

Did anybody notice the red shirts at Starfleet Academy were running ‘toward’ the big scary deadly beam of light? Typical red shirts…

80. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

77, if you view it with a closed mind, or a closed wallet, I think you would agree that this wouldn’t bode well for Trek?

If you remember the Great Trek Drought of the 1970’s, before Phase II was even a gleam in Roddenberry’s eye, I think you’ll agree that very few of us were expecting perfection in the re-creation of TOS.

And when TMP finally did come out, I recall very few who said, “No garish colors, and therefore not canon.” Or, if they did, they paid to see the film, anyway.

Have too many of us become too jaded, such that we are content even to contemplate the possibility — to use a Vietnam-era phrase — of destroying a franchise in order to save it?

81. Gorn47 - February 1, 2009

NOTICE THE REFERENCE TO “ALIAS”

In the screenshot #9 where Kirk is riding up to the Enterprise construction site, look at the sign in the background. It says “Authorized Personnel Only”.

Granted, that’s a common phrase, but it may, in fact, also be a reference to J.J. Abrams’ old TV show “Alias” (Season 4) when the group formerly known as SD-6 had become APO, or Authorized Personnel Only.

82. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

Big Red Lazer reminded me of:

Stargate Atlantis: the Replicator’s sattelite weapon.

Star Trek Enterprise: Xindi planet destroyer, the Verteron array

(007) Die Another Day: sattelite gun

83. Stanky McFibberich - February 1, 2009

re:80 Hat Rick “Have too many of us become too jaded, such that we are content even to contemplate the possibility — to use a Vietnam-era phrase — of destroying a franchise in order to save it?”

Apparently that is what they are trying to do. I’m fairly certain they are destroying it…doubtful about the saving.

84. Orignal Trekkie - February 1, 2009

Gene Roddenberry had originally intended for the Majel Barret (Number One) character to be the one who employed logic over emotions. Aside from that little bit of Trivia, Sylar as Spock? That’s Totally Cool! All we need is for Q to show up and my Star Trek Life would be complete.

85. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

81, speaking of inside references, some of the things that I hope will come out in the future DVD-release featurettes is the attention to detail that the production devoted to this film.

For example, although the interior of the Oviatt Library will probably never appear in the film, there were many frame prints of a space and aeronautical nature hung in the lobby of the library during filming. As well, the exterior doors of the Oviatt Library bore a translucent Starfleet logo.

If this is typical of the production’s approach, then I look forward to inside references of like nature in other settings. We’ve already seen a welcome reference to the Apollo Moon landing in this film. Nuggets like these make going to see this movie over and over an experience to look forward to, and an experience to treasure.

Besides, indubitably, they will want you to buy the DVD and use that well-worn freeze-frame function once it is available. I, for one, hope that there are Easter eggs and inside references aplenty.

86. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

I’ll lose my mind if Kirk’s favorite band is Driveshaft!

you Alias & LOST people will know what I mean.

87. Steven - February 1, 2009

Preview was great! Cannot wait to see the film. Come on, May 8!

God bless1

88. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#85

Team JJ Abrams always throw nuggets & references from their previous projects into what they’re currently working on.

89. Will - February 1, 2009

80. Hat Rick – February 1, 2009

” And when TMP finally did come out, I recall very few who said, “No garish colors, and therefore not canon.” Or, if they did, they paid to see the film, anyway.”

The difference here is that in that case, Trek was still going forward in a timeline and this, very obviously, has gone backwards to a specific point before going forward again.

This is akin, in my mind, to recording a mixtape of R&B and classic pop love songs, taking that tape, rewinding it to someplace in the early half of the tape, then recording a heavy rock love song in the middle just for the hell of it. For it to fit, it would need to flow, and, in my opinion, that is what the people who doubt this new movie are waiting for- a way for this to flow with the existing shows and movies/that which is already in place.

90. Captain Roy Mustang - February 1, 2009

This new superbowl trailer rocks

91. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

88, that sounds true enough, from what I’ve read. By the way, apologize for the horrific grammar in Message 85. One of the perils of multitasking, I’m afraid.

On to the question of What Next after this new movie. There’s always STO, which is just getting started. But the ultimate What’s Next would be the sequel, and that’s going to happen only if the movie is reasonably blockbusterlike.

Recall that Superman Returns has done to the Superman movie franchise what kryptonite could never do. Contrast that, if you will, with Batman Begins.

Will the new Star Trek be more like Superman Returns or Batman Begins? (Well, it IS an origins story….)

92. Tango - February 1, 2009

I have a fever and the only cure is more cowbell.

93. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#91

I did not enjoy Superman Returns at all, so I was very happy that the movie killed the whole franchise!

if Star Trek is a success, then I think that they’ll have to raise the the bar for the sequel in order to avoid the “not as good as the first one” stigma attached to sequels.

94. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

89, that’s a valid point. Yet if we are to look at changes, we should look at all of them, and not just segment them on the basis of before or after.

TMP did not look like a movie that had any of the color sensibility of TOS. It just didn’t. It wasn’t even that it was pastel; it was more than that. It was, if anything, grey. By comparison to the riotous hues of the Classic series, was as if the color control knob had been set to “monochrome” — and then broken off.

Moreover, overall, with few exceptions, nothing in the TMP universe look like it had ever BEEN anything but bluish-grey.

Would this really make sense in the application of canon? Wouldn’t it have made more sense for there to be at least remnants of the old color scheme from just a few years prior?

Further, let’s look at the Star Trek II. Compared to the bluish-grey sterility of TMP, it looked like Sherwin Williams gone mad had colorized the Enterprise — and the uniforms and the bridge, in particular. Star Trek II, if I’m not mistaken, happened after the events of TMP. So, is Star Trek II therefore not canon?

I don’t want to argue. I’m just considering all the possibilities.

After all, there are always…. possibilities.

95. Jefferies Tuber - February 1, 2009

Nice that drinking on the job is still a Star Trek tradition. Note the flask at hand in the McCoy intro. STAR TREK and MAD MEN are of the same vintage.

Also, what’s with the headgear on the dude behind Kirk in that scene?

All I can say is, if they’re willing to let us know that Vulcan is destroyed and Earth is probably destroyed, what are they holding back?

Do we think they’re going to leave Vulcan and Earth destroyed, or will Kirk cheat death, undo Nero and maybe even meet his dad?

96. fred - February 1, 2009

“I recommended that you give that open mind thing a try, you might actually enjoy it.”

Wow, that was a whole sentance wasted, there. There are a lot of people with preconceived notions that will be unhappy with the reality of what they were expecting being different. I expect this movie will receive the same treatment from the long-time hardcore fans, and recieved with open arms from those not demading that reality fit their own notion. New disciples from common people and not the ingrained leaders. Sound familiar?

97. ShawnP - February 1, 2009

Effin a, man. That’s awesome!

98. CMX54 - February 1, 2009

Exploration? Why explore when it’s soooo much more fun to blow stuff up?

*wink*

99. BonesCLCW - February 1, 2009

Friends of mine who hate Star Trek, admitted that it looked “cool”

That says a lot!

100. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

I don’t think people should be worried whether ST will be a commercial success, I’m my opinion it’s already going to be a hit cause the TOS fans and the casual action/sci-fi fan will go and watch this.

The Dark Knight was a success because Heath Ledger died.

the problem IMO will be the sequel, as I said a sequel can kill a franchise. Another exampje would be the horrendous Fantastic Four sequel and the very boring X-Files sequel. Both movies drew in a meager audience cause word of mouth killed it at the box office.

Chris Evans from Fantastic Four recently said that the Fantastic Four franchise is over because the studio did not like the results. They’re going to wait a while and then reboot it.

But I have faith in Team JJ based on their previous projects.

101. Stanky McFibberich - February 1, 2009

re: 99. BonesCLCW – February 1, 2009 “Friends of mine who hate Star Trek, admitted that it looked “cool” That says a lot!”

It sure does.

102. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

trailer needs more Vorlon ships!!

103. Admiral_BlackCat - February 1, 2009

More tidbits to chew on. Awesome!
Thanks Anthony and crew for the excellent coverage.

104. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#101

I’ve gotten the same response + a “it looks interesting” comment from friends who arent Trek fans that saw the preview trailer while at the movies.

105. Julia - February 1, 2009

Could someone please write down what is beeing said word for word before the introduction between Kirk and McCoy? I get the gist of it but I can’t understand everything.

106. Spock's Brain - February 1, 2009

61. Xplodin’ Nacelle – February 1, 2009
“I gave the trailer a C. It wasn’t perfect, but it wasn’t horrible either. I got more of an appetite for the film from the theatrical trailer myself. I seriously belive that they should’ve left out the ice monster, Nero, & the Kelvin explosion. Those three scenes need to be de-emphasized!!! They scream Nemesis to me, & I’m a die hard Trekkie. I’ll still show up to support the release, but I hope that the casual fan, & the general public doesn’t dismiss the whole film because of these scenes. It truly worries me.”

#1: I can kick all your asses on TOS trivia.
#2: It’s great trailer with MODERN sensibilities. A 30 second synopsis focused on Kirk.
#3: Nemesis? The “general public” did NOT go see it.
#4: De-emphasize for what? What are the alternative scenes you want in? Kirk battling aliens is Classic Trek; You can’t leave out the villain Nero; or cut the temporal incursion and attack on the Kelvin; the attack on Earth.
#5: If y’all malcontents haven’t figured this out yet: This an ACTION film. Live with it. Or shut up. Your whining has become boring.

107. Xai - February 1, 2009

39. Stanky McFibberich – February 1, 2009
“This is a modern film, with a blockbuster sensibility. You see this in terms of the directing, dialog, and the CGI budget. JJ Abrams has often asked fans to view his film with an open mind and this commercial makes the reasons for that clear.”

Ah, yes…the old “view it with an open mind” statement…also known as “view it with your pocketbook open”

_ Stanky, if you don’t want to see it, don’t. It’s a movie. Generally most people pay to get in.

108. barrydancer - February 1, 2009

As seen on Twitter. “New Trek Movie=Muppet Babies.”

109. barrydancer - February 1, 2009

As a side note, Rachel Nichols is so hot, I couldn’t care less if she were green in real life. :)

110. Spock's Brain - February 1, 2009

105. Julia,

Pike: “You always had a hard time finding your place in this world.”

Kirk: “Why are you talking to me, man?”

Pike: “You can settle for an ordinary life. I dare you to do better.”

111. Weerd1 - February 1, 2009

We see the explosion in Sickbay, presumably the one that allows young Bones to become CMO… Do you think the guy in the lab coat getting fried is Boyce or Piper?

112. Neal - February 1, 2009

cool

113. John from Cincinnati - February 1, 2009

This is NOT an origin movie of the original characters aboard the original USS Enterprise. It is an alternative origin, of a new crew and a new ship. There’s nothing original about it. Just call it what it is, a reboot.

114. Julia - February 1, 2009

110. Thank you.

115. Kmt guy - February 1, 2009

#38
Beside the Breen and the probe there’s also the attack by Terra Prime in Enterprise, but still it seems to have a target painted on it.

116. Gary Seven of Nine - February 1, 2009

45. Y EN A MARRE! – February 1, 2009

You guys are just a bunch of cheerleaders for this film (Anthony, I’m looking at you).

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Perhaps you should see if ‘trekmoviehaters.com’ is available and start your own blog. Maybe ‘startrekxitriggeredmymidlifecrisis.com’ or ‘ifidontcomplainaboutthenewtrekfilmiwillexplode.com’ or ‘icantbelievetheymadea21stcenturymoviewithamoderndesignaestheticthattakesplaceinthe23rdcentury.com’ or ‘weneedmoretrekmovieswherethecrewstaresattheviewscreenFORHALFTHEFILM.com’ are available.

117. GregW - February 1, 2009

Red pulse phasers?
They can’t even get the phaser turrets on the primary hull correct.
Riverside ship yards?
Didn’t anybody bother to even reference the original dedication plate from the bridge?

Grade=D

118. Classic Trek - February 1, 2009

The Building on the far left in San Fran as the shuttles pass- is labelled “Tagruato” which I believe tied in with the viral campaign for Cloverfield

http://www.tagruato.jp/ has a site up.

119. Stanky McFibberich - February 1, 2009

re: 107 Xai
I’ll wait for a good number of reviews (from elsewhere) before I decide whether or not to take my “open mind” to the box office.
Usually when people tell you to have an open mind they mean to adopt their opinion.

120. Green-Blooded-Bastard - February 1, 2009

The words Pike has with Kirk lead me to think that this is a more human Star Trek, less contrived dialogue, more like what people would say to each other in a given situation. I’d love to read the script, it probably reads like someone telling a story with actual soundbites of the events as they occurred. I liked it, but it did go by really fast. It should have been a 60-second clip.

121. Classic Trek - February 1, 2009

Sorry for the double post.

Just reviewing again – I think Kirk is flailing a bottle of Saurian Bandy (minus the leather) at the start of the fight. It shatters on the other dude’s head.

Anyone have any idea what 120374 is (on the sign in front of the Enterprise construction). Is that a Lost or Alias ref? JJ’s Birthday? Random? Just curious

122. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#118

nice catch there!

Tagruato was indeed used in JJ Abrams’ “Cloverfield” marketing campaign!

Tagruato owned a bunch of “high-tech” deep sea drills (which allegedly awoke the Monster) and iirc, the Slusho! drink featured in the movie!

LOVES IT!!!!

123. klang31 - February 1, 2009

Bar fights, hot girls & guys, things blowing up, strange new worlds, starship fights, strange alien creatures, a future San Francisco, and a ship named Enterprise, plus more.

That’s what I saw in the super bowl ad. Geez, to me that sounds like Star Trek. Wow, I mustn’t been watching the same show as some of you posting on this board.

I thought ‘judging a book by its cover’ wasn’t really a Star Trek notion. Guess judging a movie by its ad must be ok then.

124. fizzben - February 1, 2009

Just speculating here. But I’m guessing the San Francisco ship yards were destroyed when the Narada attacked probably the same time it attacked the Kelvin therefore the ship yards were moved to Iowa. Just a guess. Everything looks awesome can’t wait to see the movie!

125. Isis the Cat - February 1, 2009

Stanky, then why don’t you just shut up until then?

None of your criticisms are constructive. AT ALL. You’re just being negative for negativity’s sake, and it’s frankly beyond tiresome. Don’t you have anything better to do?

126. Mike Ten - February 1, 2009

113 John from Cincinnati: I agree with you, this is not the Star Trek we grew up with. Nero altered everything. How will this movie work with the Star Trek Enterprise time war or the Temporal agents from the future ( ST Voyager) who go back in time to correct altered timelines?

How can Nero succeed where even the mighty Borg (First Contact) failed?

Will everything we know snap back into place at the end of the movie?

I guess we will have to tune in 3 months from now to find out….

127. Captain Hackett - February 1, 2009

I do not have much time to read your comments cuz I am very buzzed from the part that I just hosted. My friends who were not Trekkies told me how cool and appealing it was when we saw it.

Yeah, I cannot wait to watch it any longer!

128. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#126

if the Borg wanted to, they couldve sent 100,000 Cubes to Earth via TransWarp Conduits.

but they didn’t.

129. Son - February 1, 2009

I saw a post by HatRick that said something to the effect that there is a disconnect between Star Trek and The Motion Picture.

How many years difference is there between the two films in universe? Because, if it’s significant (like 20, 30 years) I could see there being a reasonable disconnect. Compare the world of today with the world of 20 years ago. Life, while similar, was fairly different. If the world kept being like it was then, today, we wouldn’t be on here right now because the commercial Internet wouldn’t exist.

Even ten years difference is some what significant. Just look at all of the changes since 1999.

130. Xai - February 1, 2009

119. Stanky McFibberich – February 1, 2009
re: 107 Xai
“I’ll wait for a good number of reviews (from elsewhere) before I decide whether or not to take my “open mind” to the box office.
Usually when people tell you to have an open mind they mean to adopt their opinion.”

-sometimes that actually means… try it, before assuming.

131. Third Remata'Klan - February 1, 2009

My mind is always open.
It doesn’t pay not to be.

This movie’s gonna be FANTASTIC!
Odd-numbered curse be damned!

132. AJ - February 1, 2009

It’s obvious that Kirk, as JJ envisions him, is the Kirk we know, but in different surroundings:

A dead dad who was a great man, a drunk, abusive uncle, his mom either a shadow of her former self, or remarried and less concerned with JTK’s day to day than she should be. Pike, who somehow sees it his duty to mentor Kirk through his rebellious period, assumes the father role, etc.

Kirk is resentful and angry. He’s brilliant and he knows it, and his emotional desire to reject Pike’s mind-numbing logic, is, hopefully, eclipsed by his superior intelligence.

This is not canon, but it’s a credible redo of the character’s backstory, and would be great to watch.

Spock, hopefully, still rejects his dad’s desire that he join the Vulcan Science Academy. I get the impression that his return to Vulcan to save his mom and others during the drill scene may create a different short-term outcome.

I am for this film, and think it will make another grand addition to the annals of Trek.

133. Xai - February 1, 2009

117. GregW – February 1, 2009
Red pulse phasers?
“They can’t even get the phaser turrets on the primary hull correct.
Riverside ship yards?
Didn’t anybody bother to even reference the original dedication plate from the bridge?

Grade=D”

_Not been following along, eh?

134. The Realist - February 1, 2009

All looks good except the sky lie picture look like the air is polluted?

135. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

129, I’m estimating between five and ten years. See, for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_list_of_Star_Trek_stories_(2201-TMP)

In real-world terms, five years ago, Star Trek: Enterprise had not yet gone off the air.

136. McCoy's Gall Bladder - February 1, 2009

There is no odd numbered curse, it was a lack of Harve Bennet curse!

I agree, the trailer for Friday the 13th is awesome!

137. LoyalStarTrekFan - February 1, 2009

Where has it been confimed that Earth or Vulcan are destroyed? From what I understand it’s only been confirmed that Earth and Vulcan are attacked, not destroyed. I also believe that the mission to the drilling platform in orbit of Vulcan was to prevent the destruction of Vulcan if I understood the “20-minute footage” coverage here at TrekMovie.

Overall, an excellent trailer that got its point across that this isn’t the sterotypical Star Trek. For that purpose the trailer gets an A. I eagerly await May!

138. Thomas - February 1, 2009

GregW,
The plaque says San Francisco, but that doesn’t mean it’s built there. There is a maritime tradition of ships being built in one shipyard but operating out of a seperate “home port”. The Titanic was built at a port in Dublin but had Liverpool registered as its’ home port.

The Enterprise could conceivably be built anywhere and have its’ plaque say San Francisco, as that would seem to be her home port.

139. Wes - February 1, 2009

Great trailer….it even got my wife’s attention! (which is no small feat, as she HATES Trek)

And Stanky….seriously man, why must you come and try to bring everyone down with your negativity? We get it. You don’t like it. Other people do. Accept it!

140. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

134, I’m assuming that it’s fog. As I alluded to in the earlier thread, the City by the Bay without fog would be like Chicago without the movement of air. It kinda comes with the territory.

You can see in the Starfleet-Academy-Meets-Death-Ray scene that the air is actually quite clean in bright mid-day conditions.

141. SPOCKBOY - February 1, 2009

Did anyone else notice that Kirk totally clocks a guy in the head with a bottle during the bar fight?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v617/spockboy/kirkbottle.jpg

It seems a bit out of character, but I think that the farther away he IS from being the Kirk we all know at the beginning of the story, the more exciting and potentially interesting the journey will be dramatically.
: )

142. BaronByng - February 1, 2009

124 – that’s probably a good guess. I think that might come at a different point in the film, though, because the cadets and instructors are wearing the same red and grey uniforms as in Kirk’s era. (Maybe after the thwarted attack on Vulcan?) Anyway — roll on May.

143. SChaos1701 - February 1, 2009

45

Shut up.

144. Spock's Brain - February 1, 2009

134. The Realist – wrote:
“All looks good except the sky lie picture look like the air is polluted?”

I guess you never heard of San Francisco’s fog?

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/143/369082017_2877386260.jpg

145. sean - February 1, 2009

#100

“The Dark Knight was a success because Heath Ledger died.

the problem IMO will be the sequel, as I said a sequel can kill a franchise. Another exampje would be the horrendous Fantastic Four sequel and the very boring X-Files sequel. Both movies drew in a meager audience cause word of mouth killed it at the box office.”

Dark Knight had *massive* buzz long before Ledger’s death. There’s no doubt he inspired a decent spike in numbers, but that movie had blockbuster written all over it well before that.

