New Star Trek “Going Down” TV Spot Video + Screenshots & Analysis | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

New Star Trek “Going Down” TV Spot Video + Screenshots & Analysis April 13, 2009

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

Over the weekend Paramount started airing a new 30-second TV commercial, which is the 6th TV spot for the new Star Trek movie. Paramount have not yet made it available, but video is now online. Check it out below with TrekMovie.com’s usual screen caps and analysis.

 

 

"Going Down"
With the tagline “This is not your father’s Star Trek" Paramount is definitely trying to appeal to that new mainstream audience who may not be interested in Star Trek.

Screencaps & analysis
[SPOILERS]

This new TV spot has a few new shots, mostly extensions of scenes we have seen before. Below is a breakdown of all the new stuff in this commercial. [NOTE: caps are based on best video available - will be updated if/when Paramount provide better source].

Click images to enlarge


Kirk talks to Pike before boarding shuttle to Starfleet Academy


Sulu finds out he isn’t the only one with a cool weapon during the fight on the Romulan drilling rig above Vulcan (Kirk fights his own Romulan in background)




Sulu falls off platform without a chute, Kirk jumps after him


Weapons being loaded on USS Enterprise during battle with Narada



Kirk now in command after returning from Delta Vega (note Scotty in background right of lower shot)


Crewperson gets blown into space during USS Kelvin’s battle with Narada

 

More trailer analysis and details
And in case you missed it, check out our previous shot-by-shot analyses:

(Video cap thanks to  CinemaClockHD)

Comments

1. neal - April 13, 2009

Yabba!

2. John - April 13, 2009

very nice trailer and shows us abit more everytime

3. S. John Ross - April 13, 2009

No strong response to this one either way. As always, I hold out hopes that the trailers are more about selling tickets to – rather than representing the character of – the film.

Here’s hopin’.

4. Meni - April 13, 2009

It’s about time Star Trek grew a pair. This movie is going to kill at the box office.

5. Scotty 7 - April 13, 2009

I am the father . . . and it looks like the Star Trek I have always dreamed of!

6. sconetone - April 13, 2009

Very…….flashy

Roll on the 8th :-)

7. Laura - April 13, 2009

Teeny rant:

“This is not your father’s Star Trek.”

So don’t worry, you won’t be a geek if you go see it!

I’m excited to see this movie, but this little bit of tactical marketing really ticks me off.

End of teeny rant.

8. CAPAirSAR - April 13, 2009

Most of my non-trekkie friends were already sold on the film anyway, so this is kind of a non-issue as far as I’m concerned.

Still glad to see they’re marketing though.

9. Starman - April 13, 2009

I despise “This is not your father’s Star Trek”. I’m a dad and this is the Trek I always wanted to see.

10. JimJ - April 13, 2009

I tell you what, it may seem like it’s not fair to read phrases like ” Forget everything…”, “Not your father’s…”, etc. BUT it IS working. I am a JH/HS teacher and you’d be amazed how many kids who used to roll their eyes about Star Trek are planning to go see this thing. Sure, I’ve been helping the movie’s cause along a bit, but in the past none of them listened to me about Star Trek. Who knows, could this be a blockbuster, or a flop? I’m now betting on a blockbuster! :)

11. Ertel - April 13, 2009

A strong reinterpretation of Star Trek in a very new way : action, fun and speed. Not sure everyone will appreciate this, but it is seems allright to reborn the franchise.

12. Dennis Bailey - April 13, 2009

#5: “I am the father . . . ”

Same here. LOL

Looking forward to this. :-)

13. Keith - April 13, 2009

I prefer Theatrical trailers to TV spots, if I were to base seeing the movie on these TV spots and wasn’t already a fan of Star Trek I might be a little iffy… to fast, ha. Can’t wait for some more intense dialogue!

14. Mr. X - April 13, 2009

What “rebirth” of what “franchise”? This is not your father’s Star Trek. Which means this one is cool, the last 40 years are your father’s Trek and are not cool.

This movie will have no effect at all on the “franchise”. New fans will like this movie, and only this movie. Everyone who thinks they will now tune in to TOS or any of the spin offs is naive to say the least.

15. Boozba - April 13, 2009

This movie is gonna kick ass!!!!!
Can’t wait!

16. Daniel Broadway - April 13, 2009

Are the weapons being loaded photon torpedos?

17. Yammer - April 13, 2009

My father didn’t have a Star Trek and I am fine with this spot.

Thanks to the pervasiveness of entertainment-focused media, which has popularized the number-crunching of Variety, we know how much this movie cost ($150M) and that it is going to need a big weekend (around $70M). Get them into the theatres by any means necessary!!!

The hardcore will attend regardless, even (or especially) those few here who regularly visit in order to assert their refusal to be conned into seeing a movie with such obviously wrong and historically incorrect bridge lighting.

18. George - April 13, 2009

This movie will be kickass!!!

19. steve2 - April 13, 2009

Have you guys heard they are holding the movie until Christmas?

Just kidding…………….

20. I'm dead Jim - April 13, 2009

I’ve long felt that this is the treatment that Star Trek deserved but never got, even TMP. I only wish JJ could have helmed TNG movies (after First Contact anyway, I never had a problem with that, mostly).

21. C.S. Lewis - April 13, 2009

As always, it’s not the action, the new actors, the visual style, or even the musical score, although I wish it was more reminiscent of Star Trek for my own reasons. It’s about the movie’s sensibility. Bestiality jokes, quickie hookups, smart-mouthed disrespectful language, unearned promotions (i.e., undeserved rewards) etc – these are the problems I have with what I’ve seen thus far. Such unintended lessons learned by young viewers will be powerful — as all Hollywood teachings are powerful, bypassing normal critical gatekeeping — and certainly not what we need to be teaching our children.

Yes, I am a father, a husband, a homeowner and a taxpayer and this is the stuff that keeps me worried. We do not need more punks in the world. May Abrams and Orci be cursed with smart-mouthed teenagers for needlessly indulging in this!

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

22. 750 Mang - April 13, 2009

My father never cared for Star Trek.

The tagline is yet another boring cliche, a riff on an Oldsmobile commercial for God’s sake.

Maybe they should have just said this isn’t your Star Trek. I don’t know.

I need to unplug my router I’m not getting much work done.

23. Mirror Jordan - April 13, 2009

Cool TV Spot! I really hope that they will persuade the die hard Trek haters. My cousin-in-law (whom I saw yesterday) still thinks it’s too “stupid” to go see…I hope that thought process goes away for most of the general public.

24. David - April 13, 2009

Was thinking about this over the weekend… concerned (a little) about X-Men Origins appearing a week prior. It actually looks like a VERY good movie so wondering if this will hinder Star Trek’s opening weekend any (Terminator appears a few weeks after). Lots of sci-fi movies in a very tight space. Thoughts?

@dimensionmedia on twitter

25. The Governator - April 13, 2009

Good tv spot…. sort of aimed at me, considering my (somewhat) youthful age, but then again I was already a fan so…. yeah. Not a rock fan, but it works to fulfill the purpose of this spot. Its hard not to take some offense to it, considering its basically trying to say that this is not the usual Star Trek, but a new, kick-ass Star Trek, but its all a marketing game. And considering I have some very anti-Trek friends, this is somewhat helpful to me. At this point, I think I might be able to fill up at least half a row at the theater.

26. Starman - April 13, 2009

@24 (David)

Probably no different than the summer of ’82. Lots of big movies, and they all did well. Of course, movies were better back then….