X-Files wasn’t hurt by bad word-of-mouth, it was hurt by being released in the summer instead of winter, and by virtue of the fact that the show had been off air for 6 years and the last movie was released 10 years ago.

As for Fantastic Four – did you see the first one? The second one was no less appalling or ridiculous than the first one. They both stunk.

146. Christopher Lee - February 1, 2009

I don’t think this commercial did the movie any favors. It went bay WAY too fast and didn’t show much. I don’t have broadband, so this was my first chance to see one of the trailers. I was hoping for more.

147. sean - February 1, 2009

#136

Then how do you explain the fact that Harve co-wore Trek III and Trek V? ;)

148. Crusade2267 - February 1, 2009

OH No! A giant evil laser beam is attacking San Fransisco, and EVERYONE IS IN RED!!!

149. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

148 LOL !!!!!!!!!

150. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

trailer needs more TransWarp Conduits!!

151. sean - February 1, 2009

Woah, the official site is totally different. And the nav menu makes Probe noises from Trek IV! Nice.

152. AJ - February 1, 2009

138:

And Enterprise in TOS isn’t even a Constitution Class vessel according to the dedication plaque. It is “Starship Class,” and has since been retconned after the brilliant Franz Joseph blueprints and Tech Manual, then legitimized by the powerhouse TNG ep “Naked Now.”

As mentioned here, San Fran could definitely be the home port (no reference to shipyards) despite the Iowan manufacture.

I worked on a Russian commercial icebreaker which was re-built for tourist cruises back in 1992. The stern said “Sovyetskii Soyuz Murmansk” when it was actually constructed in the Leningrad shipyards, as all similar class ships were. There was even a Vladivostok-based ship built in Finland.

So there is no issue with Iowa. Starfleet Command and Academy are still in the Bay Area.

Post TOS, they started getting more detailed on those plaques, so confusion obviously ensues.

153. THE GOVERNATOR - February 1, 2009

I didn’t think J.J. could possibly make another Trailer that was anywhere near as good as his Theatrical version. I guess I was wrong. I never cease to be amazed.

154. aries127 - February 1, 2009

I just got it!

This is a Prince Hal story. From Shakespeare’s Henry IV, pt. 1. Hal is hanging out in bars with Falstaff and their friends, playing violent practical jokes on each other while his father’s (Henry IV) reign is in jeopardy. Throughout the ensuing war, he sheds his old life and meets his match in Hotspur, who he bests in battle. He then becomes Henry V. (“Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more!”)

Kirk is Hal.

Jesus, Star Trek is awesome.

155. Hat Rick - February 1, 2009

129, I had occasion to look into my wardrobe just now and I realized that there WAS a significant difference between today and 20 years ago that I hadn’t accounted for: The effect of the mere passage of time on my suits from that era. For, despite the vague similarity in outward appearance, I found out upon trying one of them on that my suit coats have mysteriously shrunk in girth — and only in that dimension, strangely enough. And, in fact, so have my suit pants. No doubt it is because of some exotic, heretofore-unknown force that affects the very fabric of men’s furnishings….

156. Timncc1701 - February 1, 2009

I will keep an open mind and see it. It could be great. But is definitely a different audience it is aimed at. It looks more like an action film like Transformers (excellent trailer by the way) than it does like TOS. I am wondering if TOS is “too cerebral” for the MTV ADD generation. I will reserve judgment, but is this just going to be another Transformers film with lots of action and fun but not much to think about?

157. garen - February 1, 2009

boy oh boy….how bad does GI Joe look?!

looks like they screwed the pooch on that one. Way too much un-realistic cgi.

158. sean - February 1, 2009

For everyone taking issue with ‘Buckle Up’, I wonder what you thought of ‘Thattaway’ or ‘It’s gotta have a tailpipe’ or ‘Double dumbass on you’?

159. Crusade2267 - February 1, 2009

156

Being of that generation, I find MTV to be not cerebral enough to hold my interest. But then I’m just wierd.

160. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#156

I guess I fall into the MTV category, but I do t even watch that channel (much)!

161. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#157

it was absolutley ridiculous.

I laughed after the preview was over.

162. Nostalgic G - February 1, 2009

I for one can not wait to see this film hit theaters.
Feels like Paramount is finally giving Trek the A treatment instead of just treating it like a cult hit and nothing more. I think Trek as a whole will finally get the respect it deserves.

Can’t wait for the merchandise to start rolling out, specially Playmates’ line.

163. Poroto Parker - February 1, 2009

I noted that in the beginning of the trailer there is a logo for Spyglass Entertainment. That studio was always involved in this production?

164. Nostalgic G - February 1, 2009

P.S. Check out part one of my in depth retrospecitve on Playmates Trek toys:

http://nostalgic-g.blogspot.com/

Thanks!

165. C.S. Lewis - February 1, 2009

Dear Stanky,

Thank you for the courage to write your dissenting opinion. There are many here who would have you and any others with dissenting opinions keel hauled for their temerity. Interestingly, they are often the same who so loudly proclaim their devotion to Roddenberry’s “utopian ideals”. To this old Cold Warrior, I’m pretty sure they are not following Roddenberry, but other failed utopians with books such as “What Is to Be Done?” etc.

Obviously, this movie has nothing to do with historical Star Trek so why should the producers, or the movie’s “Amen Chorus” here, be surprised when fans of the old girl state their disappointments which are rational, anticipated, and deliberately induced? Not only that, but there are dozens upon dozens of generic action movies to contend for our money. I, for example, have already seen “The Bombardiers”, “Top Gun”, “The Bourne Identity” and even “Fast Times at Ridgemont High”. This movie is for the kids and I do sincerely hope they enjoy it! I’ll follow it out of interest, but at this point do not anticipate spending money to take my family to see anotherwise fairly generic flick.

Regrding the thought police: IDIC, it would seem, works only for certain combinations entailing a very limited diversity. Thank God such people hold no authority or we would live in a nightmare Hollywood could not imagine.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

166. C.S. Lewis - February 1, 2009

Before I forget: SIXBURGH! What a game. Dare I say, “Whoo-hoo”?

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

167. SChaos1701 - February 1, 2009

“Historical Star Trek”?

Son, it’s FICTION!!!!

168. Stonn_is_Decius - February 1, 2009

this commercial had less going for it than the theatrical trailer. TPTB were clearly pushing the action element for the Joe Six Pack audience – which, to me, underscores the fundamental problem of what we know to date about the film.

the further JJ&Co get away from the original milieu and sensibility to attract a wider audience (and, please be honest, ‘modern audience’ means less an attention span for ideas), the less and less it looks and feels like the original Trek some of us know and love.

a much more forgiving friend of mine and TOS fan (she loved the subsequent series; i didn’t) just shrugged at this commercial and the trailer and said, “It doesn’t look like Star Trek.”

she’s right.

169. Diggin' up Bones - February 1, 2009

True story. I’ve been through one ST background after another on my PC for the last few months. I was kind of getting burned out on it, so I searched through moon pictures for a new background and I found this cool picture of an astronaut on the moon and set it as my background. Well the damn picture is hanging on the wall in Kirk’s bar scene. I guess I haven’t gotten away from ST backgrounds after all. Nice trailer, though short. Has anyone heard any of the actual soundtrack music yet?

170. Rat Boy - February 1, 2009

Is it just me, or did San Francisco get zapped a lot in the movie trailers attached to the big game? On top of this, at least the Golden Gate Bridge got trashed in the trailers for Land of the Lost and Monsters vs. Aliens. Isn’t there something in Los Angeles or Chicago worth blowing up?

171. SPOCKBOY - February 1, 2009

#154. aries127

Nicely done.

172. garen - February 1, 2009

#166 c.s.

one for the other thumb!

Northern panhandle West Virginia Pittsburgh fan here!

“whooo hoo” indeed.

173. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

165 – I don’t mind dissent in opinion at all. I welcome it.

We all debate here out of love of Star Trek. In the end, either the movie will be good, or the movie will not be good.

Our opinions here are really a combination of educated speculation, a little wishful thinking and logical deduction.

Stanky thinks negatively of the movie, I think positive, based on our individual viewpoints.

This is both IDIC and American ideals in action.

There is no thought police here, only people disagreeing with each other about various aspects of this movie.

174. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#169
this is probably old news:
Michael Giacchino is the music director for this month’s Academy Awards.

and this is probably even more old news, but at ScoringSession.com you can view illustration of him with JJ Abrams conducting the score.

175. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#169 again

from the sites I’ve gone to regarding the score, they all keep saying that it’s a “big surprise”.

what ever that means.

176. OneBuckFilms - February 1, 2009

169 – Listen to the background of the eSurance behind the scenes video.

There is some music that might come from the score :-)

177. Commodore Lurker - February 1, 2009

Decloaking . . .

I was really turned-off by the first trailer.

This one is a vast improvement; it feels more like Star Trek.

Shoulda kept the Nimoy “Live Long and Prosper” at the end though.

Still bugged by the overly contemporary dialog that is Orci & Kurtzman’s style: “Why you even talking to me, man” and “Do it, do it!” and the first trailer’s “Buckle up.” Just doesn’t feel like Trek.

I really want this film to succeed, but I get the feeling I’m not going to be happy walking out of the theater for the third Trek movie in a row.

Recloaking. }:-/>

178. McCoy - February 1, 2009

167. SChaos1701

Yes “historical Trek”. Even science fiction works better with continuity, SChaos1701.

But it’s all mute at this point, probably always has been. But I hold a glimmer of hope that the Enterprise has been equipped with the capability for time travel or cloaking and it will all be taken away at the end. Either by time cops, Talosians, Nimoy or a secret StarFleet division. I have a glimmer of hope that the gear is representative of the pre WNMHGB era.

However, Fringe has not given me goose bumps for the team in charge. I see cliches scene by scene accented by close-ups of gratuitous gore. Unless JJ has fixed what the writers put on paper, I expect the same from Trek (more cliches) and right now the footage supports that.

179. Brett Campbell - February 1, 2009

158 – I thought “well, double-dumbass on you!” was hilarious! Still do. Great delivery of it by Shatman.

180. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

#177

I am a big fan of Robert Orci’s & Alex Kurtzman’s scripts from Alias & LOST!

Kirk sounds exactly like that hick Sawyer from LOST!

181. Brett Campbell - February 1, 2009

178 – You mean “moot.” Unless you meant that nobody can say anything by “mute.”

182. Weerd1 - February 1, 2009

I don’t see how they can reset at the end of this story. It’s like this:
If you are a big fan going way back and watch this Alternate origin, and they change it all back at the end, there’s no real motivation to get involved in the movie- your Trek will be back next time.

If you’ve never seen Trek before and go to see this, a reset ending isn’t a reset for you, it’s just a change to the history you only just learned, and the movie didn’t much count.

This movie has to be relevant, AND it has to make Trek fresh and new. It’s a clever reset, but a reset nonetheless. I admit there’s something exciting, even as a Canonite, about new adventures of my beloved TOS characters. Only seeing the film is going to show me if I will consider these new people my beloved TOS characters…

183. iyellkhan! - February 1, 2009

Its always fun to flip through the comments after another tidbit has been released. The fights between the “die hards” and the “give it a tries” are often amusing, but I think tend to miss the underlying concerns some of us really have.

Personally, I still find many of the astetic choices made to be awkward, if not a little bit dissrespectful of what came before. Half the time it seems as though they are trying to make star trek look like flash gordon, the other half star wars.
The story is, of course, what matters, but when we’ve gotten such beautiful work in the past (NCC-1701 refit, to name one) its a bit disconcerting to see a sledgehammer taken to the universe we all know and love.

You can tell a good story while being respectful to what came before. Alas, every indication thus far, suggests that Nero’s ship is JJ taking a bulldozer to that which came before. Too bad.

Things I still want to know:

How closely does this mirror Star Wars in plot structure
(its clearly a hero’s journey story)
Is Vulcan this movie’s Alderan – aka does it go boom?
(granted, they might be shooting at earth because Vulcan didnt go
boom)
Are we really following string theory form time travel? If so, then all of this
is an alternate universe where nothing will affect the previous universe.
That would make Nero kinda a moron to go back in time at all. Spock
too.

Lastly, what, thematically is this movie about? Every great (and popular) star trek movie has had some environmental or political undertone / undertheme running through it. With Wrath of Khan we had the Genesis device, with The Voyage Home we had time travel to save whales, with Undiscovered Country we had the cold war, and with First Contact we had a nuclear missile helping to usher in a new era of peace (granted, almost unwittingly).

This is what I’m looking for in this movie. Its what makes it ral science fiction, and what truely makes it star trek. Thus far our trailer tastic releases from Paramount havent given us that, and that is where I’m most concerned. We had a character only piece before, star trek III: the search for spock. Its nice, but its not particularly memorable to the grand populous out there.

Oh, and when does starfleet temporal enforcement from the 29th century come in to fix this nasty paradox? those time ships are shielded from causality, right?

\\//_

184. McCoy - February 1, 2009

181

LOL

Yes, “moot”. Always have been a bad speller…thanks

185. Commodore Lurker - February 1, 2009

180 KOABs

Decloaking . . .
That is exactly my point. O&K’s dialog worked great for Alias, Lost, MI 3 (didn’t like that flick) and Transformers. But, it sounded stupid in Zena and Hercules, and it just doesn’t fit in what little we’ve seen from the trailers for Trek so far.

Trek, regardless of which series or what writers, always had a non-contempory style to the dialog. I accept O&K’s Trek cred, but they need to move beyond present day L.A. parlance to make Trek = Trek.

Recloaking. ):-]>

186. McCoy - February 1, 2009

182…

If this is the first Trek they come to….it wouldn’t matter what the ships looked like then, even the classic designs would have been new to them.

But it’s mute…er, I mean moot. I get it

187. kirk09 - February 1, 2009

183—as daniels’ explained in star trek enterprise, there are some timelines that they are not permitted to tinker with…kinda an extension of the temporal prime directive…

188. KingOfAllBlacks - February 1, 2009

I would love it if the movie ends with Riker saying: “Computer end program.”

Aha!

189. Brett Campbell - February 1, 2009

184 – You’re welcome. Don’t mention it. Well, if you’re mute, you can’t anyway. ; )

Have a good one!

190. McCoy - February 1, 2009

188

That would be great…. :o)

So simple, and yet a perfect way to get me to enjoy the film. Maybe that’s the plan they had with the whole “alternate reality” thang. It allows us to come out of the theater thinking, wow, none of what I just saw had meaning. Cool.

191. Diggin' up Bones - February 1, 2009

174,175,176 Thanks from the poster formally known as 169. If the music is a “big suprise,” maybe that means it will call on some of the old classic soundtracks. Unless it’s the Star Wars music. Or the Dawson’s Creek music.

192. Jote - February 1, 2009

Love the Earth shots – the academy and shuttle fly-by. I hope there are more Earth scenes. Futuristic Earth never had enough coverage in Trek

193. SChaos1701 - February 1, 2009

178

So you want everything to look like a cheesy 1960’s Sci-Fi series that was cancelled?

Sadness….

194. KingOfAllBlacks - February 2, 2009

I wonder if they make a reference to when the Tholians tried to steal the 31st Century time pod in ‘ST:Enterprise’.

195. McCoy - February 2, 2009

193: “So you want everything to look like a cheesy 1960’s Sci-Fi series that was cancelled? Sadness….”

I would have wanted the designs to **better** match the continuity that was established in TOS, TAS, Trials and Tribulations and, Mirror Darkly. More detail, less switches. There was middle ground.

It sure feels strange to hear you say Star Trek was a “cheesy Sci-fi series that was canceled.” So much has taken place since TOS cancelation dude.

196. Notbob - February 2, 2009

I saw the add when it first showed, during the super bowl and I wanted to see it again. This movie looks like it’s gonna be damn good.

I know that some have griped about some of the different/new things, but it works for me.

197. M-BETA - February 2, 2009

Is the guy fighting Kirk meant to be Sulu or someone else?
If it’s meant to be Sulu, it’s a stunt double who looks nothing like him!! Haha!

Now THAT is a great nod to TOS. Pause it on the fight scene and you’ll see what I mean.

Great trailer though. Love Mcoy and Kirk introducing themselves. Look forward to gearing the whole conversation leading to ‘Space is a disease wrapped in danger and silence’.

198. Iowagirl - February 2, 2009

#107
– Generally most people pay to get in. –

Oh I’m sure they do – and some pay while watching and some pay afterwards…;)

199. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 2, 2009

As a resident of the SF Bay area, I’d like to say, can we have that skyline NOW, please? :-)

Only one thing: that shot has to be from the point of view of the Bay Bridge, not the iconic Golden Gate bridge. The SF side of the GG bridge is semi-wooded, being encircled by the Presidio. This area is more than likely always going to be kept as a park, like Central Park in NY. The area where the Bay Bridge joins Oakland to SF, on the other hand, is metropolitan & has piers, and looks more like the perspective for the shot above.

Compare the GG bridge: http://www.visitingdc.com/images/golden-gate-bridge-picture.jpg
With the Bay Bridge: http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/1ds-4/san-francisco-embarcadero-aerial.jpg

Only the GG bridge must remain the same forever. As far as the Bay Bridge goes, I’d really prefer that in 200 years’ time, we’d have updated the suspension span to something a lot more modern.

200. MAT - February 2, 2009

How much liberty does one take before it becomes something totally different? Which is ok, I suppose.

201. Paulaner - February 2, 2009

Do you want to see the worst Kirk in Trek history? He is in “Generations”. Nothing can be worse than that :)

202. Mr Lirpa - February 2, 2009

#101 snobbish elitism, lovely!

203. Kev - February 2, 2009

all JJ needs to do is move the damn neck of the new enterprise a quarter of an inch forward on the model and line up the sauser with it and the ships perfect along with the rest of the film from what ive read and seen.

204. kirk09 - February 2, 2009

TO EVERYONE: if you wanna download the super bowl trailer, USING SAFARI BROWSER ONLY, right-click the appropriate one among the three links below the embedded trailer above (the HD sizes available links; for transferring to iphone i recommend the 720 link), select ‘download linked file as…’, save it, then import it into itunes…once it’s in your itunes library, select the new trailer in your movies section, then select the ‘advanced’ menu in itunes and select ‘create ipod or iphone version’…it’ll then convert it to the proper parameters…then when syncing your iphone, CHECK THE MANUALLY MANAGE SONGS AND VIDEOS LINK in the iphone general display menu, and then go back to the movies section and DRAG the new trailwr ONTO YOUR IPHONE ICON IN THE DEVICES SECTION TO THE FAR LEFT…then it’ll sync properly…

TO ANTHONY: PLEASE DONT DELETE THIS POST, as I’ve pretty much pre-answered about half a dozen important questions having to do with downloading the super bowl trailer for itunes use :) LOL

205. Devon - February 2, 2009

Does anyone know why the new Star Trek/Transformers/GI Joe trailers are not in the Myspace/YouTube Superbowl Ad competitions? It seems like almost all the other ones are except those three. Would have been added publicity.

206. kirk09 - February 2, 2009

#183–the theme of this film is three-fold: first, the use of something called red matter hearkens loosely to fears that the Large Hadron Collider will destroy the world, and what could happen if evil people seized control of it, second, the theme that a man can overcome anything and truly achieve greatness even in the midst of hopelessness (the kirk escaping an abusive past to save the galaxy…and in today’s economic climate thae idea that a person can overcome even the worst of times no matter what is a message we really need AND is the very essence of star trek), and third, how absolute power corrupts absolutely, and now a quest for vengeance coupled with a delusion that one’s doing one’s duty to one’s countrymen can turn one evil very easily) as evidenced by nero, and alluding to anakin skywalker in star wars

207. kirk09 - February 2, 2009

#205–probably because paramount wouldn’t allow the rights to be given for the competition, or maybe myspace hates star trek

208. Quarksbartender - February 2, 2009

I wonder if there was as much debate over the hate it’s and the love it’s back when the motion picture came out or TNG for that matter if anyone has some of the old letter pages from the fan club magazines back then I would love to see the debate back before the Internet made it so easy for people to whine about every little detail. I am personaly happy that Trek is alive and well and providing such fun debate.
I also can’t wait to see this movie at midnight here in Vegas with all my buddies from the Experience.

209. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

208, I’m fairly certain of my recollection that no such debate occurred, or at least, not with such ferocity.

Back then, we were grateful for any new Trek at all. At least, many of us were.