27. weerd1 - April 13, 2009

“Not your father’s Star Trek” was used repeatedly by Berman and Braga regarding Enterprise as well, so I don’t know if I would have used that line. Not sure how groovy I am going to be with the more modernistic language- I always thought the more melodramatic language gave a more timeless feel to the other shows, particularly the often Shakespearean feel of TOS. Just for me, staying away from modern colloquialisms allows a piece to not be rooted as much in a specific time period. Particularly when we are talking about something set in the future, when we know language will be different, using baseline language without slang seems a little more believable to me. If that’s my biggest issue with the film’s execution though, it will be minor indeed.

28. GaryS - April 13, 2009

Forgive me if my first comment on this shows up later .
This is my second try at this .
after the close up of Uhura there is a shot of somebody falling ,almost leaping .
who is that?
I dont think its the crewperson from the kelvin.
This has a darker background .
I think it might be Nero .
Opinions would be welcome .
Thanks.

29. Daniel Broadway - April 13, 2009

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/PixelMagic/enterprise_tv_spot.jpg

30. Laura - April 13, 2009

I think my problem with “Not Your Father’s Star Trek” is that for forty years, it’s been fun to make fun of Trek fans. This tagline implies that it’s still fun, because this Trek is not THAT Trek, not the one that those pimply nerds with Coke-bottle glasses and pocket protectors liked way back when. And because it isn’t that Trek, it’s okay for the cool kids to go see it. They need not worry about their coolness being affected by association.

So the problem is really with what feels to me like a stereotype, since I was never a pimply nerd with a pocket protector. (Coke-bottle glasses, yes.) “Not Your Father’s Trek” feels like an implicit pander to the stereotype. And that’s what irks me. I know the purpose here is to get butts in seats, but come on.

That said, I will be going to see the movie on opening day anyway.

31. catchupwiththesun - April 13, 2009

i am dying inside waiting to see this drilling platform fight scene

32. Mike Hole - April 13, 2009

Impressive, most impressive.

33. The Governator - April 13, 2009

You know, I noticed that for about a millisecond, when Pike’s shuttle is headed into the Narada, you can see the Enterprise in the background on the bottom left.

34. I'm dead Jim - April 13, 2009

That would be Kirk on the Narada if I understand you correctly.

35. Daoud - April 13, 2009

Since a generation is considered ~20 years… then…

your father’s Star Trek was… The Next Generation!

Star Trek (TOS) was your GRANDfather’s Star Trek. :)

Makes perfect sense, as I agree with others, as a from the start of TOS watcher… this is the Trek I’ve always wanted to see. More Kirk+Spock+McCoy.

Yep, this is the GRANDADDY of all Trek. ;)

36. George - April 13, 2009

Don’t get offended by the tag line “It’s not your fathers Star Trek” remember they are trying to appeal to a larger crowd.

37. I'm dead Jim - April 13, 2009

34: I meant that comment as a response to #28 GaryS’s question.

38. 750 Mang - April 13, 2009

30. Laura – April 13, 2009

You’re 100% right.

It like they are apologizing for Star Trek having to be in the title. Maybe they should have made a different movie if Trek is so lame.

39. marvin - April 13, 2009

@24

david, wolverine is everything BUT a very good movie

40. The Governator - April 13, 2009

28. GaryS

That’s Kirk, I’m pretty sure.

41. Stel Pavlou - April 13, 2009

Sorry. *raises hand* father here too, and this is exactly the kind of Star Trek I’ve wanted to see for a long time.

42. The Governator - April 13, 2009

38. marvin

You’ve seen it?

43. TonyD - April 13, 2009

I’m a veteran TOS fan (35 years and counting) so that ad clearly isn’t aimed at me. Still, given that there is some ambivalence among old time Trek fans towards this new movie, I am a little surprised that there hasn’t been a trailer or spot aimed at my demographic. Other than that web-only, alternate version of the first trailer and the teaser from what now seems like an eternity ago, the advertising has really kept away from the hallmarks of the original show: no Nimoy, no classic fanfare or themes, no familiar lines of dialog. I know they’re in the movie but Paramount seems to have been really active in pushing them into the background.