210. EvilSean - February 2, 2009

IMHO, the world of tomorrow (based on the snippets we have seen from the movie) looks a little too gritty and industrial for my taste. I mean, San Fran looks like it could be something out of Blade Runner. And the Iowa ship yard look quite haggard. I’m all for making the movie real, but a part of me will be dissappointed at losing the “Clean” image that ST has given us of the future (ST:FC excepted) up until now. Not the kind of image Star Trek wants to get across, I would have thought.

Totally reserving judgement, but making observations. I know I am going to love this movie regardless. I suppose I just fear change!!!

211. Spock - February 2, 2009

#63, you had a nice sentiment but in practice it doesn’t work. After about 5 years of TNG, everytime they’d make a ‘new’ species it’d just look and act like something we’d seen before.
If it’s going to be old hat, it might as well be a hat we know and like.

212. bdrcarter - February 2, 2009

Ad Meter Scores: Star Trek had a score of 6.14…which puts it in the middle of the pack of all spots seen during the Super Bowl. (By comparison, the winning spot by Doritos scored 8.46 and the worst spot…Visio Flat Panel TVs…scored a meager 3.77.) Other movie scores:

Year One………………………….6.75
Land of the Lost………………6.78
Up……………………………………6.74
Race to Witch Mountain…..6.38
Star Trek………………………….6.14
Angels and Demons……….6.14
Transformers 2……………….5.93
Fast & Furious…………………5.66

Let’s hope this isn’t a box office ranking come next fall.

213. Maximus - February 2, 2009

I can’t believe people are buying into this movie being a Star Trek movie.

Proximo: He knows to well how to manipulate the mob.

Maximus: Gene Roddenberry had a dream that was Star Trek, Proximo. That is not it. That is not it!

214. Jackson Roykirk - February 2, 2009

@ 102: “trailer needs more Vorlon ships!!”

We are ALL Kosh.

215. Paul B. - February 2, 2009

209. Hat Rick – February 2, 2009
208, I’m fairly certain of my recollection that no such debate occurred, or at least, not with such ferocity.
Back then, we were grateful for any new Trek at all. At least, many of us were.

Baloney! There was a tone of debate when TNG was announced! I was at several conventions in the 85/86 era where the TNG producers talked about what they were planning: a captain named “Julian” Picard, an android named “Data” (to be pronounced Dah-tuh, not Day-tuh), and so forth.

Fans stood up and SHOUTED at them for suggesting having a Klingon on the bridge, or that Trek could be done without Spock, etc. There were fans who refused to consider it Star Trek without Kirk. Some of the fans were quite viscious in their replies, while others were somewhat…insane. (I remember at least one fan who acted like a new Enterprise & crew would mean stranding Kirk’s people in space!)

The big difference was that back then, fans had to meet in person and that forced us to be civil to each other. (Look it up if you don’t know the word; I think 80% of Internet users do not know its meaning.) Nowadays, fans can sit at their computers and post anonymous hate, go trolling, capture and rewatch every split second and then complain about it.

216. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

215, I was thinking of TMP. You are right that there was a substantial debate about TNG.

In fact, we need only remember that Wesley Crusher was hugely controversial to know that there was debate.

Nevertheless, even the debate over TNG was never as acrimonious or as negative as much of the debate has been over recent Trek, including the debate over alleged revisionism as regards Star Trek: Enterprise.

And, of course, it’s much easier to be presumptuous regarding one’s oppposition on the Internet, of that there is little doubt, but only partly because of anonymity. I think that the culture at large has changed so that there isn’t the belief that, in the end, we are all about the same. Rather, there are those who believe that they are better than others, possibly because they believe that they have been a fan longer than others. This kind of snobbery is as unnecessary as it is prevalent, but no less destructive because of it.

217. fred - February 2, 2009

If this movie can’t make Trek relevant again and attractive to today’s culture, it dies out with us old fogies. Is that really what everyone wants?

218. BK613 - February 2, 2009

156
Nowadays it’s anime and Adultswim that the kids seem to be into, at least in my neck of the woods. The peeps that grew up on MTV are around 30 (±5) now.

I agree with you though in sentiment. I’m trying to remain open minded about this movie but I beginning to think that they reduced Trek to the level of “popcorn movie” for this outing.

219. Maximus - February 2, 2009

#215

That’s a very good point. Actually a very good point. But you see, TNG era Trek did all these radical changes in a future time-line that at that time was not an already established one. Therefore they effectively added, rather than contradicted already existed canon. And most importantly of all…Gene Roddenberry was still around. It’s a shame Star Trek wasn’t handled like the 007 franchise where it’s ran by the Broccolli family. Instead they give Abrams control of it and kinda does his own thing and well…from my opinion has alienated the fan base.

I see Star Trek or any other franchise as someone’s house. In this case Star Trek is Gene Roddenberry’s house. Come over hang around, play video games, eat some good food. Be respectful but go ahead and play around. But don’t start rearranging or putting in new furniture or repainting the walls. And well, I think Abrams is being a house guest in Roddenberry’s world.

Though Berman did a good job for the most part. At least everything somewhat fit…somewhat.

You see that’s my biggest problem with the movie. They’re just doing a great job screwing up an already established timeline. If this was all post-Nemesis stuff, that would be cool! No problem.

Just my two cents worth. :-)

and I am being civil!

220. Maximus - February 2, 2009

#218

Yeah, it seems like they did reduce Trek to a popcorn outing unfortunately.

:-\

221. KingOfAllBlacks - February 2, 2009

I would like Uhura to say the following line in the movie:

“I can’t color enough. If I had my way I would use every crayon in my box!”

10 points if you know where that’s from.

222. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

Well, 217, that’s the critical question right there. I think that there ARE those who want Trek to remain as pristine in life as it is in their memories. However, times change.

I’m probably older than most of the posters here, and I have fond memories of watching TOS and TAS before anyone had ever imagined that there could be a Phase II, let alone TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, or STIX. However, I suppose I am peculiar in that I do not wish every kind of Trek to be exactly like TOS, and — forgive me — while I think that the New Voyages series is wonderful, I do not believe it is the only legitimate approach to Trek.

When TMP was released, I remember how fantastic it looked, not how different it was from TOS.

When TNG hit the airwaves, I was proud of Trek’s TV resurrection rather than irritated that Picard was nothing like Kirk.

When DS9 was aired, I was delighted that there were two new Trek series to watch for weeks on end.

And so on.

Maybe I’m not enough of a fan to some, but I prefer fresh new takes on classic ideas over exact imitations of that which cannot really be copied. I am enough of a rationalist to abstract out the essence of a thing, without demanding that it is the literal repetition of it.

The only way to preserve something so that it is exactly the same as it was is to imprison it under glass, hermetically sealed, in a museum, forever. And that is something that, fan or not, I do not wish for Trek.

223. KingOfAllBlacks - February 2, 2009

#222

wish more TOS purists were open minded like you are.

Mr. Roddenberry would be proud.

224. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

Thanks, 223. I appreciate that.

225. Holger - February 2, 2009

Thank you for the pic by pic analysis! One gets great services on this site.

226. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - February 2, 2009

#222

You have rationally and eloquently made the case that I was just about to make. I salute you, sir.

227. JanewaysKnickers - February 2, 2009

new enterprise is growing on me

228. KingOfAllBlacks - February 2, 2009

I got into the TREK game a little late and only had a couple of Voyager seasons to watch. then ENT came along and I saw the whole thing.

I’ve caught as much DS9, TNG, and TOS as I can from the reruns on tv.

I admit that a batch of VOY & ENT episodes were not for me but regardless I was glad there would be a new Trek episode the following week.

so instead of picking apart the new movie we should be excited that TREK is back (and hopefully for a long while) and there’s new material to enjoy.

229. Databrain - February 2, 2009

113 said:
‘This is NOT an origin movie of the original characters aboard the original USS Enterprise. It is an alternative origin, of a new crew and a new ship.’

And this is precisely what has many trekkies upset. There is nothing to go into this film for. The original beings we became familiar with are being gutted and having their souls replaced with alternate time-line imposters. Of course some pro-Abrams cheerleader will say it is the complete opposite with only anecdotal evidence to support their ‘open minded’ cheerleader claims. But it is becoming increasingly obvious from the outset that what is going on here is corporate interests capitalizing on familiar names for the sake of profiting through the mindless masses and their need for a new action adventure movie featuring plenty of explosions, characters sky-diving, fighting saying ‘what er ya talkin to meh fur mang’ and an assortment of other silly, stupid things that have absolutely no relationship to Gene Roddenberries vision. But go right ahead cheerleaders, tell me the thousand reasons why I am wrong and you are right.

230. SteveinSF - February 2, 2009

Looks good–I just hope the SFX and the actions shots are not as quick and choppy like recent action movies. I’d like to see what happening.

231. Databrain - February 2, 2009

By the way, I am as ‘open minded’ as they come. But the call by most here to be ‘open minded’ seems semantical manipulation oft he meaning of ‘open minded’ at best. What you are really saying is the opposite, to revert to a state of ‘oh golly gee thems some good action scenes!’. And the saddest part is I think some of you are actually aware of this fact. But what do I know? I am just a 24 year old ‘close minded’ trekkie who loved the next generation, and in fact found it to be the most open minded of all the trek series.

232. Databrain - February 2, 2009

On another note. I wish my mother allowed me to attend some of those conventions back in the early-mid 90s. That seemed like the most amazing time in trek history to be alive. A time when true open mindedness really flourished.

233. ZASTRO - February 2, 2009

Whaaaa, whaaaa.
Whiners. It’s unbelievable to me that you guys whine sooo much about this.

You are the same type of people that cried to the heavens ” A FRENCH CAPTAIN!- NEVER!”

STFU.

234. TOS Enterprise - February 2, 2009

Re: #229

There are not 1,000 reasons why you are wrong. There is only one reason. You have not seen the film, therefore you cannot have a fair, complete, and accurate critical opinion of it.

This is like reading the back cover summary of a novel and deciding the book is terrible and putting it back on the shelf. You can decide, based on the back cover summary that you’re not interested in the story that this novel tells, or that it simply doesn’t speak to you, but you CANNOT decide that the book is poorly written.

Watch the movie, or don’t. But you can’t say it’s going to be terrible if you haven’t seen it. And you can’t know its character based on what some Marketeers have shown you so far.

235. Star Trackie - February 2, 2009

Despite the lovely eye candy and fast cuts for the ADD generation, the most promising thing I noticed was Pine’s Kirk. His attitude is right, the fight is right and his introduction to McCoy with a toast from the flask is spot on Jim Kirk. Well done!

236. Devon - February 2, 2009

#229 – Wow, you sound really bitter because something wasn’t done your way. Get a grip please. Geesh.

237. New Horizon - February 2, 2009

229. Databrain – February 2, 2009

It was a T.V. show, they were characters, and this is real life. The characters we all grew up on still exist on DVD, in books, and in our minds. They’re really not dead, as long as we remember them.

What has essentially been said is that despite the fact these people ended up having slightly different lives, they still end up being who they were supposed to be…destiny….pulls them through all the bumps and diversions.

From what I’ve seen with the prequel comic, and the clips from the movie, my main concern is the dialogue…because really, the story seems pretty darn good. TOS had very well written dilogue, but a lot of what comes out of Hollywood these days is barely passable as dialogue.

I’m hoping some of the Chekov humor got toned down in a final edit. Having the computer not understand his accent in one of the clips shown is just plain wrong. It wouldn’t happen by that point in the future. They universal translators for goodness sake. That type of humor worked in Trek 4, because Chekov was talking to another human, but if the tech in the 23rd century is that unreliable…they must be running a Microsoft OS.

If the movie sucks, we just have to grow up and move on. I’m sure we’ll all get over it.

238. CaptainRickover - February 2, 2009

I don’t know, I really don’t know…

A very fast spot, showing nothing else as action, action, action and… action. Okay, it might be good for superbowl, but if it will be enough for this May ? I don’t know.

Don’t understand me wrong, I like action and I like Star Wars. But I consider Star Trek in some higher level as the (very entertaining, but sometimes very simple) Star Wars sci-fi-fantasy. I’m not sure what I should do with this allway-funny-and-so-cool Jim Kirk. I allways thought that Kirk was a very serious man with a certain sense of humor, but with a very dramatic and tragic background. I think it’s not a good idea to cast that background away in an alternate universe – just to tell a weird timetravel/alternative-universe-story.

I don’t see where the origin-story is, because it’s an origin story of an alternate universe crew. I don’t think I could be SO open minded… Just to stay true for Roddenberry’s optimismn is not enough for me.

239. Devon - February 2, 2009

#219 – “Instead they give Abrams control of it and kinda does his own thing and well…from my opinion has alienated the fan base.”

Hmmm.. nope.

240. JWM - February 2, 2009

#230: I have to agree. The super-quick cuts are a little hard to follow visually sometimes. It has its place (one man fighting a ton of people seems to be where it works best) but I like to see my epic battles as clearly as possible. A good template is, and I know I will get pilloried for this here, the Star Wars films. The cuts are fast, but they tended to give you long enough to tell clearly who was firing at whom and what was going on.

241. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#113 and #229 — You could not have stated it any better. I also stated it yesterday. Us “old-schoolers” are not being whiners. Again — when the news first started coming out about the movie and the first promotional posters/images we were led to believe that we would see a TRUE origin story. This movie is clearly NOT a true origin story — it is alternate timeline story taking place early in an alternate “Enterprise Crew” origin scenario. The more I think about it — the more and more it makes sense — forget about the radical changes. But look at all the major characters (who at least on the surface) who DO NOT EXIST in this alternate timeline (yes they are “origin” characters:
1-Number One
2-Boyce (who obviously was more than just the ship’s doctor for Pike)
3-Tyler
4-Gary Mitchell
5-Lee Kelso
6-Ben Finney
7-Charles Garrovick
8-Finnegan
9-Carol Marcus
10-Janice Rand
I mean I can go on and on.
Taking it one step further, based on the IDW Comic book that leads into the movie, you can almost say it’s a two-part NG episode, with Part 2 taking place in an “altered past timeline).
How can Abrams expect for many of us fans of 30-40 past years just to “make believe” than many of these original characters have been wiped out. Perhaps there might be a reference or two in the movie, but I’m NOT holding my breath!

242. BK613 - February 2, 2009

228
“so instead of PICKING APART THE NEW MOVIE we should be EXCITED THAT TREK IS BACK (and hopefully for a long while) and there’s new material to enjoy.”

These are not mutually exclusive. You can be excited about the movie in general but be disappointed in individual or thematic elements.

As I am ATM.

243. Mark Lynch - February 2, 2009

I wish the Internet had never been invented.

Then I would not have to keep looking here and have my hopes buoyed and dashed repeatedly upon the rocks.

Okay, my tongue is slightly in my cheek with the above.

However, I think #229 has got it spot on. We are judging an entire movie on less than two minutes of footage. My guess (obvious though it may be) is we are being fed the most action of action sequences. Get those bums on the seats people, as someone might be saying at Paramount.

I have my concerns that Star Trek is being dumbed down for a new generation, along with my concerns over all the changes to the characters, props, ships etc.
But I will try to keep an open mind (my take on that means being non judgemental) and hopefully go see the film a couple of weeks after it premieres in the UK (don’t like crowds)

Let’s just wait for now, discuss what we actually do know about. See the movie in a few months and then pull it to pieces as only Star Trek fans can do.

But please keep it civil. There’s enough crap in the world already without getting nasty here.

If I was trying to make a point I have probably messed it up. Just the ramblings of a chaotic mind having a really off day.

244. P Technobabble - February 2, 2009

I thought it was a killer trailer. I’m pretty certain I’m gonna love this movie (knowing myself the way I do).

I’m a Star Trek fan. I’m a science fiction fan. I have no problem with alternate timelines, and no problem with a new playground for Trek.

245. BaronByng - February 2, 2009

What’s wrong with a popcorn movie? Star Trek has *always* been an adventure and action series, with the added bonus of some high-minded science fiction and social commentary. It’s not an Ingmar Bergman film intended only for the art-house crowd.

Star Trek on television has the extended storyline time to do the ‘exploring strange new worlds’ thing, planet of the week, villain of the week, what have you, with some handwaving given to backstories. That’s what series are for, after all.

Movies, speaking abstractly, need to stand on their own, with a compelling, self-contained storyline. This is the point at which you need to explicitly show the backstory, as part of the protagonists’ character arc. This in particular is a coming-of-age story and it seems to be hitting classic universal storytelling notes — about young people who sign up for military service to get away from something (McCoy’s divorce?) or find their true calling (Kirk, Spock).

In addition, there’s the notion of understanding why the characters are the way they are. In the TOS TV show, we’re just presented with Kirk As Exemplary Leader, but if he was always like that from a young age, wouldn’t that be a really boring story to watch? “Jimmy Kirk, Straight-A Student?” Admirable, maybe, but I’m pretty sure he would have been wedgied continuously. Similarly, Always-In-Control Spock would just be a cliché, by Grabthar’s hammer if I may say so.

The audience needs a reason to care. Watching a flawed, recognizably human character fail, learn, grow, then succeed is what creates drama. What makes this story particularly dramatic (from what little I know, so this is conjecture) is that if the timeline is changed, then we don’t know the fates of the characters. If everything was reset to just blend smoothly into the TOS continuity without making a ripple, then what is the reason for the audience to care, or watch a sequel? If it’s just for special effects, then indeed, that would be vapid and pointless. If it’s because there will be situations whose outcomes are unknown, then that’s compelling.

It has been said many times by critics that the older Star Trek films coasted on their audience’s familiarity with the franchise, characters etc. Personally, I felt that the TNG films were the weakest in terms of character consistency and development; I don’t feel that the TNG cast ever became as iconic as the TOS crew and so there was less of a draw for general audiences.

At this point in history, Enterprise, the last televised series, was not a huge hit, and last aired original episodes years ago. There is a generation that has grown up *not* watching TOS, or most of the other series either. Thus, it’s a little unrealistic to expect a large non-core-Trekker audience to come to Star Trek ’09, a summer blockbuster film intended to become the tentpole of a reinvigorated franchise, with pre-knowledge of who the characters are, what the Federation is, etc. That’s why ST09 has to tell the story from the beginning, keeping enough the same but also providing a dramatic reason to move forward.

Otherwise, they could have hired any of the old TV directors to put out a direct-to-DVD prequel movie. And direct-to-DVD is the kiss of death — it generally means a franchise has run out of ideas and is trying to make a quick buck.

246. Databrain - February 2, 2009

237 said:
‘What has essentially been said is that despite the fact these people ended up having slightly different lives, they still end up being who they were supposed to be…’

If they end up who they always were, what is the point of showing an alternate back story? So the writers/promoters can capitalize on action movie cliches and then justify it as an ‘alternate time-line’ variable? I just don’t buy the whole ‘what er ya talkin to meh for mang?’ kirk mentality. I know kirk of the original series was somewhat driven by instinct, but he wasn’t stupid, nor did he have a blatantly dismissive attitude toward other’s.

247. Gary - February 2, 2009

GUYS THERE IS A “TAGRUATO CORP” BUILDING IN THE MOVIE check it outttt!!!

248. Databrain - February 2, 2009

241 said:
‘#113 and #229 — You could not have stated it any better. I also stated it yesterday. Us “old-schoolers” are not being whiners.’

But the thing is I am not an older schooler. I was a new fan who started watching TNG in syndication after it was off the air for a year or two as I was too young to really understand it during its original air. Then from there I delved backwards into the original series, and I made the connections. The prototype was the original series, but I always felt the next generation was a natural evolution of the vision roddenberry had in the original, but due to constraints, could not fully express himself till the next generation aired. So, it’s not an age specific thing. I am of this generation. It angers me when people try making it age related when it has nothing to do with this. It is more a matter of there being those who want to see roddenberries vision kept genuine, and those who do not care about how trampled on it becomes. When you talk about it in terms of ‘old school/new school’ you open the debate to people calling Roddenberry purists close minded, because they are thinking of it in terms of age and stuff. I am in my 20s, and I am willing to guess most of the people cheering for this new film are older than I am. People who live stressful lives and want an action film to pacify on.

249. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#248 — if you see my past posts I often use “old-schooler” as a reference to the origninal series as a human drama, age has nothing to do with it. My 15 year old son is also “old-school” Star Trek. As I have stated many times prior, is that my initial concern (and will be until I see the movie for myself)– is that we are not really getting an origin story, no matter what kind of spin is put on it. I will accept that and STILL ROOT for this movie to be great!!!

250. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

“But it is becoming increasingly obvious from the outset that what is going on here is corporate interests capitalizing on familiar names for the sake of profiting through the mindless masses [...]”