I’m sure Paramount thinks old time fans will automatically flock to see the movie, if only to nitpick it apart. And they may well be right. Still, it would be nice if they tried to show at least one spot that feels just a little more familiar for those of us who actually liked the old show.

44. Daniel Broadway - April 13, 2009

#39

Why do you think “Enterprise” dropped the “Star Trek” title when it first came out?

Like it or not guys, the old Trek is seen as lame. We love it, sure, but it’s not excepted in the mainstream.

This TV spot is necessary to change that view. Mark my words, someone will become a new fan because of this movie, then go back and watch the old ones and say to themselves “Wow, I can’t believe I’ve been missing out on all this stuff for so long.”

45. That One Guy - April 13, 2009

CS Lewis,

I cannot respond to your comment without feeling a sense of irony, since I will be seeming like one of those “smart-mouthed teenagers.” For those who know me, I’m a college student. Living on campus, I see acts of stupidity far beyond the realm of anything you can even dream of on a regular, if not daily, basis.

If anything, these recent movie reboots have helped people to see a better side of our existence by making these grandiose stories into “human” stories. “Iron Man” and “The Dark Knight” are prime examples of this. Even “Transformers” has done this, despite the criticism against it.

Now, if you want someone to blame for the “Bestiality jokes, quickie hookups, smart-mouthed disrespectful language, [and] unearned promotions” I would point the finger at shows such as “Jackass” and “Punk’d.” Or even better, go onto YouTube for about 10 seconds, and you can find literal thousands of examples of human stupidity.

I promise you that college kids (18-23 [which is what the cadet crew is]) will continue to be crude, over-confident, and moronic. I see it every day, and on rare occasions actually indulge in it a bit.

Kids will be kids.

46. GaryS - April 13, 2009

34 and 40.
I thought that might be the Narada.
I didnt catch that it was Kirk though.
Thanks you guys!

47. Randall - April 13, 2009

Does anyone have any information on when the TV spots are supposed to air? I haven’t seen one yet.

48. Raphael Salgado - April 13, 2009

Ya, those are small photon torpedos! There’s no way they’ll bury Spock in those a few decades from now…

You think Shatner would have ever jumped to save Takei if he fell off the platform?

But of course, the timeline’s changed, so hopefully we can rewrite both of those moments out. ;)

49. Czars of all russias - April 13, 2009

The tag line “not your fathers” just means their taking the movie in a place that the series never could do to the era it came out. Back than a interracial kiss between uhura and kirk broke history. Don’t be stupid people their not saying it’s not for older geeky crowd. Jeezus

50. That One Guy - April 13, 2009

47,
They’re already on, but they’re still fairly rare because of the other stuff coming out this in the next week or two. My guess is that we’ll see them more often as the 8th approaches.

51. UrMom - April 13, 2009

De ‘Not your fathers star trek’ is a reli stupid comment! But at least dats paramount nd not de film makers….im sure J.J wudnt come up wit dat!… im a 16 year old girl nd after i c dis wit my friends im definately bringin my dad!! XD

52. S. John Ross - April 13, 2009

BTW, where is Jeff Bond’s response? :)

53. Geoffers - April 13, 2009

#51…. erm…. if only I could understand what you are typing… (JOKING!)…

54. spockatatic - April 13, 2009

LOL, my dad would probably hate this movie… He’s not much into action. And neither is my mother. She would probably prefer an intellectual approach to the problem…. Sigh. Parents.

55. Laura - April 13, 2009

TonyD @ 43 (oooh, that rhymes!):

Holy cats, you are right! Where IS the spot that is intended to put my fears to rest? I now know that “This Is Not My Father’s Trek,” but where is the reassurance that it is still MY Trek? They are making a big assumption here, that long-time fans will flock to see it. But I’m not convinced that’s the case. I’m pretty sure that my older siblings and their spouses, all of whom are first-generation fans, don’t even know this film exists. Why isn’t it being marketed to them? Or are they just an undesirable demographic?

56. Brad - April 13, 2009

29, good catch!

57. braxus - April 13, 2009

Im not big on movies showing all attitude in characters. Reminds me of too many people today. Im glad this movie isn’t Hell bent on showing too much Rock and Roll so to speak. I found this comercial didn’t draw me in, as it just seemed like too many brainless flicks today. Show me some character involvement and I’ll watch.

58. Will_H - April 13, 2009

Nice to see a few new things, but this trailer makes the movie look like a mindless action movie, so overall not impressed.

59. I am Kurok! - April 13, 2009

I would have preferred “Star Trek: like you’ve never seen it before….”

60. the quickening - April 13, 2009

#4

You hope.

61. Sprout - April 13, 2009

55. “I’m pretty sure that my older siblings and their spouses, all of whom are first-generation fans, don’t even know this film exists”

I was getting more concerned about over-exposure. There’s Star Trek tie-ins with ESPN, Pop Tarts, MTV, everything. If someone doesn’t know it’s coming, they’re living under a rock.

62. the quickening - April 13, 2009

#7

I agree, and the fact they feel they have to market like this shows the problems the film has going in to get people to buy tickets. I wish them a lot of luck.

63. protogenes - April 13, 2009

J. J. and Paramount just sent out a big “F*ck you* to all the fans.

64. Julio - April 13, 2009

If there was a Internet Trolling Hall of Fame, C.S. Lewis would have his own wing. Always entertaining.

65. Jay - April 13, 2009

#63 — Really? Are you serious? WOW… I’m sure that’s what they wanted to do. Heaven forbid a franchise tries to go for a larger fanbase besides the canonites that have buried in the ground. Sorry, dude … it’s either adapt or die.

66. protogenes - April 13, 2009

“Sorry, dude … it’s either adapt or die”

Ok, maybe, but it’s this particular adaptation I have issue with.

It appears to be Trek with the brain removed.

67. freddy - April 13, 2009

Everyone should support this film so they can make other one, besides this film should kick @ss.

Regarding Trek’s competition I would worry about Terminator more than Wolverine – which I heard sucks eggs.

68. Ajax - April 13, 2009

I don’t know about ‘Weapons being loaded on USS Enterprise during battle with Narada’. The guy loading those things was wearing cadet red so perhaps it’s a cadet aboard the Kobayashi Maru simulator?

69. I'm dead Jim - April 13, 2009

I’m not worried about Terminator. I’ll wait to see it on DVD. Of course, a lot of people may feel that way about Trek including some here. Let’s hope not.

70. I'm dead Jim - April 13, 2009

68. Well, I seem to remember them doing that with photon torpedoes in some TOS movies and thought that was kinda silly. It should be automated in the 23rd century I would think.

71. the quickening - April 13, 2009

#59

That’s a great line… just as effective and a lot more positive.

72. Spectrum of the Spock - April 13, 2009

is Chris Doohan around here? Cuz it literally *was* his father’s Star Trek!

73. Spectrum of the Spock - April 13, 2009

… those are weapons being loaded…

It’s for crew entertainment – a “six MP3″ changer. Only in the future each MP3 player holds 150 Terabytes…

74. Spectrum of the Spock - April 13, 2009

oops – i meant *aren’t*

75. Jordan - April 13, 2009

I understand the purpose these high-octane tv spots serve, but I’m not digging the Fast & Furious-eque marketing approach.

76. New Horizon - April 13, 2009

You’re not supposed to. ;) It’s to capture a different market. Watch one of the trailers geared to your demographic. These guys are really good at repackaging.

77. Selor - April 13, 2009

@3 Trailers are ALWAYS made to sell tickets and not to show how the movie really is… that is the very point of a trailer ;)

78. ann peek - April 13, 2009

Still no Chekov…(sigh)

79. New Horizon - April 13, 2009

63. protogenes – April 13, 2009

Oh come on off it. There has been plenty of trailers marketed towards Trekkies. Give it a rest. They’re doing their job and getting asses into seats. If you’ve read the reviews, you know that the movie has been greated warmly by the Trekkies who have seen it. I think that says a lot.