Even if this were so, there is enough of what makes this movie Trek to make it interesting to many. This may not seem plausible to a few critics, but there it is.

There is a time for persistence, and then there is a time for re-evaluation. To do the same thing over and over again when it hasn’t produced recent results would be folly, particularly when big dollars are at stake. Let’s look at the recent track record: Generations was, by post-Roddenberry standards, as canon as they come. It featured a Roddenberry-approved crew (Kirk, et al., and Picard, et al., all of whom were cast while Roddenberry was alive), several Roddenberry-approved ships, and a universe whose fundamentals (the Federation, etc.) were originated by Roddenberry.

Generations was not a huge success.

First Contact was a success, but not as much as Star Trek II or IV. Insurrection and Nemesis were by and large a disappointment and a failure, respectively.

Let’s remember that Generations, First Contact, Insurrection, and Nemesis were all canonical; in fact, they are part of what defines canon. Yet, as they evolved, there came a point of diminishing returns. The old approach was no longer working.

Nor was it simply a matter of leadership by Berman, et al. Star Trek V was a failure, too, and Berman had little to do with that. Moreover, Trek V featured the original crew exclusively.

The point may be that by focusing excessively on outward manifestations, we may easily lose sight of the sine qua non of a thriving series of this nature: An expanding audience base coupled with a cogent outlook.

There are many things that can be solved through cohesion and adherence to canon, but it has seemed, as a matter of empirical fact, that expanding the base has not been one of them. And therein lies much of the problem.

Perhaps it is the storyline. Perhaps characters — even the classic ones — were insufficiently developed. Perhaps it was the budget. Perhaps …. many things, and for this, see the failures of Star Trek V and, at least in part, Star Trek: Enterprise. But to blast away at full phaser setting at Star Trek (2009) merely because it doesn’t seem canonical…. what, exactly, will this accomplish?

Canonicity is as canonicity does.

There are more things in heaven and earth than is provided for in canon.

251. Crusade2267 - February 2, 2009

102, 214

We have always been here

252. Devon - February 2, 2009

246 – “If they end up who they always were, what is the point of showing an alternate back story? So the writers/promoters can capitalize on action movie cliches and then justify it as an ‘alternate time-line’ variable?”

No different than your precious “Yesterdays Enterprise.” :)

“I just don’t buy the whole ‘what er ya talkin to meh for mang?”

None of this makes any sense. Says more about you? Yep.

“but he wasn’t stupid,”

Neither is this one :)

“nor did he have a blatantly dismissive attitude toward other’s.”

No one cares.

“It is more a matter of there being those who want to see roddenberries vision kept genuine, and those who do not care about how trampled on it becomes”

His vision of making money off the franchise is living on. :)

253. Mark - February 2, 2009

I didn’t like the way Kirk shouted “Do it! Do it!” The real Kirk would have only thought it and it would happen.

254. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

Hey Devon #252 — well said. I actually LOVED “YE” and thought it was the best episode of TNG. The only difference with that and this movie — is that for “YE” (we were not for the lack of a better term) were not sold an “advanced bill of goods. I just might be wrong (as i have stated many times before) — ONE THING that you can BET the house on is that at the end of this movie they will NOT …. “end up who they always were”.

255. Databrain - February 2, 2009

I keep stating this. If Roddenberries primary intent with TOS was to make money, he would have just written another western drama. He could have very easily made a lot more money that way than with StarTrek, which made very scant profits during its original run, as far as what I have read. After all it was almost canceled after the second season, right? Yet Roddenberry churned forth for a third, despite ratings and money issues. His message was first, money was second.

256. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

OK, how petty does it make me to be so relieved that it’s probably not AnaKirk yelling, “Woohoo?” ‘Cause it does. Immensely. Just promote me to Chief Petty officer. I can accept a lot of surprises in Kirk’s past, but “Woohoo” was going to be a big one to swallow.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – that Orion girl needs more meat on her bones.

257. Commander K - February 2, 2009

If this really is an alternate reality, i’m just going to keep pretending it is the ACTUAL reality we all know of..i’m sure that cant be too hard to do,. ;)

258. Devon - February 2, 2009

255 – If only in a perfect world….

259. Commander K - February 2, 2009

Oh and the enterprise firing bit has got me excited!!!

260. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

But, 255, in this day and age, you can’t get far with just the message and not the money. It’s no longer 1966. It’s 43 years later, and there are hundreds or thousands of different distractions all competing for attention.

Personally, I do not believe that even Roddenberry dispensed with the need for monetary gain, but even if he had, it would not have been possible for Trek to have been made had his partners — Desilu, Paramount, etc. — agreed with what would have amounted to a messianic approach.

Hollywood studios may be many things, but one of the things they are not is out there solely for the public good.

Wasn’t it Sam Goldwyn who said that if you wanted to send a message, you should choose Western Union?

The fact is that money is what drives studios in this world of ours. Money that only an expanding fan base can afford.

261. Captain Dunsel - February 2, 2009

#255 “Yet Roddenberry churned forth for a third, despite ratings and money issues”

Actually, no. When NBC backed out of its promise to put ST on Monday nights at 8, Roddenberry backed out of HIS promise to return and line-produce the show. He had much less to do with ST in its third season. That decision was largely about ratings.

As far as profits, I believe it was Roddenberry himself who said “The greatest science fiction in Hollywood is not on the screen – it’s in the accounting office.” You can’t judge whether someone was or was not primarily after profit solely by whether he MADE a profit.

262. JWM - February 2, 2009

“His message was first, money was second.”

If that were the case, if he were such a vaunted artist who refused to compromise, he would have packed up his kit and gone home after the original pilot got rejected. Don’t build up GR to godhood status. He made compromises, and he went into the business to make money. It does not detract from the motivation for his material. But he was human and he made the same human choices any other producer does to keep making money, because without money there’s no more art in show biz.

When he did dig in his heels, Paramount replaced him with Harve Benett to produce the movies.

263. Jefferies Tuber - February 2, 2009

255. Databrain – February 2, 2009

Hilarious idealism. Roddenberry famously tried to take a cut from the actors when they signed autographs while under contract. Not that he didn’t like his own show, but the early scrappy days of Trek Conventions had everything to do with cash.

The man lived in Bel Air. LA is filled with wealthy neighborhoods for people who don’t want to live in overtly wealthy neighborhoods, but Bel Air is for people who want to leave no doubt that they’re rich.

264. Chris - February 2, 2009

There is one big element in this new Trek movie thats been sorely lacking in the previous TNG movies- emotion- none of the TNG crew had any hang-ups and they all got along as if they were robots. To see a young Kirk with all his flaws and becoming a better man is the stuff of heroes.

This is certainly putting excitement and energy back into the franchise I think.

265. I AM CAPTAIN KIIIIIRK! - February 2, 2009

For months I’ve been telling my wife and kids about how awesome this movie’s going to be. They like to tease me for being a Trek nerd. But last night during the Superbowl, after watching the trailer THEY all said — without prompting — WE HAVE TO GO SEE THIS MOVIE!!! Even our guests, who aren’t Trek freaks like me, are rarin’ to go.

Go Steelers!

266. McCoy - February 2, 2009

260

There’s a wide gap between wanting to get paid for your vision and doing it solely for the money. Roddenberry was not the studio. He had to sell his vision to them. The Cage itself was a monetary risk and costs lots of money to produce. Each episode of Star Trek was also expensive for the time. There were plenty of other options for him with less risk.

Roddenberry was not perfect (none of us are) but I find it strange defending his vision here on this site, a site that would not exist without him. Not all episodes of TOS are wonders of TV, but the episodes that hit the mark are way ahead of their time and inspired fans, educators, engineers, astronauts and creative minds for decades to come. Star Trek was canceled, but the world finally understood what it had during syndication. Since that time, Trek has become more than Gene could have imagined.

Much more homage to where it all started should have been placed in this film. It’s great to have Nimoy and Majel in here. They are certainly the lure. More could have been done.

267. Mark - February 2, 2009

Databrain

oh, brother…

I continue to wonder why some people who don’t like or hate some elements of this new movie continue to put themselves through torment by coming to this site and commenting. Mind you, I’m not saying you can’t come here (some are probably saying now, “Oh, they want to silence us!”). I’m just wondering why you want to come here day after day. Is it a martyr complex? Wouldn’t it be better (and healthier for you) to create your own ihatejj’strek.com?

I’m only afraid some of you are going to have heart attacks when I read your comments

268. Enterprise's helmsman - February 2, 2009

This movie looks so much better then any of the other Trek movies.

269. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#268 — Just because it “looks so much better” does NOT mean it will be better than any of the other Trek movies. If it half as good as the current “Gold Standard” — STIIWOK, then we just might be in for a treat!!!
“Looking better” can only take you so far…

270. Vole - February 2, 2009

Please write the shot-by-shot transcripts, someone?

271. Dr. Image - February 2, 2009

This trailer is very effective and it kicks much ass. (And this is coming from a purist.) The only tech nit I’ll pick or question is whether those are phasers or photorps. Phasers should be beams of energy, not squirts of “stuff.”

272. THX-1138 - February 2, 2009

#247

I just knew it. The snow monster dealy looks like an overgrown, red cloverfield lice creature. This prequel is actually a veiled sequel to cloverfield.

273. Paulaner - February 2, 2009

#222 “I prefer fresh new takes on classic ideas over exact imitations of that which cannot really be copied”

Amen to that.

274. Denise de Arman - February 2, 2009

THX#272- LOL!

275. Boborci - February 2, 2009

229. Databrain – February 2, 2009

“But it is becoming increasingly obvious from the outset that what is going on here is corporate interests capitalizing on familiar names for the sake of profiting…”

I wonder how the corporation implanted the story we came up with into our minds and tricked us into thinking it was our own? Not that I would put that past current technological abilities.

276. Ryan H - February 2, 2009

# 275 – Thank you Mr. Orci for your wonderful movie. I can’t wait to see it. :)

277. OneBuckFilms - February 2, 2009

271 – I believe they are phasers. The reason being:

– They are coming from the areas we know to have Phaser Turrets.
– They are similar to the phasers seen in Star Trek II.

Damn, that shot looks good though.

278. Crusade2267 - February 2, 2009

I think that this movie is a turning point for the franchise, much in the same way as TNG was. TNG radically altered the franchise, as it allowed us to see Star Trek in a way that didn’t involve Kirk and Spock. And it grew up a generation of people who got used to Star Trek being in the 24th century. But in those early years, there was some tension between fans who embraced TNG and those who were upset it wasn’t TOS.

Believe me, as one of the fans who grew up on TNG, I wish they had a better sendoff. I will miss TNG, DS9, and Voyager. Enterprise is kinda tacked on there, I suppose, being in the Berman era. But just as the franchise took a turn into the TNG era, it’s now taking a turn into a different era. We’re just going to have to get used to it.

This isn’t the Star Trek any of us grew up with, whether you grew up on TOS, TAS/TMPs, TNG or the other spinoffs. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t Star Trek, and it doesn’t mean that it can’t be good.

279. rangerone314 - February 2, 2009

Star Trek II was a bit of an action film (compared to ST:TMP)… Kobayashi Maru opening, Khan & Chekov & eels, ambush against Enterprise, vaporizing Jedda & Capt Terrell, Enterprise vs Reliant, blowing up a nebula etc

Also, while I like ST:TMP a lot more than Nemesis, a boost like TWOK was needed after the more plodding ST:TMP.

We need something a little more exciting & buzz-inducing after Nemesis. Once that is done, maybe we see something in the grain of Star Trek IV The Voyage Home (which being one of the best movies and had the least amount of carnage)

280. rangerone314 - February 2, 2009

Which movie do you all think is worse? Nemesis or Star Trek V: Final Frontier?

281. Paulaner - February 2, 2009

#237 “That type of humor worked in Trek 4, because Chekov was talking to another human, but if the tech in the 23rd century is that unreliable”

Remember the (painful) scene in Trek 6, where they translate Klingon using paper dictionaries. The finest cheese :)

282. Janeways Knickers - February 2, 2009

I liked the whole thing. I’m willing to give it a chance. I know I’ll go several times to see it regardless. i did with nemesis in 2002! We haven’t had real trek in ages, even Enterprise to an extent wasn’t “star trek” for years.

I’m excited about the new cast, think they’ll be sexy and edgy. also like the whole alternate reality idea. Nimoy is a bonus too. Its unfortunate though, that i could sketch a better looking enterprise myself.

I do think its important to remember the hype around Logan writing Nemesis and look how that turned out.

It does look a lot like Starship troopers which i really enjoyed – but that in itself is worrying. (all this has happened before….?)

So long as we get star trek 2 style bad guys, ships and submarine battles with an iconic soundtrack, without the “how are you feeling jim?”old age, goody goody nonsence I’ll be happy. Not too much to ask for eh?

283. Paulaner - February 2, 2009

#280 “Which movie do you all think is worse? Nemesis or Star Trek V: Final Frontier?”

Nemesis, in my opinion. Trek V, in the deep of its soul, has a genuine, typical TOS plot.

284. GaryS - February 2, 2009

Hi Bob, The Super Bowl spot looked GREAT!
Good luck on May 8th!

285. Star Trackie - February 2, 2009

I love the phaser burst effects…puts me in mind of the wonderful animation of Forbidden Planet’s rifles and blasters. I wish they were blue…blue-white just seems more electric and powerful, but I can live with red. The Enterprise looks fantastic.

286. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

Thanks to those who have complimented my messages.

Having thought about this a bit more, I want to throw in a bit of a facile parallel — one with which I do not agree — between Star Trek (2009) and Star Wars Episode IV. In both movies, we have a young man who is raised by someone other than his parent. Each man is dissatisfied with his life and yearns for something more. Both movies feature a hero riding a motorized vehicle across a desert landscape. In both movies, each hero gets into a bar fight. We could even throw in a reference to the latter Star Wars movies (e.g., Episode VI, ROTJ) in that the hero fights a giant monster. (But what archetypal hero does not?) And, in truth, the lobster-like monster on the Frozen Planet in Trek does look a bit like one that Anakin fights in Episode II. But what of this?

Be prepared, I think, for movie critics to make precisely the same kind of comparisons. And keep in mind that, for all that, these are all surface features, and things that many movies have shown for decades. (The original Episode IV hovercar-journey-home scene owes much to earlier movies with similar scenes, only with wheeled vehicles.) The central question is what is made of these components.

To continue the metaphor: Drama consists essentially of the same elements just as a car has essentially the same components. Every car has an engine and wheels, for example. It’s what is made of these components that matter.

There will be many ways to criticize the forthcoming film, and indubitably, some of these criticisms will be deserved. But I concur with what Abrams has said: View the film with an open mind. To say that the new film is unoriginal, or, paradoxically, uncanonical, is a bit like saying that Star Wars was just a rehash of Saturday morning serials: It may be merely a small truth that conceals a big lie.

287. Sid James - February 2, 2009

Is it just me or does this look like a horribly generic action movie??

I’m not getting excited so far..

288. The Lensman - February 2, 2009

255. Databrain – February 2, 2009

I keep stating this. If Roddenberries primary intent with TOS was to make money, he would have just written another western drama. He could have very easily made a lot more money that way than with StarTrek, which made very scant profits during its original run, as far as what I have read. After all it was almost canceled after the second season, right? Yet Roddenberry churned forth for a third, despite ratings and money issues. His message was first, money was second.”

Uh….No. As others have stated, it was all about the money in the early days. He could’ve made a western? You mean he could’ve made yet ANOTHER western? The type that the airwaves were not only saturated with, but had BEEN saturated with for years and were slowly on the decline?

And if it failed? Well…..he could always fall back on westerns.

Roddenberry had no grand “vision” he created a show that would make him and the networks alot of dough. He created a merchandising business, Star Trek Enterpirses (later Lincoln Enterprises) because he wanted cash. He wrote lyrics to a theme with no intention of using them to horn in on Courages cash. He was a tyrant on TNG who wanted as much credit for everything as he could get, and that meant more cash for him.

He was a regular joe who only had one good idea.

Also, he wasn’t involved in season three and IIRC, most of the idealistic message shows were in that season.

First Inter-racial kiss? Season 3
Federation as super tolerant society? Season 3
Most famous ep about racism? Season 3
Humans and Klingons working together? Season 3

Platos Stepchildren and Let That Be Your Last Battlefield. These establish, more than any prior episode, some kind of vision or statement about just how idealistic and utopian the Federation is. Kirk’s speech to Alexander is the primary basis for the “utopian vision” of Trek, as is LTBYLB view of how ridiculous racism is.

And Roddenberry had little to no involvement with those. But not surprisingly, tried to take credit for the powerful messages these eps conveyed in regards to a super tolerant utopian vision. He started believing what the fans believed in regards to him…

Roddenberry became the computer god leading a pack of people all too willing to deify and follow him. The kind of computer god James T. Kirk would talk into destroying itself so that it’s followers could be free.

289. Crusade2267 - February 2, 2009

287

Don’t judge a book by its cover… or it’s PR machine.

290. Databrain - February 2, 2009

275 said:
‘I wonder how the corporation implanted the story we came up with into our minds and tricked us into thinking it was our own? Not that I would put that past current technological abilities.’

The same way they turned vulcans into weak, illogical beings during the run of ST: Enterprise. Sometimes an incentive to dumb something down is all the writers need in order to do it, a sort of catalyst, you might say. I would even venture to say that a production team can do this without realizing it. You can have a dumbed down film with an intelligent, well thought-out explanation for why it is dumbed down. I’m not saying that is what you did, I am merely making an observation based my current knowledge of what’s been done. I take full responsibility for my implications, whether they are wrong or right upon viewing the film.

291. Spock's Brain - February 2, 2009

280. rangerone314 – February 2, 2009
“Which movie do you all think is worse? Nemesis or Star Trek V: Final Frontier?”

STFF is worse (and Insurrection felt like a second season TNG episode stretched to two hours)!

With Nemesis, I believe that ultimately it’s not the story (a good one) but the execution by the director and the rest of the tech/editing/creative team. Actors played the cards they were dealt.

292. Databrain - February 2, 2009

Also, turning Kirk into a reluctant hero is a little too close to the Han Solo domain in my opinion. Kirk, as portrayed in TOS, was very ambitious, but not overtly arrogant. He did possess some degree of arrogance, but it was toned down a notch from the usual brand of male arrogance. In fact this was the case with most male characters in startrek. And he never struck me as someone with a reluctance to join starfleet. But as someone who was into the notion from a very young age.

293. RAMA - February 2, 2009

Anything that follows this movie will be different. I can safely say it will be a touchstone. Is it the ultimate ST movie? Well probably until the next one!

294. Star Trackie - February 2, 2009

#287 “Is it just me or does this look like a horribly generic action movie??”

Granted, after 20 years of what appeared to be Star Trek put on “mute”, the approach of JJ’s new movie can be somewhat jarring. But rest assured, this appears to be old-school Star Trek action/adventure 101. It’s back to the basics…adventurous, exciting, full of heart…sexy and fun. And it’s spelled “Star Trek.” No bloody hyphens….just Star Trek. It’s nice to see it back.

295. RAMA - February 2, 2009

I must say its nice to see an epic feel too. No other ST movie would have fit this well into the Super Bowl spot.

296. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#292 — PERFECTLY STATED regarding Kirk!!!
You could not have stated it any better!!!!

297. RAMA - February 2, 2009

#292 — PERFECTLY STATED regarding Kirk!!!
You could not have stated it any better!!!!

Ridiculous…han Solo was an old space veteran, Kirk is a fresh cadet! Its not remotely the same thing..we can assumethe character will grow, not just in a fictional sense over time, but in this one movie alone. So this criticism doesn’t really apply.

298. Spock's Brain - February 2, 2009

292. Databrain – February 2, 2009 “Also, turning Kirk into a reluctant hero is a little too close to the Han Solo domain in my opinion. Kirk, as portrayed in TOS, was very ambitious, but not overtly arrogant. He did possess some degree of arrogance, but it was toned down a notch from the usual brand of male arrogance. In fact this was the case with most male characters in startrek. And he never struck me as someone with a reluctance to join starfleet. But as someone who was into the notion from a very young age.”

Databrain, canon has never established what Kirk was as a 20-something kid. And remember this is an ALTERNATE TIMELINE caused by the Romulan temporal incursion. Kirk’s going to be affected by the altered (compared to our known timeline) events in his life. I’m sorry if these are spoilers for you.

299. RAMA - February 2, 2009

290. Databrain – February 2, 2009

275 said:
‘I wonder how the corporation implanted the story we came up with into our minds and tricked us into thinking it was our own? Not that I would put that past current technological abilities.’

The same way they turned vulcans into weak, illogical beings during the run of ST: Enterprise. Sometimes an incentive to dumb something down is all the writers need in order to do it, a sort of catalyst, you might say. I would even venture to say that a production team can do this without realizing it. You can have a dumbed down film with an intelligent, well thought-out explanation for why it is dumbed down. I’m not saying that is what you did, I am merely making an observation based my current knowledge of what’s been done. I take full responsibility for my implications, whether they are wrong or right upon viewing the film.

Acutally Enteprise showed the Vulcans evolve out of this illogical attitude, since they were not ‘following the true teachings of Surak”. See the events in the 3 part Forge saga. I did make for some very good character/race development.

300. RAMA - February 2, 2009

287. Sid James – February 2, 2009

Is it just me or does this look like a horribly generic action movie??

I’m not getting excited so far..

Obviously the trailer is a distilled version of the movie. Look at ads for STVI! They had Kirk yelling “fire!” and starships careening around…but it was really not an action oriented movie.

301. ProperTrekkieUK - February 2, 2009

Just out of curiousnessness…the pic of the academy, and the pic of the two shuttles flying toward the academy don’t seem to gel…where is it in relation to the two pics???? Probs just can’t see it!

Looks proper good though! From what I can see my girlfriends rubbishy internet…!

302. RAMA - February 2, 2009

You can easily see the shuttle relation to each other here:

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/st09sbcom/10.jpg

303. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

@boborci if you’re still reading, I’ve got a question on the topic of scripts and writers vs. funders with regard to this particular movie.

Are you at liberty to say how many drafts of the script you went through before it was finally greenlighted? Were the rewrites substantial (like, say, changing plot points) or superficial (rewording dialogue)?

I know I’ve been critical of the 1/4 of the story that’s been revealed so far, and I’m hoping that the remaining 3/4 make a big difference in how it comes off. So know that even those of us who are doubtful WILL give it a fair hearing.

304. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 2, 2009

Well.I like the trek Trailer for the Supperbowl. They are goiong all out for Star Trek and we as the Hard core Fans should all be pleased as our Trek is Once again being treated right. this is A Mainstream mocie with it. I loved seeing the Big E in Action and she looks good. The onl;y Thing I hate is the Fact we havt to Wait till May. But I will Survive. So alll the Hardcore Fans get with it and be there on Opening Night and lets sell out all the Theaters and get the rest on board and I bet Trek can have a 75 million dollars doe the opening weekend and Trek can make over 300 million and then we can have More trek in the Future.

305. Elrond L - February 2, 2009

#294: Amen!

To all those complaining about young Kirk — what, he began life as the perfect hero? No flaws in his teens? No growth, no change? Remember the great line is STV: “I need my pain.” Pine said himself that if Kirk starts out heroic, there’s nowhere else to take the character.

How cool was it to see “Star Trek” during the Super Bowl — I cannot wait for May.

306. DNA-1842 - February 2, 2009

We can’t expect the different bits of the trailer to make sense in the order that they have given!

307. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 2, 2009

Oh. By the Way. That was one Hell of a Supper Bowl. Trek and the Supper bowl go Great Together don’t they. Hey Bob Orci. I hope you are already thinking of a New Story for the Next Movie along with the Court. because you are going to get this Question. How are you going to top this Trek Movie.

308. sean - February 2, 2009

#292

Kirk *was* arrogant, in many instances. Half of TMP & TWOK are about Kirk’s overconfidence and the consequences thereof. I don’t see this possible portrayal of Kirk as being that far from the ‘not a boyscout’ Jim Kirk Carol Marcus speaks of.

309. Enterprise Fan - February 2, 2009

Both trailers look awesome. My family and I are jumping out of our skin waiting for May 8. This will mark the rebirth of the entire franchise. Very excited!

310. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

[SPOILERIFIC SPECULATION BELOW.]

Part of the fun is speculating about just how and why Kirk’s fate is change. Is Pike in on the whole thing? Is he made aware of the stakes by Future Spock? We see Pike telling Jimmy Kirk, in no uncertain terms, that he is basically wasting his life if he doesn’t go (to the Academy? on board the Enterprise?). Did Pike also know something that Kirk didn’t know — that if Kirk didn’t take up his offer, the entire future would change far for the worse?

If this is, as oft stated, a timeline-modification story, then there are numerous opportunities to pose the question: Would “X” have done this anyway, and if so, in this way? What opportunities were missed because of the changes made?

And then there is the question of a reset. To reset, or not to reset — that is the question. Has the future been irrevocably changed? Is it true, as I believe Crewman Daniels in ST:E hinted, that certain timelines cannot be changed at all, lest the worst happen?

Could there not be a timeline in which temporal police do not exist, and are these timelines the kind that are the most feared, and is Nero aware of these facts and ready to take advantage of them?

Fun, fun, fun, indeed. There is so much in there, in the movie, already to enjoy. All else, I think, is quibble.

311. Tony Bruno - February 2, 2009

Life long “Trek” fan here. Grew up watching the original series in reruns in the 1970’s. Never really took to TNG for a lot of reasons, but enjoyed DS9 a great deal. Heck, I’ll even admit to enjoying the fourth season of “Enterprise”. I even made some silly CG videos with my son, like my Phase II tribute, and my “Valdez” trailer. Therein lies my Trek-fan cred

That all being said, I’m looking at this movie as a “Universe B” film. It’s clearly what the story intends to be. The Jim Kirk I grew up with still exists on DVDs, and in his own “universe”. This? This is just a way for the filmmakers to tell a different story with characters we think we know.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not sold on everything. I’m still not crazy about something as big as the Enterprise being built on Earth. I’m not sold on the art design, either. Nevertheless, I plan on giving this movie a chance to impress me.

In the end, it’s just a movie, folks. Like it, love it, loathe it, it’s just another Hollywood tent pole production. The sooner we accept that, the sooner we can just relax.

Besides, if it really sucks, we can always just watch ‘Khan’ to cleanse our palettes. :)

312. Hat Rick - February 2, 2009

Typo: I meant to ask why Kirk’s fate is changed, not why his fate is change. (Although, that, in itself, is an interesting question.)

313. McCoy - February 2, 2009

304 and 307 Capt Mike:

You mean the big E looked good in the single 2-second, classic angle shot you saw her? The angle that suggests the fewest changes?

314. Tony Bruno - February 2, 2009

292:

I agree with your assessment here. The “Why are you talkin’ to me, man?” line bugged the heck out of me.

Of course, I think it’s supposed to bother us. Clearly, the focused, “stack of books with legs” Kirk we knew vanished when the Kelvin was destroyed, and the timeline changed. So, regardless of Nero’s failure in killing Kirk in the past, he did succeed in totally screwing up the man he would become. Call it partial success.

Seeing a James Kirk who has lost his way, and then finds it in this alternate timeline, might be a fun ride. Let’s just wait and see.

315. sean - February 2, 2009

#313

I thought the ship looked great in the original shots everyone complained about. But that’s me.

316. rayjay - February 2, 2009

Love the trailer.

Watched with a group of non-Trek fans. They all had a positive reaction and thought it might be a fun movie to see.

317. SChaos1701 - February 2, 2009

Lol…Databrain…you never cease to give me a laugh.

318. Sid James - February 2, 2009

The fact that this is written by uber-hacks Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci means that this could be directed by the ghost of David Lean and I’d still have deep misgivings about it.

319. boborci - February 2, 2009

303. T.U.M. – February 2, 2009

The second draft was green-lit, and it had very few changes.

320. table10 - February 2, 2009

Although the entire thing looks insanely interesting, one part that intrigues me like mad is at the end when Kirk yells from the captains chair “DO IT, DO IT!”

Whatever circumstance surrounds that frantic scene, im absolutely dying to find out :)

321. Katarian Eggs - February 2, 2009

New phaser effect is kinda cool, a little too Star Wars, though.
The shot of San Fransico looks very cool as a futuristic city.
But why the hell would a RED creature evolve on an ice planet? Wouldn’t it stand out so much that every other monster on the planet would feed on these until they were extinct? Makes no sense.
Good to see Jim & Bones sharing a drink.
That bar fight looks predictably lame & the bar set is completely lacking imagination. It seems that throughout the two trailers, it’s very clear that JJ & his team have a very limited imagination for what the future might look like, everything is way too now, without enough change to denote 250 years of growth.

322. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

319. boborci

Thanks! That must have felt great.

323. montreal paul - February 2, 2009

Look… it’s simple….

If you whiners are so hell bend on this ruining YOUR version of Trek.. DON’T GO SEE IT and STOP WHINING. It’s becoming boring. Same old whining over and over and over…

I, for one, will be seeing this movie over and over again… and I am old enough to have watched TOS when it first aired.

324. Bob, The Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - February 2, 2009

re: The Bar Scene/Fight – Is that New Glarus Spotted Cow I see on tap :)

325. Denise de Arman - February 2, 2009

Sid James#318- The name-calling is out of line.

326. Duncan MacLeod - February 2, 2009

318.

I find that very offensive. How many movies have you written? How much of your work has appeared on the big screen? Do you have any clue what the challenges and roadblocks there are in creating movies? I find it ironic that Bob posted very close to that silly comment.

327. Devon - February 2, 2009

Bob, I have a question and I am teetering around with doing some scripts and stuff. I wouldn’t mind doing some script writing.

As far as software goes when it comes down to the drafts, do you & Alex use Final Draft or anything?

328. doubting thomas - February 2, 2009

how do they expect to completely rewrite the characters’ backgrounds, motivations, and personalities, and still call them the same characters? same goes for almostevery other element of the story.

this is a parody, a caricature of star trek.

i am still willing to bet money that this movie will contain the line “beam me up scotty”

329. Mirror Jordan - February 2, 2009

“This is a modern film, with a blockbuster sensibility. ”

That’s why I can’t wait to see it! Let’s make Trek epic again!

330. Devon - February 2, 2009

328 – Tell us what all they rewrote. Go through each character maybe and tell us what it is that they rewrote, including their backgrounds, etc. GO.

331. garen - February 2, 2009

here’s a kind of bottom line measuring stick on this new trailer and the buzz for the film in general.

Of of my friends….she’s a movie fan. a fan of action movies. a fan of dramas. and based on her goals and background…she an fan of acting.

anyway….point is…shes NOT nor has she ever been a Star Trek fan. I’m sure she didnt “hate” trek or skip it on purpose….she probably just never was very intrigued by it.

But two minutes after this new ad ran during the super bowl…i got a text message from her. “i’m so excited for star trek. we have to see that!”

there. proof. everything is falling into place. Mainstream movie goers got the message last night. “I love it when plan comes together”

good job JJ, Bob, Alex, et al. Keep it up over the next few months!

332. boborci - February 2, 2009

327. Devon – February 2, 2009

Yes, we use final draft.

333. demonfafa - February 2, 2009

My problem is the inconsistencies in how the producers explain this movie. Everything we’ve seen so far indicates that it’s more of a reboot, but Orci & Kurtzman deny that every step of the way. It’s not supposed to be a reboot, and everything will be explain in canon, yet it doesn’t look nor feel like it should. Where are the Melville, the Shakespeare and the Hornblower references? What are they exploring? Granted, sometimes new life form concepts aren’t for great movies, but at least there’s some level of intelligence.

As many have said, I will wait until I see the blasted thing before I pass judgment. I’m not sure what my standards will be but I’m trying to be optimistic. TRYING.

334. Paulaner - February 2, 2009

#327 “how do they expect to completely rewrite the characters’ backgrounds, motivations, and personalities, and still call them the same characters?”

In my opinion the background of most Trek characters has never been revealed. Sulu, Checkov, the same Kirk… the TV episodes and the movies didn’t tell us too much of them.
In my eyes, Kirk as a young passionate rebel is perfectly in character, I don’t see much incompatibility with a mature smart, clever, determined and emotional man.

335. Spanish Brock - February 2, 2009

I am agreeing with many comments regarding the general reception of the ad during the SuperBowl. I was with several friends, none of whom are typically interested in Trek. . . until now. They were definitely excited by the movie – “Kirk is hot,” “the movie looks intense,” or “I would like to have J.J. Abrams’ babies.” (Maybe they should put that on one of the posters.)

In the end, I think that this movie has something missing from a lot of Star Trek in the recent past. It just looks fun.

336. Jefferies Tuber - February 2, 2009

I’m impressed with Greenwood as Pike. Talk about an enigmatic, fateful stare.

Bob, This movie has a lot to do with fatherhood, doesn’t it?

337. Devon - February 2, 2009

332 – Cool, I think I’m thinking of getting it. I am playing around with a demo version but it watermarks everything.

On that note, I just read that “The Undiscovered Country” was written through email. I thought that was cool considering how far back that was.

338. Dr. Image - February 2, 2009

Well, I’m now on board with the movie… alt timelines etc., and all.
But if it ends up sucking, the firestorm from many- myself included- will be unrelenting.
There will always be… New Voyages. (Pun intended.)

339. garen - February 2, 2009

333

theyve already explained away your issues. Its not a reboot because it does not erase the story that came before it. it doesnt erase the history that weve already witnessed.

It essentially a continuation of the same timeline that we as an audience have always been watching. The exception is that…instead a sequel that takes place after the previous film…were getting a sequel that *starts* after the previous film but then takes us back in time to tell a new story with characters weve already met. The timeline that WE have watched will not be interrupted.

Familiar with Back to the Future?? This is kind of a crappy example but it may work. In part 1 marty goes back to 1955. In part 2 he goes back to 1955 AGAIN. His second trip back to encounter and interact with those same characters did not make Part 1 moot. His first trip still existed. Our DVDS didnt disintegrate.

340. hitch1969©, producer of "If I Did It, Jr"- a musical for children, starring children. - February 2, 2009

yo orcster was there ever any serious talk about putting shia laboof in the new trekmovies dot com dot gov?

he looks pretty good in your new transformers movie, there bud.

the woemyn!!

=h=

341. boborci - February 2, 2009

340.

No.

342. What is it with you? - February 2, 2009

Bob and Alex provide us the back-story that we’ve been dreaming about for 40 years, and all everyone here can do is complain that it doesn’t depict the Kirk as “a stack of books with legs” stereotype? Not to mention that the canonistas are basing this on one phrase in over 40 years of canon – as if that is the final say on Kirk’s entire life.

I don’t see how a stack of books with legs couldn’t have been a reckless, arrogant young man. My PhD supervisor, the most dedicated and brilliant academic I know, headlined a punk band well into his twenties. But he grew up, found a new passion, and moved on to become one of the most respected minds in his field.

Why can’t we see the same in Kirk? I like this new twist on Kirk, it makes him infinitely more interesting to me. And it makes him more human.

343. Planet Pandro - February 2, 2009

338.

Good doctor, I would expect nothing less. I’m excited, optimistic, I’m looking forward to this movie alot. But if it turns out badly this May…well, in that case…you can all say you told me so.

I’m hoping its worth the wait, anxiety and wonder!

344. Capt. of the USS Anduril - February 2, 2009

In all honesty, I’m sold on seeing this movie, but I won’t be 100% positive until they do this: a slow trailer showing a flyby of the USS Enterprise with either Pine or Nimoy narrating the “Space, the final frontier” monologue with Giacciano’s score in the background. If they give us that, I will be extremely happy.

All in all, I’m happy with the way this thing looks. For one thing, whoever was complaining about the red pulse phasers, maybe you should watch Wrath of Khan again. That’s what they look like, for the most part. They moved the turrets on the dorsal of the saucer, probably to give better line of sight. And the fact that they seem to operate like turrets really makes me happy.

345. databrain - February 2, 2009

299 said:
‘Acutally Enteprise showed the Vulcans evolve out of this illogical attitude, since they were not ‘following the true teachings of Surak”. See the events in the 3 part Forge saga. I did make for some very good character/race development.’

I thought it took them thousands of years to evolve into the logical vulcans of the 23rd century, not 150 years. Besides this does not explain why they were physically weaker than they were in TOS. Remember, vulcans supposedly possessed 10 times the strength of an average human.

346. Robert Gillis - February 2, 2009

This is OBVIOUSLY not canon because no other Trek movie had a commercial in the Super Bowl. Please, friends, we have an explanation for the canon issues — alternate time line. Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE move past “why wasn’t the Enterprise built in San Francisco” and what color the phasers are? The movie looks kick-ass and will revitalize the franchise and be incredible. PLEASE no more canon posts, PLEASE?

347. Weerd1 - February 2, 2009

Mr Orci-
I still want to ask- is the CMO of the Enterprise who dies to make way for McCoy Boyce or Piper? That would be a nice touch I think. If you aren’t allowed to answer, blink your little light once for yes and twice for no…

348. garen - February 2, 2009

345

amen, brother!

349. Robert Gillis - February 2, 2009

And to Mr. Orchi, and Kurtzman, and Abrams, THANK YOU!!!!

350. Robert Gillis - February 2, 2009

#348, sorry, meant to say, Orci! THANK YOU!

351. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

#342 – “Bob and Alex provide us the back-story that we’ve been dreaming about for 40 years”

>>SPOILER ALERT<<

Not quite, What Is It; I don’t know if you’ve been following other script discussion threads but there’s a twist that makes this not quite the literal backstory of what we saw in TOS.

Whether it’s as good as that literal backstory movie would have been (and I maintain that it could have been just as mainstream crowd-pleasing, because it’s all in how it’s told) remains to be seen.

Pretty much anything’s worth it in the service of a good, well-told story. I’ve just got to keep my fingers, toes, and internal organs crossed that this story actually does turn out to be better than the literal one would have.

352. BK613 - February 2, 2009

255
Don’t deify him. Don’t vilify him either.
He was a TV producer that, like Norman Lear would do with All in the Family later, tried to say some things about the world around him while at the same time trying to make a living. In fact, Star Trek gets made in part because NBC refused to air an episode of his previous TV series (The Lieutenant ) which dealt with racism in the Marine Corps.

Did he do it alone? Of course not. But it was his production company and he assembled the cast and crew of the show that would eventually grow into the leviathan it has become.

BTW, season 3 is where they beat you over the head with the message. lol
They were a bit more subtle before.

Like in Court Martial, where a white man is tried by a female JAG officer in front of a court which includes as board members a black man, a Russian (Krasnovsky) and an Indian (Chandra.)

Like in The Menagerie 1 & 2, where the Starbase commander is Jose Mendez.

Like in City on the Edge of Forever, where Uhura is leading/in command of the search party looking for McCoy.

Like Who Mourns for Adonis? where Uhura is the most qualified person on the ship to rig a bypass circuit.

I could go on and on citing examples BTW…

Point is, while these are passe today, at the time they were rare, even ground-breaking, moments for minorities on TV.

353. Trek Nerd Central - February 2, 2009

328 doubting thomas:

You realize, don’t you, that the doubting Thomas in the gospels came around, right? He overcame his skepticism in the end.

No need to judge anything from a couple of whizzy trailers. Sure, the movie could very well stink out the wazoo — or it may be just the kick in pants the franchise has needed for the last few years.

An awful lot of opinions are being formed based on very little evidence. I’m just suggesting we all wait before we judge.

354. hitch1969©, producer of "If I Did It, Jr"- a musical for children, starring children. - February 2, 2009

i find it a bit concerning that something as important as star trek didn’t need a “3rd draft” but in the orcster we trust.

yo orcster – at any point did you consider making the enterprise transform into a corvette or something? and then into a robot?

thats the enterprise – a robot in disguise. more than meets the eye. etc. etc.

you ever do that, man? like get totally wasted and then started writing crossover projects with your characters? i tell you what, back in the 1980s I would have loved a TJ Hooker / Fantasy Island crossover episode. Khaaaaaaaan!

maybe we can get us some shia leboof in cowboys and arabians? that would be kewl. like a mashup, bro. mash those characters up and make a phat beat.

=g=

355. boborci - February 2, 2009

354. hitch1969©, producer of “If I Did It, Jr”- a musical for children, starring children. – February 2, 2009
i find it a bit concerning that something as important as star trek didn’t need a “3rd draft” but in the orcster we trust.

There were more drafts. The question was which one got green-lit.

356. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

#355 OK, I guess I didn’t go far enough with my question Sloppy of me!. After the green light, how many drafts did it take to get to the final?

357. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - February 2, 2009

Hey Bob orci. How are you going to Top this Trek Movie. Everything I see says it will be The Best Ever and thats saying a Lot. So can you top it .