80. Chain of Command - April 13, 2009

Heh heh. A Star Trek commercial with rock music.

I said it before: The original Star Trek was cutting and hard edged for its’ time. This reboot needed to be cutting and hard edged for the present. And what better way to do that than to bring back the original characters?

It’s so COOL to have Star Trek (without colons in the title) be about Kirk, Spock, McCoy et al. again. This is going to be fun!

81. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - April 13, 2009

This will be a lot of fun. Ill be seeing a lot of Movies this Year. termanator and Transformers and Trek at least 4 or 5 times o and thats just at the Imax. Will be a great year and an incredable May.

82. osiris - April 13, 2009

Cannot bloody wait. Neither can my mother, who’s been a fan since TOS first aired.

83. CAPT. CRUNCH - April 13, 2009

I agree..i was born in 1966 as well and I have been waiting for this a long time … I hope they have Chekov in the next commercial as well
i long to hear what new thing was invented in Russia, “keptin”

84. TREKKIE369 - April 13, 2009

at #81–I hear ya Capt Mike! Especially with Trek!

85. Chris Doohan - April 13, 2009

72. Spectrum of the Spock – April 13, 2009
is Chris Doohan around here? Cuz it literally *was* his father’s Star Trek!

I love trekmovie.com so, yes, I’m always around here . No, it’s not my father’s Star Trek, but I think he would be very happy with the way it turned out. I also believe he would be happy with Simon Pegg’s Scotty as well.

Speaking of which, did anyone get him that damned towel?

86. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

I am only 25 and the tagline This is not your father’s Star Trek is making me feel old.

I bloody hate this tagline, it makes the great Trek seem obselete. It ain’t still great stuff.

87. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

you say that this is the Trek you wanted to see as if the last 43 years of Trek were all wrong including TOS

88. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

10- You see those kids who use to shun at our Star Trek, here’s hoping they will now watch it as a result of this movie.

89. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

typo in my message number 86- It is still great stuff

The tagline annoys the hell out of me

90. Star Trackie - April 13, 2009

#35 “Since a generation is considered ~20 years… then…

your father’s Star Trek was… The Next Generation!”

Exactly! That and all the other 24th century “Trek” that came after. It’s the stigma of THAT Trek that this movie has to distance itself from. This is a return home for many, leaving the baggage of the Berman’s version of Trek at the station. This is back to basics, StarTrek 101. This is fun Kirk-fu jump kicking, shirt ripping, alien banging, neck-piching, lurpa swinging, alcohol drinking old school Star Trek. And after 20 years of the same-o same-o…people are ready for it. It’s gonna be huge.

91. Sci-Fi Bri - April 13, 2009

In mother Russia, shiip helms you.

92. Spectrum of the Spock - April 13, 2009

@ 85. Chris Doohan

Mr Chris, glad to hear it. Your positive comments and Mr. Nimoy’s are enough to give hope.

BTW – have you seen the whole film yet???

93. Spectrum of the Spock - April 13, 2009

… and didn’t you have a part?

94. CAPT. CRUNCH - April 13, 2009

to 87…it’s not that at all…tos was awesome/// Next Gen definitely had it’s many moments…even 4th season of Ent looked grand…but the movies, even the Next Gen, besides TWOK and maybe 1st Contact seemed lacking….substance…based on my experience with Abrams, productions:
Lost..Alias..etc, and exciting spiraling action: Cloverfield, MI3..I feel this
to be something that gets the franchise moving ahead warp speed!

95. ClassicTrek - April 13, 2009

David Marcus agrees- this is not his father’s Star Trek.

96. Spock - April 13, 2009

It was modern trek that took away the sexy costumes, the fun, the humor, the good stories, the create character interactions. It was also modern trek that saddled the franchise in Treknobabble. This trek seems to be shedding all that baggage and taking the series back to its action adventure roots as seen in Season 2 of the original series.