358. SChaos1701 - February 2, 2009

What’s funny is that these (un)”True” Trek fans are decrying a movie that has someone yelling “Wooo Hoo Hoo”, Kirk yelling “DO IT! DO IT!” and getting into a bar fight when at this very moment I am watching an episode of a TV series that they defend with all their being as being so holy that is basically a musical episode, has Spock hanging out with, helping, being on the level with, and jamming out with space hippies, disciplined Starfleet officers swaying around to hippie music, and Kirk even admitting to Scotty that he used to get into trouble when he was their age.

Hmmmmmmmm….funny……

359. Bruce_Wayne - February 2, 2009

I LOVED IT!!! CAN’T WAIT!!! BLOWN AWAY HERE!!

BUT…

to temper my enthusiasm…how does this fit into continuity? Where’s Gary Mitchell? Dr.Piper?
It appears Kirk’s relationship is deeper with Pike than “…I met him once at the academy…”
JTK flirts with Uhura??? WTF??
What about Balance of Terror being the 1st time we see the Romulan empire???

h-e-l-p——————————-

360. krikzil (aka Lixy) - February 2, 2009

NO one defends Way to Eden. I’m a diehard and that episode isn’t even so bad it’s good. ;)

361. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

You think anyone could come within a light year of them space hippies without getting the contact high to end all contact highs?

362. SChaos1701 - February 2, 2009

Personally, I thought it was cool. I liked it. I’m just trying to show the hypocrisy of certain people’s ilk here.

363. Weerd1 - February 2, 2009

359- I hate to say it, but you are about four months behind on the conversation… In short, think “Yesterday’s Enterprise” style timeline shift, and check out the articles on the Countdown comics…

I defend Way to Eden- Spock was hip! He was groovy! What, intellectuals can’t enjoy the arts?
Gonna snap my fingers and jump for joy, got a clean bill of health from Doctor McCoy!

364. krikzil (aka Lixy) - February 2, 2009

#362–well, don’t think it’s hypocrisy. It’s rather apples and oranges — bad eps from a show that ran for 79 versus one new movie.

365. hitch1969©, producer of "If I Did It, Jr"- a musical for children, starring children. - February 2, 2009

no worries, orcster. when i wrote my hit musical – “If I Did It, Jr” – we is talking first draft is final draft.

and are you like me in the sense that when i am writing. I like to get my drink on, and my smoke on? i find that it brings the art out.

i get all kinds of ideas when i am hammered drunk and higher than a kite. some dudes get violent. some dudes take it out on their woman. but not old hitch1969. i am an example of substance abuse done good, for the power of good.

=h=

366. Elrond L - February 2, 2009

#341 boborci:

Thank God!

BTW, really impressed with Pike in the new ad. And Karl Urban is going to steal a lot of scenes, I hope.

367. Peter - February 2, 2009

Does Kirk say “do it do it” or “SPOCK NO!!”

368. CastrolUSA - February 2, 2009

I may be biased, but I thought the grease monkeys advertisement were pretty awesome on last night’s game. If you want to see it, check out the video here http://bit.ly/4Jr2. I am still excited about Star Trek too!!!

369. SChaos1701 - February 2, 2009

364

Yes is is hypocrisy. And, no, it was not a bad episode.

370. Daoud - February 2, 2009

If there weren’t a Bob Orci in our universe, Captain Robau would have had to go back in time and create him. :)

What!?!?! No Shia in a sequel Star Trek movie, even?? :) Why, “Ensign Ricky” has his name all over it!

I do hope that as you and Alex work to continue the storyline, that you can cleverly work in characters like Number One, Colt, Jose Tyler, Drs. Boyce Piper & Dehner, Gary Mitchell, Carol Marcus, Areel Shaw, Ruth, Janice Lester and others that suggest that timelines all have a way of working out they way they always do. Of course, no way to get all of them in there… although imagine a prequel to Mudd’s Women where Kirk encounters Carol, Areel and Janice on Risa… Or not!

Where did you guys get together to watch the Super Bowl?

371. Gary Seven of Nine - February 2, 2009

Go back to the playground, that’s the best venue for name calling.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

318. Sid James – February 2, 2009

The fact that this is written by uber-hacks Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci means that this could be directed by the ghost of David Lean and I’d still have deep misgivings about it.

372. lostrod - February 2, 2009

Thanks for the shots. The commercial itself was so fast I missed several of the images you displayed.

First?

373. Anthony Pascale - February 2, 2009

Sid James
warning for flaming.

374. vorta23492392932939230 - February 2, 2009

275. Boborci – February 2, 2009

” I wonder how the corporation implanted the story we came up with into our minds and tricked us into thinking it was our own? Not that I would put that past current technological abilities.”

Well, to answer your sarcasm with a bit of a reality check — they didn’t have to implant it — they hired you based on a body of work they could conceivably count on to further their values and interests. Its called an ‘institutional conspiracy’ – nobody has to brain wash you because they bet you’re going to deliver what they want when they pick you (and JJ, etc.)

I saw the Transformers. I do hope this movie is not like that one.

I am still rooting for this movie to be good, and I can definitely get on board with a new intrepretation – I just hope the mindless violence enhances the story and not the other way around.

… just felt like answering your defensiveness with some of my own.

375. Kruge - February 2, 2009

hey Vorta

do you wear your tin foil hat with the shiny side on the inside or the outside?

376. CaptainRickover - February 2, 2009

# 346

No chance! :)

377. Alex - February 2, 2009

By the way, is that really the Enterprise or just a generic Constitution-class starship Kirk is looking at being built in the various trailers?

378. vorta23492392932939230 - February 2, 2009

375 Kruge

what part of that lost you? You think a business is run by guessing?

PS shiny always outside.

379. Weerd1 - February 2, 2009

377- If it is the Enterprise, I find it interesting that various crewmembers would be in on its construction. I suppose that would enhance the feeling of loyalty to a ship if you were literally there when the keel was laid. I suppose as a new type of ship you would need your cadets to be familiar with the new systems, and perhaps in on the development and programming.

380. boborci - February 2, 2009

377. Alex – February 2, 2009

Enterprise.

381. boborci - February 2, 2009

374. vorta23492392932939230 – February 2, 2009

“Well, to answer your sarcasm with a bit of a reality check — they didn’t have to implant it — they hired you based on a body of work they could conceivably count on to further their values and interests. Its called an ‘institutional conspiracy’ – nobody has to brain wash you because they bet you’re going to deliver what they want when they pick you (and JJ, etc.)”

Touche!

382. hitch1969©, producer of "If I Did It, Jr"- a musical for children, starring children. - February 2, 2009

yo orcster, speaking in generalities, of course…. but can you answer this question since you’re the dude who wrote the movie. is there intense character development with all the appropriate drama and dialogue in this movie? or is it another formula action flick. or is it maybe both?

what i am asking is if the thinkers in the bunch can expect anything deep and profound in this trekmovies dot org that you wrote. and, did you use any drugs or alcohol in massive amounts during the creative process?

fill us in, put us at ease. of course, no matter what…. i am on record in saying that you aint yella. trust me, i’m a fan, simply from the time and care you’ve taken here at this site over the past 2 years whatever its been. if i wrote a movie (and we may someday convert “If I Did It, Jr.” to the big screen) anyway dude i would just get high and drunk and write some crap and if they didnt like it… let em eat cake!

see what i am saying brother p-touch?

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

383. Christine - February 2, 2009

I saw this when it aired during the Super Bowl. I was like, “YAAAY!!!!!” I screamed so loud and everyone at the party stared at me. It was great. Star Trek ’09 Commercial and a STEELERS WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 8DD

SO. AWESOME. I love the guy who’s playing Pike. SO COOL. His voice gives me a good feeling. -SHOT’D-

GO STEELERS AND STAR TREK!

384. boborci - February 2, 2009

382. hitch1969©, producer of “If I Did It, Jr”- a musical for children, starring children. – February 2, 2009

Formula action flick.

Kidding. The plot lives and dies by the characters more than anything we have ever done.

385. Christine - February 2, 2009

Oh, and BobOrci:

I think it’s so great you’re on this site, getting in touch with fans! :3 Not many people in the business would do that!!

Now let’s get some Trailers on during times /other/ than the Super Bowl… ;) (Especially since football season’s over (boo-hoo. D: )).

386. Weerd1 - February 2, 2009

384- Mr Orci, I know I’m being a pest (re:347). Pre McCoy is it Boyce? Piper? Blink? Blink Blink? :)

387. hitch1969©, producer of "If I Did It, Jr"- a musical for children, starring children. - February 2, 2009

MEMORANDUMB™
to: the orcster
from: hitch1969
re: substance abuse

yo dude what about getting drunk and smoking dope during the creative process like we do?

respectfully,

=h=

388. James Heaney - Wowbagger - February 2, 2009

Jefferies Tuber: C.S. Lewis as a “racist proponent of eugenics”? Have you *read* The Abolition of Man, or are you merely insane?

Or are you an interloper from another universe, working under MWI?

389. Mazzer - February 2, 2009

Hmm, if the Superbowl audience blinked, they would have missed half of those shots.

390. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#297 — What are you talking about. James Kirk was NO FRESH FACED space cadet in TOS? Are you kidding me? What episodes of TOS are you talking about? Can you give me just one episode where was a fresh faced space cadet?????

391. Sam Belil - February 2, 2009

#297 — What are you talking about. James Kirk was NO FRESH FACED space cadet in TOS? Are you kidding me? What episodes of TOS are you talking about? Can you give me just one episode where was a fresh faced space cadet?????

392. T.U.M. - February 2, 2009

Sources say he was never a Boy Scout.

393. Greg2600 - February 2, 2009

Looked good. Only a fast trailer. I just hope Kirk doesn’t kill that giant bug by throwing a rock at a button that closes a door on its head….

394. Trek Nerd Central - February 2, 2009

359. C’mon, you can’t say you’re surprised. Kirk-Uhura sexual tension was ALL OVER the original series. Always looked to me like they had a thing in the past they were still gettin’ over.

395. Jefferies Tuber - February 2, 2009

as a commanding officer in TOS, Kirk was always clipped and fast-talking, expecting the best of those around him. but that could plausibly be a form of overcompensation for his own rascally youth. it all fits.

I think the street talk, sexual tension and action in the new movie is a gale force breath of fresh air. Nearly every character in The Shoulder Pad Generation, except Riker, is an earnest nerd. Just rewatched some extremely painful episodes with Wesley the other day. Duuuuude.

396. COMMANDER KEEN - February 2, 2009

Lots of great stuff packed into a very short trailer. I for one liked the introduction of Kirk and McCoy. This trailer was quite goosebumping good.

397. fred - February 2, 2009

JJ has said before his intention is to make this feel real, and bring the future of Star Trek into a place where it is recognizable as both Trek and our possible future.

Roddenberry would approve. For him it was all about real pople in fantastic situations.

398. Captain Otter - February 2, 2009

Trolls are multiplying like Tribbles around here.

Here is the cold, hard, truth:

Paramount will never, ever, ever make another moment of Trek in the exact same mold of what has come before. The moment has passed. Nemesis killed the franchise.

Like it or not, Trek’s only chance at a future (apart from fan productions) is for JJ to pull a Miracle Max. Anyone who yearns for more studio-made Trek HAS to hope and cheer for this film to be good.

So if you are still pissed that this movies is being made, keep it to yourself. Misery may love company, but go comfort each-other on an anti-new-movie site. There are plenty of them.

Those of us who frequent this site are choosing optimism.

399. Brian Matthews - February 2, 2009

125: I don’t have the belief that we are going to see this movie resolve into the Trek of yore, in whatever manner us fanfolk fervently wish (or demand, in some cases). I would think that if we were to get a glimpse of such it will be in the sequnce with the Kelvin, where we ought to see the (hypothetical) ‘unaltered’ Trek universe. If that seems re-visualized, then all bets are off

400. Johnny - February 2, 2009

I continue to have grave doubts about this film. Everything I see fills me with these doubts. Respect for canon is one such concern. Some basic questons are yet to be answered, like the stick switch car that Kirk drives yet he doesn’t know how to drive one in “A Piece of the action” The bridge doesn’t look the same as in “The cage” Where’s the red bridge rail?? An alternative timeline is one way they are justifing it and I can understand this. Like in the books written by David R George in the Crucible series. (great books) But WHY? Surely they could of made a movie about the earlier life of Kirk, Spock and Mc Coy without changing established canon!! I am worried!!

401. SChaos1701 - February 2, 2009

400

Blah blah blah….

402. Brian Matthews - February 2, 2009

321: Maybe the ice planet creature is amphibious, and came up from under the ice. Its color may have little to do with anything except looking cool against a snowblind background for a MOVIE… ;-)

403. Ryan H - February 2, 2009

#400 – It seems many people continue to post the same negative message without even reading other posts that might address their problem. Mr. Orci said himself that there would be an explanation for everything that seems to violate canon. So calm yourself.

404. VOODOO - February 2, 2009

I really hope this doesn’t turn out to be the Star Trek version of Top Gun.

405. Xai - February 2, 2009

The only thing I disliked was the pacing, but I understand the why of it.

It was not Star Wars
JJ didn’t insult Trek fans
It does honor canon (if you don’t know how, you are not keeping up.)

406. ShawnP - February 2, 2009

Interestingly, I just saw the Star Trek trailer posted on the front page of MySpace, and reading the comments from all the younger people is encouraging in that they voice never having been interested in Star Trek but that this take on it (based on the trailer) piques their interest. This is good news, methinks.

407. tHE tRUTH iS oUT tHERE - February 2, 2009

Good Lord!….Mr. Orci…I don’t know how you do it….knowing you are fan from way back, and have invested quite a lot of yourself in this, I would like to apologize for the immature attacks on your writing…but apologies would recognize those who really just need to go away….the movie looks like it is going to be very exciting…I have non trek friends who are saying it looks like a good movie…I know the nay sayers will say they have the right to be negative…but this movie has wrapped…it’s a done deal…now, all the people who have “migivings” and are “worried” and have a “bad feeling”…well, generally, when you set your mind on a certian path, it tends to lead to your outcome…so at this point, stop bringing us down…after the movie comes out, then critque to your hearts delight…oh, but how will you since you are going to wait till it comes out on DVD if you even see it at all…maybe because you don’t want to spend your hard earned $10 on what could be the best two hours in a cinema…and if you are that concerned with $10….then may I suggest you get off the computer and go to work, but most likely you are at work and not doing your job but sitting around the office giving off your negative vibes which is not a good idea with today’s economy. Bosses tend to let those go that have a negative attitude so why don’t we all just be thankful we have some type of Trek coming our way!….sorry Anthony if this is considered flaming but I have read post after post for the past 6 or more months and after seeing the new trailer and how good this movie has the possibility to be, I had to speak my piece….

408. LostonNCC1701 - February 2, 2009

It is time again for my Half-Serious/Half-Facetious, Half-Speculative/Half-Wishful-Thinking look at the plot of ST:

(Okay, until “Countdown” finishes, the Prolog will remain as I used to have it)

In the wake of Nemesis, the Federation (and, to a lesser extent, the Klingons) and the Romulans got into a better relationship. Not a alliance by any means, but certainly better than it ever has been. There have even been some calls for a movement for reconciliation with the Vulcans. There are some violently against this, led by Nero, who had been a patriotic hero of the Romulans during the Dominion War. Nero, along with other radicals and a few military men, were eventually captured by the Klingons and put on Rura Penthe. Eventually, however, he escaped and with his fellow Romulan extremists (who can easily be identified because of their prison-issue tattoos and shaved heads) hijacked the Narada- a new and horrible weapons ship that is capable of traveling through time and destroying an entire planet (although it still is insignificant next to the power of the Force) . Spock found out about this and “borrowed” (since Vulcans don’t steal) a Federation prototype time-ship to follow him into the past.

Nero realizes that since he will have no supplies he needs to change the past with as little effort as possible. To simply blow up Vulcan would possibly bring in too much trouble, but to go back to the Romulan-Earth War or a similar point in time would be too likely to change the timeline so much that his initial quest becomes irrelevant. So he decides to do the easy thing: Kill James T. Kirk before he is even freaking born. If he is able to kill Kirk before he is born and a trip back to the future reveals that Romulans still aren’t the big bosses of the Galaxy in the new timeline, he’ll go back and do more. Or if Kirk survives he’ll go back and do more. No big deal. He has all the time in the world (heh).

So we go to the USS Kelvin in the year 2233ish, investigating some weird anomalies (including the disappearance and believed destruction of 47 Klingon ships!). It is under the command of Captain Robau, with first officer George Kirk. Just then, Nero’s ship attacks. Caught completely by surprise, the opening volleys of the “battle” lead to the Captain dead and George in Command. He orders all non-essential personnel- including his pregnant wife- to abandon ship not in the escape pods but by using the Shuttlecraft, leaving many of them severely overcrowded. During the escape, some of the crew use their craft to cover the extremely-heavily damaged Kelvin on a kamikaze attack on the Romulans. The Kelvin is further aided by a mysterious ship (Spock’s timeship). It works, but the stress causes Mrs. Kirk to give birth prematurely as her medical shuttle goes into warp to escape. The Narada, although still operational, is badly damaged and escapes through time to safety (some point in time where they can just go orbit some random moon and do some repairs and get ready for their next attempt at destroying the Federation). We’d then see the Time-ship go through time too, probably going ahead to check to see what this has changed in this “new” timeline which is similar but different from the original one. Spock cares about this new Timeline because, quite frankly, it is the logical and moral thing to do.

We’d then go through a short vignette of Kirk and Spock growing up. Spock has some pressures growing up with being Half-Vulcan, Half-Human, but Kirk’s childhood is more interesting. His mother either died or left him with his idiot Uncle, who Kirk despises and proceeds to aggravate by driving his antique car into the future site of a Starfleet Shipyard with “Magic Carpet Ride” by Steppenwolf playing on the radio all along(oh sure, it wasn’t in the trailer, but POST-PRODUCTION, people!). When the Cop (who is wearing a robosuit to enhance the abilities of himself) catches him and brings him back to his Uncle, he gets into big trouble. It is never stated or shown that Kirk was on Tarsus, but it is never directly denied either (although I’m gonna guess he doesn’t, but everyone can fanon up a explanation, I’m sure.) One thing that changes though is that because of his different upbringing, he never feels obligated to join Starfleet, instead hanging around Iowa causing trouble until one day he enters a bar being frequented by new Academy recruits visiting the shipyard. He gets into a barfight after hitting on Uhura and is then accosted by the famed Captain Christopher Pike of the being-built USS Enterprise. Pike talks Kirk into joining Starfleet.

On his way to Starfleet Academy, Jim meets Leonard McCoy, on his way to Starfleet medical. McCoy says he’ll just be an old Sawbones. Jim then begins to call him “Bones”. The name, and the friendship, sticks.

Kirk’s time at the academy is unorthodox. While the Axanar mission, Finnegan, John Gill, Ben Finney and Gary Mitchell aren’t seen or mentioned, they aren’t directly denied either. However, Kirk does cause trouble in the academy: He hires a Orion Hooker (or maybe just an Orion at the Academy on some sort of exchange program… I like the Hooker idea better), he cheats at the Kobayashi Maru and is only saved from expulsion when someone points out that he has shown great original thinking. But still, when first assignments are handed out, he’s left on the ground, primarily because there are still concerns about his conduct with the Kobayashi Maru.

His friend Dr. Leonard McCoy (AKA “Bones”) is able to sneak Jim up to the Enterprise, under Captain Pike and his first officer, Spock. The Enterprise is the most advanced ship in the fleet and this will be it’s first real mission (while this would seem on the surface to eliminate the Talos incident, you could maybe retcon it into having taken place during a shakedown cruise or testing run gone awry). They get a message in from Vulcan about “lightning storms”, causing Kirk to panic about a Romulan attack. He’s right, and when they arrive above Vulcan the Enterprise finds a good chunk of the fleet blown to bits and the Romulan ship drilling into the planet itself (in the future of this new timeline, Picard refers to Wolf 359 as the SECOND worst loss of Starfleet life in history. Also, with much of the fleet blasted up in this new timeline, future sequels will have a explanation as to why the Enterprise is always the only ship in the sector/quadrant/system/whatever). After a brief battle in which the Ship’s chief physician, one Phillip Boyce, is killed (leaving Bones as the chief medical officer), Pike gets a message from Nero asking for a meeting, and since there are transporter problems he goes there using a shuttle, out of which he has Kirk, Sulu and Olsen jump out of to try and disable the drilling.

Kirk and Sulu are able to badly damage the drill (Olsen begins the fine Redshirt tradition), but they are too late and the anomaly black-hole is sent into the planet. Spock beams down to help evacuate the planet, as Kirk and Sulu are then beamed back up (thanks to Chekov’s quick-fix of the Transporter), while Spock continues to save his family down on Vulcan. Jim essentially takes over the ship and attempts to use several methods to try and destroy the black hole, but ultimately fails until Old Spock’s Timeship arrives and closes it just in time. Spock beams back up while most of Vulcan continues to evacuate because of aftershocks from the attack. The Romulans leave (possibly though a time bubble) to regroup. It appears to only be a hollow victory, as the Romulans could still easily try again. Worried about the Romulans coming back, the Enterprise runs like hell. Meanwhile, all the turmoil boils over inside of Spock (Vulcan? Human? Neither? Both?) and he breaks down and throws Jimbo onto a ice planet. This may be because Jim is under the impression he saved Vulcan when in reality it was mainly Deus Ex Spock’s Time Machina.

Meanwhile, on the Romulan ship of DOOOOOOOOM, Nero decides not to kill Pike, because why do that when he can torment Pike with information FROM THE FUTURE! Yes, you will be assassinated in Dallas… err.. wait… I mean, you will be confined into a black box for your entire life and will only be able to answer “yes” and “no” to every question. MWAHAHAHAHAHA! Pike uses some badass words pointing out all the flaws in Nero’s plan, because that’s what he does.

On the Ice Planet, Jim finds himself wandering aimlessly, no doubt cursing about the stupid Vulcan and the stupid emotions he shouldn’t even have. Eventually, he will begin singing “Mr. Tambourine Man”, causing a monster shockingly like the one in Cloverfield to become enraged. Thankfully, old Spock shows up to save his ass. Because that’s how old Spock rolls. A little bit of exhibition follows in which Old Spock proves that he is, indeed, Spock (this may or may not involve a rousing single of “The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins”). Old Spock drops some zen and backstory, and then they go and see the last dude to get stranded on this Ice Planet: Montgomery Scott.

Scotty was transferred (by which we mean “dropped”) on the Ice Planet because he dematerialized Porthos VI. Not the Planet, the Beagle belonging to Admiral Archer. Old Spock totally breaks the Temporal Directive, makes everyone smile, tells Kirk to piss Young Spock off and get command of the Enterprise and then sends them on their way with a “Live Long and Prosper”. The crowd cheers.

Kirk then goes to the bridge, and proceeds to really piss off Young Spock. Then, using the Starfleet regulation, he is able to become Captain. Kirk then announces that Scotty is now Chief Engineer, and tells everyone that from now on, he is the biggest badass in the Galaxy (taking the title from Chuck Norris, who had held it since March 4, 1940). He then hears that the Romulans are doing repairs in a white nebula, probably getting ready to blow up Vulcan again. We then get a correction: The Romulans have just LEFT the white nebula, and have set course…. FOR EARTH (Nero, apparently, has just figured “Ah, hell, screw it, let’s nuke Terra and call it a day”.). Oh… that is a problem.But now that James T. Kirk is in command, no force in the universe can stop the USS Enterprise. Nothing! NOTHING!

We get a gratuitous “prepare for battle” sequence like that in “The Wrath of Khan” and “Nemesis” (come to think of it, that might have been the only good thing in Nemesis’ final battle). The sequence is awesome, and when the DVD comes out Youtube is flooded with remixes of the scene put to such songs as “Eye of the Tiger”, “Flying High Now”, “You’re the Best (Around)”, “Lose Yourself”, “The Touch” and, of course, “The Rocky IV Training Montage in Siberia”.

The Narada appears in Earth Orbit. Awfully nice that Starfleet had sent basically every ship they had to Vulcan to get nice and slaughtered. Now nothing is defending what should be most heavily defended planet in the Quadrant. Oh, what’s that? Earth is always undefended? Never mind then. So Nero orders the Narada to begin drilling. Target: San Francisco (he’s into symbolism). But then, appearing out of the blackness of space: The USS ENTERPRISE.

So, the Enterprise goes one-on-one, mano-a-mano with the Narada. Assisting in the battle, again, is Old Spock’s ship. During the battle, Nero orders the Drilling rig to autodestruct: all power must be used to try and destroy the Enterprise. So the Narada flees into the depths of space, but the Enterprise is in hot pursuit (Chekov uses a Russian analogy to describe the Romulans running away). Kirk beams over to the Romulan ship, frees Captain Pike (who then beams over back to the Enterprise, which he still is technically in command of), and then fights Nero hand to hand. Nero makes the foolish mistake of cutting Kirk’s shirt, making him very angry and unbeatable in hand-to-hand combat. Kirk then proceeds to make Nero launch the black hole things INTO THE SHIP ITSELF (making the fact that the Narada had left Earth orbit a good thing). He then beams out as the Narada is literally absorbed into itself. Nero, saddened, begins to fiddle, then notices that Old Spock’s ship is still out there. Surmising who it really is, he begins to gun for that. Kirk (Pike is in Sick Bay) orders the Enterprise to risk getting caught in the Narada’s event horizon to protect the ship. Needless to say, they save it (because Spock dying again doing anything less than a heroic sacrifice that saves the entire universe would be cop-out). The Enterprise and the Time-Ship race away just in time (as always). Old Spock then sends a message to the Enterprise, although only Kirk and Scotty know who it is since Spock’s voice is so different in his old age. The message: “Jim, it has been an honor serving with you one last time. Live Long and Prosper. Thank You.”, he’ll then time-ship out of there.

In the aftermath (with the Enterprise being repaired in space dock), Pike tells Kirk he has exceeded even his Father, and that he is proud that the Enterprise will next be commanded by such a great leader. Pike himself says he intends to move on, he was in line for a promotion anyway. Kirk puts on the Golden Tunic of Awesome to the cheers of the crowd and walks onto what is now HIS bridge. Spock, fully realizing that he had let his emotions get the best of him, thanks Kirk for what he has done, but asks him how he knew about the regulation to get him removed from command. Kirk says something along the lines that it was something he learned from a “new friend”. He then tells everyone to buckle up, the Enterprise is a ship for exploration, and there is a ton out there to explore.

He then says “Set course for… (pick one: Cestus III /Organia/Eminiar VII/Sherman’s Planet/Ceti Alpha V/Altair IV/L-374/Halkan/”Second Star to the Right”)”.

We then get Pine doing the famous “Space, the Final Frontier” narration. Only one difference: When he’s done, Spock tells him that those are fine, evocative words. Kirk then says the final lines of the first TOS Kirk episode (”Where No Man Has Gone Before”): ” I believe there’s some hope for you after all, Mr. Spock. ”

Warp!

Fade to credits and the musical stylings of Michael Giacchino.

After the credits, we get a brief TOS clip of Majel Barrett as Number One, in tribute.

409. JusticeBoy - February 2, 2009

I have a flask just like Kirk’s!

410. Aragorn189 - February 2, 2009

408,

I hope your speculations turn out to be right. I like your version. We’ll see come May how much is actually true.

411. Publius - February 3, 2009

I think I can explain the Riverside Fleet Yards Issue.

If I recall correctly, we read somewhere that the phenomenon above Vulcan was similar to a prior attack on Earth. I think the scene of San Fran being attacked is the first attack by the Narada on Earth. The Kelvin and Papa Kirk save the day by thwarting the attacking and saving Earth. However, San Francisco Fleet Yards was damaged in the attack and in an effort to decentralize Fleet Operations in the event of another attack, the Yards were moved to Riverside.

Thoughts?

412. NDK - February 3, 2009

I agree with 4 8 15 16 23 42. The fly by is over the Bay Bridge rather than GG. The big structure looks like 24th century Ball Park and the Towers looks like the modern version of Ricon, Infinity etc. in SoMA

413. BK613 - February 3, 2009

412
no it is the GG bridge, Note the bit of beach in the bottom right corner and compare to this:

(large image BTW)

http://www.pilotflying.co.uk/images/golden-gate-bridge.jpg

As you can see it is the same bit of beach…

414. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

413 BK613 — I grant you it’s possible you’re right (we’ll see when the movie comes out), but I reiterate what I say above: SF downtown is by the Bay Bridge, and it’s hard to imagine SF residents allowing the Presidio, the Palace of the Legion of Honor, etc. to be paved over, with skyscrapers built all around.

Come to think of it, it’ll be cool to see these scenes on screen since I’m planning on going to the Metreon and the audience will probably all get excited…

415. krikzil (aka Lixy) - February 3, 2009

#369–“Yes is is hypocrisy. And, no, it was not a bad episode.”

Nope. Simply your opinion. Everyone else’s mileage may vary.

416. CanuckLou - February 3, 2009

Great analysis and I agree with your sentiments Anthony.

….and the adventure continues…

417. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

#414 – Wasn’t there a thrid world war or some other kind of global disaster in between our time and Trek time? Maybe those buildings were destroyed without ANYBODY having to agree or disagree to it.

418. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

#403 – That doesn’t mean it will be a *good* explanation. So unsmug yourself.

419. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

But, then, why does the bridge look the same (whether it’s the BB or the GG bridge)?

420. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

Is it impossible for one landmark to survive a disaster when another doesn’t? During the Blitz, some buildings – like St. Paul’s Cathedral – survived when the ones right next door were turned to rubble.

421. Denise de Arman - February 3, 2009

Loston#408- Wow, great narrative. Only one thing left out: Spock and Spock (Nimoy and Quinto) have a scene together somewhere in the movie. Methinks elder Spock shows up on the Enterprise bridge somewhere in there.

422. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

But not even LostonNCC1701’s masterful narrative explains why little Jim Kirk is the fulcrum on which all of this turns – why would Nero focus on him in the first place? Why would he be the only one who could defeat Nero? These are the questions that plague me. It’s all a bit religio-mystico-Anakinnical, innit? Unless there’s a sizeable rabbit in the hat.

423. Sam Belil - February 3, 2009

#422 — Just for the fun of it ….
Christopher Pike = Quigon Jin
Spock Prime = “Old” Obi Wan Kenobi
Spock = “Young” Obi Wan Kenobi
Nero = Combination of Darth Vader/Palpatine
James Kirk = Luke Skywalker
I have a bad feeling about this ……

424. kirk09 - February 3, 2009

#417—one flaw in your logic…in the Voyager series finale Elder Janeway said to Captain Janeway the Voyager became a museum on the grounds of The Presidio, near Alcatraz…. its common Trek knowledge that in the big quake that destroys Los Angeles, a large percentage of San Francisco becomes an island however The Presidio area remains intact…

425. krikzil (aka Lixy) - February 3, 2009

#421/Denise — “Only one thing left out: Spock and Spock (Nimoy and Quinto) have a scene together somewhere in the movie. ”

That’s a scene I’m looking forward to!

426. jeannie spock - February 3, 2009

Getting more and more disappointed as the time goes on.
I think they have for some reason changed the emphasis of this movie from Spock to Kirk.
Always thought it was going to be centered on Spock’s story – at lease that what we were told before filming. Perhaps Quinto’s performance was not as good as they thought it would be.
Once again Spock gets sidelined by Kirk it seems.

427. sean - February 3, 2009

#369, 415

Sorry, Kirkzil is right. ‘Way to Eden’ is indefensible. I couldn’t even sit through the remaster. CGI can’t erase a space hippies. Well, maybe it can but they didn’t use it correctly.

428. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

Maybe the Presidio grounds are still there, but the building isn’t.

429. sean - February 3, 2009

#426

It’s obviously still very much about Spock (as they made clear in the theatrical trailer). It’s rather difficult in a 30 second spot for the masses to focus on both. No need to panic.

430. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

420 T.U.M. — The Blitz involved conventional weapons, not nukes.

Good catch, too, #424 kirk09

Anyway, it’s a movie, and one in which they’re fiddling with canon to some degree, so if they want to depict SF with all these skyscrapers near the Golden Gate bridge rather than near downtown and the Bay Bridge, they can. We’ll see when the movie comes out. I just think this view is more reminiscent of the downtown view from the Bay Bridge. To me, imagining the view as over the Golden Gate bridge is like seeing a shot of a future New York with a bunch of skyscrapers in the middle of what used to be Central Park — doesn’t jive.

431. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

^ I mention the nukes thing because I always figured that WWIII in the ST universe involved nukes.

432. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

330 and 334

kirk is supposed to be a bookworm intellectual character, an encyclopedia on legs, calm and contemplative. seriously, have you people ever seen star trek? scotty’s the bar brawler, not kirk. kirk witnessed a massecre as a child, was rescued by the enterprise under captain april, and aspired to be in starfleet ever since. a model officer, not a 2-dimensional rebellious youth stereotype. the character in this movie is not kirk. it is what people remember kirk to be, without having ever payed attention to the show. a caricature, a spoof, a knockoff.

433. sean - February 3, 2009

#424

I don’t think it’s ‘common Trek knowledge’ – I certainly don’t recall any dialogue stating that an earthquake dislodged San Francisco into an island. In fact, based on footage from both The Voyage Home and TNG I’d say that definitely did not happen.

434. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

423 Sam Belil — so, who’d Darth Maul? General Grievous? Jar Jar Binks?

Wait, I don’t want to know the answer to the last one….

435. sean - February 3, 2009

#432

Guess you never watched Trek either, since no episode ever established April or the Enterprise being involved in the Tarsus massacre. We’ve also never seen anything that indicates he always aspired to be a Starfleet officer. TWOK established he was ‘never a boyscout’ and that the stack of books wasn’t above cheating on his final exam. The ‘model’ officer disobeyed orders on more occasions than I can count, and wasn’t above breaking the Prime Directive. You’re holding to a *very* narrow interpretation of ‘canon’ and the character’s traits.

436. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

333

“theyve already explained away your issues. Its not a reboot because it does not erase the story that came before it. it doesnt erase the history that weve already witnessed.”

but that’s exactly what it does, it ignores everything that was said in the original series that happened before the series. read this page and tell me how much of it isn’t erased by this movie:

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/James_T._Kirk

hell, the only thing this movie leaves intact is “enterprise”. and that’s if you exclude the records on the defiant that said that archer would attend the dedication of the enterprise when kirk was 12, and that sato would be killed at the tarsus massecre the next year, which kirk witnessed.

437. sean - February 3, 2009

#436

As others have explained before me, all those events had to occur in order for any of what we see in the movie to happen. And honestly, you’re going to complain about an illegible screen graphic being contradicted? Really?

438. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

even if we assume that there’s an in-story explanation that changes the whole timeline from kirk’s childhood on, which is a downright hackey thing to put in the story anyway, how can the characters themselves, their personalities, not be completely rewritten by this?

this production team just grabbed whatever old franchise they thought would make money, decided it was stupid and outdated, and decided to “fix” it by changing everything about it except the names. this has been the way things are done more and more in american movies for more than 20 years. should have let the brits do this movie, look as the marvellous things they’ve done with doctor who, keeping the spirit of the franchise and characters the same without simply imitating a dated feel. you don’t have to either demolish it or make a museum out of it, you can let it evolve and grow.

439. sean - February 3, 2009

#438

And yet, I can point you to more than a significant number of Doctor Who fans who feel the new show is an abomination, a dumbed-down version of their favorite show. I’m not saying I agree with that assessment, but to act as though everyone has embraced Doctor Who because it so perfectly captures the original isn’t that solid a position to take. Doctor Who just happens to have a built-in reset button to make drastic alterations to the story. In fact, I’d say the Abrams team took a page from the Doctor Who playbook in their concept for this new story.

440. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

we are talking about a show that has influenced our cultural evolution, has provided a mind-expanding experience to the few of us who understand it, which has disseminated through our culture and enhanced our understanding, and at the time when that kind of conciousness-raising is desperately needed, these people want to turn it into a joke to make a few bucks. that makes me sick. like when a politician uses the words of a long-dead moral philosopher to deceive people into giving them their votes, without knowing or caring what the man meant.

441. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

people who saw doctor who as silly and liked that are bound to be dissapointed by the new series. it kept to the spirit of what the show was, not what the audience thought it was. this is doing the reverse, imitating the audience’s shallow view of the show instead of keeping true to the actual show. of course i know that keeping true to an intelligent franchise is almost certain to doom it, as seen by the responses of the mindless masses to the star wars prequels, enterprise, serenity, even the first trek movie. but i think shows like doctor who and the next generation show that there is a sweet spot that can be reached where it can be fresh without selling out, be entertaining without being stupid, be popular without being hollow.

442. sean - February 3, 2009

#440

And again, show me the proof. Show me where they’ve dumbed it down. And please, don’t refer me to a 2 minute trailer. Trailers are meant to be fast-paced and ambiguous. The movie could be horrible, I’m not closed to that possibility. But as they say, the proof is in the pudding. You don’t even have evidence that they ignore the events you’re lamenting have been forgotten. It appears we spend more time with the 20-something Kirk than the 12-14 year old Kirk that witnessed the horrors of Tarsus IV. Who is to say that this movie will erase that event? How do we know that just because we don’t *see* Gary Mitchell he isn’t there? You’re jumping to a whole mess of conclusions before knowing the truth.

443. sean - February 3, 2009

#441

With all respect, most of the complaints about the new Doctor Who are that it is silly in comparison with its predecessor, not vice versa.

444. Jeff - February 3, 2009

I think this spot looks awesome and the more I see of this film, the more I’m prepared to give this a chance. We all know that the producers are setting up a sort of alternate timeline where things aren’t going to unfold the same as in the original series, so what’s the point in bemoaning every little change that comes up? Just go and see the film with an open mind.

445. SChaos1701 - February 3, 2009

Obviously, doubting thomas isn’t that big of a Trek fan because he would know that in Way to Eden he tells Scotty that he used to get in trouble back when he was the hippies age. And they look like their mid 20’s.

446. T.U.M. - February 3, 2009

The first series of New Who with Christopher Eccleston was hands-down the best television I’ve ever seen. Just the right blend of tragedy and gravitas without being gratuitously and pretentiously “Oh! Look! We! Are! So! Gritty!”**; a celebration of the wonders we all hope are waiting out there in the universe, and a sense of humor.

Of course, once that year was over it all devolved into laurel-resting fanwankery, but I still have the DVD’s.

A bit off topic, but I don’t like to waste an opportunity to say it.

(**I’m looking at you, Mr. Moore)

447. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

that’s like when star wars fans complained about the prequels, and all their complaints were exactly the things they enjoyed in the originals

you have noticed that cadet kirk is on board the enterprise with ensign chekov in this movie, have you not? kirk sure isn’t meeting pike for the first time when getting command of the enterprise, and he’s skipping his service as an instructor of some sort at the academy as a lieutenant, his service on the republic and the farragut. and don’t get me started on production design.

448. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

“used to get in trouble”? the kirk in this trailer isn’t just a young guy having some fun and being a bit stupid, pike’s speech makes it clear that he’s an outright failure with no ambition who’s likely to end up in jail if he doesn’t turn his life around. that’s not kirk. that’s tom paris.

449. sean - February 3, 2009

#447

Sorry, but there’s no evidence of most of what you’re saying. Nothing we’ve seen precludes his being an instructor of some kind. The line in ‘The Menagerie’ was vague and certainly gave wiggle room for him meeting Pike more than once. We don’t know if he serves unseen aboard the Farragut or the Republic. As for cadet or Ensign Chekov, he’s clearly much, much younger than Kirk by virtue of the actors’ ages (nearly a decade between them, as opposed to the 5 years between Shatner and Koenig). In fact, Yelchin is closer to the character’s age than Koenig was. So again, I cry facts not yet in evidence.

450. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

in “where no man has gone before”, mitchel and kirk discussed kirk’s lieutenant kirk’s class at the academy, in “court martial” kirk explained that he served on the republic as an ensign, alongside ben finney, and in “obsession”, the entire episode revolves around when kirk served as navigator on the farragut inder captain garrovick, straight out of the academy.

i’m not talking about checkov’s age, i’m talking about the fact that chekov entered the academy a full 13 years after kirk did, yet here, he outranks kirk.

451. I am Kurok! - February 3, 2009

Has anyone looked at the photo of Kirk at the shipyard in detail??

There’s a lot going on there: to coin a phrase, “Fascinating. . . . .”

452. Weerd1 - February 3, 2009

Look- if stick in the keister Picard can have a bar fight as a younger man, I have no problem with stack of books with legs Kirk doing it- particularly in regard to someone like Finnegan. I don’t think it’s a stretch to say the same Kirk who was academically adept, and as an instructor demanding of his students, didn;t let his hair down at night. After all, Gary WAS able to aim a little blonde lab tech at him, and even fanon says he had a kid with her…

Add to this the new secenario of not having a Starfleet father in his life pushing him in the right directions- not having lived through something like the Tarsus massacre- well, he’s a classic underachiever. I think that all makes sense- I am just not yet convinced it was the best story to tell. I hope the film will prove itself to me.

453. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

basically, we’re stuck with the idea that nero goes back in time and does something which seems to result in data still being alive, then spock goes back in time to see a timeline where the construction of the enterprise is postponed by a decade and relocated, with the design radically altered, and kirk’s life taking a very different turn from before, with his entry into the academy postponed by a decade or more, and so on and so fourth. there is no reason to do this unless the filmmakers looked at star trek and said “this sucks, we’ll have to redo it completely to make it work”, which is a pretty sure sign that they shouldn’t be making star trek at all. the only way it can work if they COMPLETELY steal the plot of “of gods and men” and have it revert at the end of the movie.

454. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

weerd, picard had his barfight in uniform. this kirk probably spent the night on a park bench. pike’s looking at him as a loser with potential. like i said, tom paris, not james kirk.

455. sean - February 3, 2009

#450

Again, I’m not saying the events will take place exactly when they did or how they did. It’s been established that Nero’s time travel will alter certain events. However, it also doesn’t prevent those events from taking place at a latter date. Mitchell’s discussion with Kirk was in the original timeline. Even if we put that aside, it’s not made completely clear *when* Kirk was an instructor, other than it was when Mitchell attended the academy. It doesn’t necessarily mean they attended at the same time. Kirk could have easily returned to Earth to teach for 6 months.

456. Weerd1 - February 3, 2009

454- Agreed; Not Jim Kirk Prime; new universe, new rules. The question will be whether or not I buy the transformation of punk-Kirk to Captain Kirk. To be fair, it is pretty Kirkian to take control of his situation and make it work for him. Perhaps his drive to get through the academy quickly makes him the grim Kirk we knew…?

And, facing facts- Tom Paris was a Kirk clone. Look at Voyager episodes like “Future’s End” where Paris and Tuvok are very obviously being written in the vein of a young Kirk and Spock- I was just waiting for the Rice Picker comment. Indeed, I think it was one of the biggest mistakes Voyager made, not exploiting the similarites with Paris and Tuvok to Kirk and Spock, and putting the two of them in more episodes.

457. AJ - February 3, 2009

453:

The construction of the E in Iowa, and its “San Francisco” plaque are fully in line with canon. A ship can be built anywhere before it’s registered somewhere.

As for the OGAM reference, I also thought it was strange that a “Kill Kirk’s parents” scenario was issued as fanfic before JJ’s plot was officially released. Go figure.

I don’t think JJ and team said “it sucks.” If they had, they wouldn’t have taken the job. I think JJ wanted to put Kirk more into the mode of Luke Skywalker: A promising, brilliant young man stuck in Podunk. inspired to greatness by a mentor, and sucked into world-shattering events that are directly involved with his family’s destiny.

Granted, Kirk’s original TOS history is interesting, but it’s a patchwork affair, with different writers tossing in their 2 cents, and fans piecing it together chronologically. Ruth, Finnegan, Carol, The Republic and the Farragut. No-one ever actually wrote a backstory for the guy. Spock had better luck.

458. doubting thomas - February 3, 2009

you’re agreeing with me and you don’t even know it.

459. Planet Pandro - February 3, 2009

# 456-

That Tuvok was a real freakosaurus…

460. BK613 - February 3, 2009

450
“in “obsession”, the entire episode revolves around when kirk served as navigator on the farragut inder captain garrovick, straight out of the academy.”

Now see this is where people go wrong, assuming two pieces of dialog mean something they don’t actually say.

McCoy: “I was speaking of Lieutenant James T. Kirk of the starship Farragut. 11 years ago, you were the young officer at the phaser station when something attacked.”

Kirk is serving on the Farragut 11 years prior to Obsession.

Kirk: “He was my commanding officer from the day I left the academy.”

Pretty explicit. But how many commands did Garrovick have between Kirk leaving the academy and the attack on the Farragut? Was Garrovick the captain of the Republic first before becoming the Farragut’s commander?

The two pieces together just don’t add to Kirk serving on the Farragut since Day One out of the academy.

461. AJ - February 3, 2009

458:

I know it. ;-)

462. BK613 - February 3, 2009

455
I agree about the Kirk-as-instructor-later bit. In fact, if we want David Marcus to be in his mid-twenties, five years after would be good.

463. BK613 - February 3, 2009

Addendum to 462: Assuming Carol Marcus is the lab tech that is

464. BK613 - February 3, 2009

430
You really can’t see much of the Presidio in that shot anyway. Just the very NE corner. But what you can see isn’t covered with skyscrapers so there is that. I agree that the skyline is not the attractive one of today but some changes would be expected, given both the passage of time and San Fran’s preeminence in the 23rd century.

465. LostonNCC1701 - February 3, 2009

I’ll have to remember to include a “Spock/Spock” thing in my next revision, whenever that is.

466. Spanish - February 3, 2009

Cloverfield in Star Trek Trailer !!

Find in http://www.cstse.es/?p=2742

467. T'Cal - February 3, 2009

Re #253, 320, etc.

Listen very closely and you’ll realize that Kirk doesn’t yell, “Do it! Do it!” He actually says, “Spock! Do it!

468. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

464 BK613 — “You really can’t see much of the Presidio in that shot anyway. Just the very NE corner.”

No, sorry, but no. Look again at the aerial shot that you posted in #413:
http://www.pilotflying.co.uk/images/golden-gate-bridge.jpg

There, you can clearly see that the NE area of the Presidio (to the east of the Golden Gate bridge itself), with a hill where the Palace of the Legion of Honor is located. That wooded hilly area is not visible in the still from the movie, but it should be *if* it’s a shot from over the GG bridge. On the other hand, the SF downtown where the Bay Bridge comes in is all flat, just like the movie still depicts.

Above, you mention the beach area, but beaches, jetties and piers are the most malleable of geographical features, whereas hills are more permanent.

I’m standing by this: Either the movie still is of the downtown by the Bay Bridge, or ILM totally fudged SF geography in order to make it by the Golden Gate bridge (which is conceivable; it wouldn’t be the first time).

469. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

@ 468 ^ Oops, sorry, I mean the Palace of Fine Arts. My bad.

470. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 3, 2009

And by the way, a campus of ILM is located right there by the Palace of Fine Arts in the Presidio, so it would be very ironic if they fudged the geography!

471. doubting thomas - February 4, 2009

i fail to see your point, 460. but you proved mine pretty well.

472. mr. mugato - February 4, 2009

That is – without a doubt – the ugliest “future” San Francisco I have ever seen. Looks like the world is very much over populated and very polluted in the new Star Trek universe.

473. doubting thomas - February 4, 2009

of course. grittiness is fashionable. diddn’t you see every futuristic movie to come out in recent years? utopian society isn’t cool enough. intelligence is out of style

474. mr. mugato - February 4, 2009

Looking at the fly over GGB pic and comparing it to the weapon attack academy in foreground shot I am starting to wonder if there are numerous time lines in this movie. As in, every time Nero attacks his actions create a new altered time line.

475. Weerd1 - February 4, 2009

468- do we know the geography hasn’t changed in 250 years? Earthquakes, WWIII, historical preservation/restoration, the razing of the area after ILM became a Genetic control point under Colonel Greene… lots of possibilities!

476. Devon - February 4, 2009

472 – “Looks like the world is very much over populated and very polluted in the new Star Trek universe.”

Or it just has fog…. yeah.

473 “of course. grittiness is fashionable. diddn’t you see every futuristic movie to come out in recent years? utopian society isn’t cool enough. intelligence is out of style”

What does the issue of a city having fog have to do with intelligence?

477. Devon - February 4, 2009

432 – For whatever, you are bending past stuff to fit your complaints against this new movie for no reason. In fact I am not even sure you have all of your facts straight. Oops.

478. doubting thomas - February 4, 2009

474

THAT would be an interesting plot element. but again, it would require a “yesterday’s enterprise” style reset button ending. no room for sequels there.

479. McCoy - February 4, 2009

Ughh.

Kissing is fine. ….but I really don’t want to see Kirk in his underwear or mounting some chick, opening his mouth above her breasts.

I don’t see how this makes me want to take my kids to it. So, it’s not for the older generation (where’s the continuity) and it’s not for the under 13 kids. Hmmm. That leaves the big demographic in the middle that is usually targeted for products. So the movie is likely more “product” than “must-see” science fiction goodness?

Say what you will, maybe you are clouded by the fact that you are the demographic, but this movie currently appears designed mostly for the 18-34 demographics. Yes, I am not a fan of movies that from the onslaught, “target” specific demographics. It’s supposed to be about the story (science fiction), not 90210 in space.

I don’t agree that Trek is only about the characters. There has to be a “save the whales” or ironic sci-fi message here otherwise it’s not Trek.

And no, Han Solo never mounted Leia.

480. BK613 - February 4, 2009

468-470
I did a quick photo comparison showing the commonalities (labeled A-F) between the screen shot and “current” San Fran:
A – “submarine” shape
B – Estuary
C – boxy building on “causeway”
D – beach curve
E – marina
F – Palace of Fine Arts

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/09shfk5i141wAQ3FbFHCUg?authkey=2s2RO2EEhJk&feat=directlink

I also used GoogleEarth to estimate the area visible and the location of four of the buildings (1-4 in both jpgs)

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-iuQZVW74WYBCNffVx9UQw?authkey=2s2RO2EEhJk&feat=directlink

Hopefully these will clarify what I have been saying

481. BK613 - February 4, 2009

471
The point was that you are ASSUMING that Garrovick commanded the Farragut when Kirk left the Academy. That detail is not in the dialog.

BTW you also claimed that he was the navigator. That also isn’t in the dialog. Only that he was one that was supposed to be firing the phasers. That could have placed him at the navigator’s station, the helmsman’s station or even down in the forward phaser room.

And my point is that filling in the details with your imagination is not canon.

482. doubting thomas - February 4, 2009

completely irrelevant. the point is he did not captain the enterprise as soon as he left the academy, he had a long career in starfleet, so this film absolutely does not, as sean was arguing, fit into the existing timeline (which the production design already makes clear), and is therefore disrespectful to the series, negating 24 seasons of television and ten movies to a mere alternate timeline that never happened, in an attempt to make the show better than the peice of crap this production team seems to think it was.

483. Einthoven - February 4, 2009

I wonder how they are not ashamed to label that utter bullshit STAR TREK.

And I wonder how people who bashed ENTERPRISE now love that unimaginative, uninspired bad idea of a reboot.

TERMINATOR 4, WOLVERINE and ANGELS AND DEMONS will send this monstrosity to hell, exactly where it belongs to.

484. Xai - February 4, 2009

483. Einthoven – February 4, 2009

Why be such a troll?

485. Xai - February 4, 2009

482. doubting thomas – February 4, 2009

unless you have jumped ahead in time and reviewed the movie and returned, how do you know it’s crap?

Your 482 post is all assumptive. Poor form to try and make a real point.

486. McCoy - February 4, 2009

485 Xai. “unless you have jumped ahead in time and reviewed the movie and returned, how do you know it’s crap?”

My guess is that from what we already know of the film, it has met his definition of Trek crap.

Crap is not the word I would use, but I believe I have enough information to know that not matter how “good” the story is or how “tight” the film is crafted, it is not the Trek movie I would have wanted.

There’s only one thing that changes my mind: altered production design at end of film to **better** match classic TOS.

487. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 4, 2009

480 BK613 — By putting the two views of SF, then and now, in the same frame, I agree with your assessment. Previously, I’d done my “side by side” comparison by flicking between open tabs. Good job! And that means that the captions above have been correct all along, too.

488. T'Cal - February 4, 2009

McCoy: “My guess is that from what we already know of the film, it has met his definition of Trek crap.”

The key phrase here is “My guess.”

489. mr. mugato - February 4, 2009

You guys have to come to terms with something. This is a three picture deal. Probably a nine picture deal if it makes money.

It doesn’t “snap-back” at the end. This will play out in an alternate universe that is vastly different from the TOS universe.

They have taken certain elements of Star Trek and melded (oops) them with their favorite elements of Star Wars. They admit it readily.

Hate it. Love it. Doesn’t matter. Star Trek has been the goose that lays the golden egg at Paramount since the TOS reruns took off. This is business. Not art. Utopian philosophy be damned – show me the money!

490. Xai - February 4, 2009

486. McCoy – February 4, 2009

Thanks for stepping in and defining it all.

I suspect that the “my guess…” portion of your statement is the only thing allowing you to view this movie. That small hope that this may all end with a flash and Kirk wakes up on (the real) McCoy’s diagnostic bed in all it’s classic 1960’s goodness and says “Bones….. ihadsuch… a… dream.”

I’d rather judge the movie as a whole, rather than assume the worst before the theater darkens. I guess that’s just me.

491. McCoy - February 4, 2009

490 Xai

Just because we say it could have **better** matched classic Trek, does not mean we wanted the set from the 60’s. The bridge, gadgets and big E could have been much closer and updated with details and textures without using the EXACT dated items from TOS. The solutions are out there.

For a lot of us, that’s a big part of Trek. I bet even you would have had a better experience at the film, as a whole, if the design solutions were closer.

492. BK613 - February 5, 2009

487
Good to know that they have perfected earthquake-proof buildings in the 23rd century. :-)

493. doubting thomas - February 5, 2009

there was nothing 1960s about star trek, xai. real trek fans know this. it just had the misfortune of being made then. that’s not a limitation anymore. this movie could have been the 2260s masterpeice it should have. instead, it will reek of the 2000s.

494. Jefferies Tuber - February 5, 2009

388. James Heaney – Wowbagger

Lewis was a complex man. I’m familiar with the book, but Natural Law was also cited as the basis for Eugenics and race/class stratification. MANY otherwise important people in Anglo-American history supported Eugenics based on then fashionable Darwinist theory. But Lewis gets a pass because he wrote kids books and converted to Christianity.

The Narnia books are extremely occidental and overflowing with not always benign racist ideas.

Google “eugenics, c.s. lewis” and review the evidence for yourself.

495. Xai - February 5, 2009

#493 Doubting thomas

Sorry, you just threw out any credibilty you might have had when you tried to define who is a “real” Trek fan or what they supposedly know.

496. Xai - February 5, 2009

491. McCoy – February 4, 2009

I have no problems with the design elements so far.
I can accept an extension of TOS in an alternate universe and as for a story-telling technique for this franchise, I think this was a very good idea. May will ultimately tell the tale…. But I go in with optimism.

497. doubting thomas - February 5, 2009

it can only be a good idea if you are not a star trek fan, because the reasoning will go like this:

star trek was old and stupid

this erases star trek and makes it new

therefore, this is a clever way to make star trek not stupid

whereas a star trek fan sees it this way:

star trek was ahead of it’s time, and ahead of our time. a show of the future.

this erases star trek and makes it current instead of innovative and futuristic

therefore, this is disrespectful to star trek, and turns a show that raised our collective conciousness into a joke.

you see star trek as of the past. fans see star trek as of the future. modernising it to you is an upgrade. to us it’s a downgrade. dong ma?

498. databrain - February 6, 2009

497-Perfectly stated.

Without that futuristic feel, trek is nothing. That is kind of why enterprise was an abysmal failure. Characters like ‘trip’ totally devoured the futurism of trek in favour of some quasi-modern george bush post/911 sentimentality. It felt like a modern show in space costumes. Hearing kirk say ‘why are ya talkin to ma mang’ seems very silly and backwards and un-futuristic.

499. databrain - February 6, 2009

495:

There are haters of genes vision, and lovers of JJ’s ‘revision’. I would describe you as the latter. That is not trek, it is something with a label resembling trek but keeping in mind that the label is not the essence, and it was always the essence that made trek what it is. Not something that catered to fans of LOST or some other modern show that needs its characters to be ‘edgy’ and gung ho bruce willis.

500. Xai - February 6, 2009

Databrain, Doubting Thomas,

Really.

Neither of you know me, yet want to define me as a non-fan or a certain type of fan. Sorry, you don’t get to label me or anyone but yourself.
Like many, I sat and enjoyed TOS in the 60’s, revisited the reruns in the 70’s, built the models, recorded the shows, watched every movie, rode shotgun with Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer and enjoyed every moment.
I am optimistic about this film and we’ll see what May brings. It doesn’t erase a thing in real life or in the Trek universe. It extends it.
I can’t make either of you see this or accept it… and I don’t care if you do. But you both need to aware that your opinion is not fact. No one’s is.
Statements like “it can only be a good idea if you are not a star trek fan, because the reasoning will go like this: star trek was old and stupid…” or “There are haters of genes vision, and lovers of JJ’s ‘revision’. I would describe you as the latter. That is not trek… “is very closed minded.

Like I said, go or don’t…. but don’t define me or tell me what to think.

501. Anthony Pascale - February 6, 2009

databrain
warning for trolling

you cannot declare who are real or not fans of trek past present or future. You are not a better fan than anyone else.

502. Rocket Scientist (was cellojammer) - February 6, 2009

I’m looking forward to this movie. I anticipate enjoyng it quite a bit, even though it diverges from the look and even some of the “historical” details of the original. At first that bothered me a little, but after thinking about it, I can accept a new timeline because it provides a clean slate for our beloved characters. Sure, the hardcore fan in me would love for this to slot right into the established continuity, but I understand that 40 + years of this stuff is a veritable minefield for a storyteller.

As I see it, Mr Orci and Kurtzman were faced with a difficult challenge and solved it brilliantly. Apparently not to everybody’s liking, but that doesn’t make it any less ingenious. It’s consistent with what’s happened before in the Trek universe and doesn’t erase a thing. My guess is that original timeline we hold so dear will be in the safekeeping of Spock Prime.

So bring on the movie. Let’s get the new adventures of the USS Enterprise and her crew underway!

If this makes me less of a fan, so be it. I won’t lose any sleep. I just want to enjoy Star Trek (and I think I’m gonna!)

503. doubting thomas - February 8, 2009

501, there is only one kind of fan. someone who enjoys the franchise for what it is. a person who likes the original series because it is old is not a fan. likewise, a person who dislikes the original series because it is old, but enjoys this new movie because it is new is also not a fan. star trek is not a show of the 60s, or a show of this decade, but a show of an era of human understanding that has not yet arrived. fans know that. that’s why this movie is upsetting to us, it treats the show as something old to be made new. it basically shows that the makers of the movie did not make the movie because they like star trek, but because they dislike star trek, and want to fix it

i still say the wachowski brothers should have made this movie.

504. doubting thomas - February 8, 2009

502, i can accepot a new timeline too. what i cannot accept is the reason they chose to create a new timeline. they saw that as a clever way to make a star trek movie without having to keep anything more than the few details the public remembers from reruns they never paid attention to, and throw out the rest, which is obviously old and stupid and nobody wants to see it. so they’ll take out everything that made it star trek except the names and replace the rest with typical 00s special effects blockbuster stupidity.

i think i may have to refer to this movie by a much more appropriate title:

“star track”

505. Xai - February 8, 2009

#503, 504 Doubting thomas

we get it, you don’t like it but you still cannot define other people here, regardless what they think or what you think of their opinion. If you have further concerns about it, I suggest you email Anthony Pascale (#501). He owns the place. Tell him all about it.

506. doubting thomas - February 9, 2009

i don’t see what’s so difficult to understand about the idea that someone who does not like star trek cannot be a star trek fan

507. Xai - February 9, 2009

If you are referring to me, I am a fan… but it’s not for you to define how as in #503 above.

508. doubting thomas - February 10, 2009

of course it’s not for me to define how. it’s already defined. a fan of something is a person who likes something. someone who does not like something cannot be a fan of it. this is the agreed upon definition that had been used for decades.

if you want to call yourself a star track fan, go ahead.

509. Xai - February 10, 2009

I am not a fan of trolls. Nice try.

510. doubting thomas - February 10, 2009

well, enjoy your star track movie, i’m going to wait until the next star trek movie is made.

511. TREK MOVIES:”STAR TREK” Y SU NUEVA BANDA SONORA. « AMIGOS TREK CHILE - May 8, 2009

[...] TV Spot #2 (aka Super Bowl commercial) [...]

512. View the Episode of Witch Mountain Movies in the Best Technique to Download Safety | Destroy Adware - May 28, 2009

[...] Star Trek Super Bowl Commercial (Officially) Online &#43 TrekMovie [...]

513. Manuel Alvarado - February 18, 2010

First time in Star Trek history to see the Enterprise with her guns blazing.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.