97. Charles Trotter - April 13, 2009

No doubt about it, the music being used is from Saliva’s “Ladies and Gentlemen.” Heh, I wonder if they’re trying to tell us something? :)

Ladies and gentlemen please
Would you bring your attention to me?
For a feast for your eyes to see
An explosion of catastrophe

Like nothing you’ve ever seen before
Watch closely as I open this door
Your jaws will be on the floor
After this you’ll be begging for more

BOOM
Do you want it?
BOOM
Do you need it?
BOOM
Let me hear it
Ladies and gentlemen!

98. Captain Quail Hunter - April 13, 2009

Those are not photon torpedos. That is the Kobyashi Maru computer cores being changed so Kirk can win.

99. RAH - April 13, 2009

Wasn’t Kirk the King of ‘quickie’ hookups? I mean how many Tos scenes had a fade in with Kirk sitting on a bed putting his boots back on? (with Alien Babe of the week lying prone on the bed) or maybe thats just my imagination.

100. Dude - April 13, 2009

Get off me with your technobabble bitching, will ya? You probably all love House MD, and that show is bathing in technobabble.

101. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

First Contact and TWOK are too of my all time films

Star Trek has had substance, and I feel part of the Trek I love has been lost

102. captain_neill - April 13, 2009

with this approach.

I feel like this film wont have the strengths of TWOK

103. Selor - April 13, 2009

@97 Humm… nice, I think that is all intended ^^

104. sean - April 13, 2009

Oh no, it’s not my father’s Star Trek! Wait, wait…I just called my dad, and he wants to see this more than he wanted to see the last 4 Star Trek movies. So I guess it’s not such a bad thing.

105. Tony Whitehead - April 13, 2009

Another great niche marketing spot…only this niche marketing is for the mass market. Sort of a retro-reboot-reimagining of how these movies shoulda been marketed all along. Excuse me, I gotta go see that spot again! It’s inside my head and I love it!

Good job!

106. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

4. Meni – April 13, 2009
“It’s about time Star Trek grew a pair. This movie is going to kill at the box office.” Couldn’t agree with you more!

107. mgoodr00 - April 13, 2009

That commercial shows Nero fighting somebody. Supposedly, that scene is not in the final cut. What’s the deal?

Also, the kids will flock to Wolverine just like they did to X-men 2 & X-men 3!
That movie and Terminator is right up their alley. Star Trek will be big with the 30+ crowd, but I think the kids still don’t dig it. I bet Wolverine opens north of 75 million. Just as much as Fast & Furious, and perhaps more. I’m telling you!

108. frederick - April 13, 2009

“This is not your father’s Star Trek… but it’s pretty much his Star Wars.”

Oh well, whatever they say to promote it. as long as it feels like the characters and they get more butts in the seats, to make potential converts!

109. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

28. GaryS – April 13, 2009
“after the close up of Uhura there is a shot of somebody falling ,almost leaping . who is that?”

That (I’m pretty sure) is Kirk leaping after he boards the Narada.

110. PoBiddy - April 13, 2009

I was a fan of TOS in its original airing, watched the moon landing live, saw all the movies, loved TNG, thought DS9 was OK, tolerated VOY and thought “WTF” for most of ENT. But I watched it all. Based on this TV spot, the other spots I’ve seen, all the trailers, etc. – This is MY Star Trek. Sure, it’s not my father’s ST – he never got it at all. But listening to stereo gives him a headache, so go figure.

If my 20 year old son saw this, he’d say, “Oh Hell yeah – it IS my father’s Star Trek – mine too!” or similar.

111. The Governator - April 13, 2009

Yeah, anyone saying that this new trek is too sexy and funny and action-packed to be Star Trek are kidding themselves. TOS season 2 anyone? People who are looking for Macbeth in space need to get a reality check. Star Trek was created to be a Western in space, allowing the freedom to include a vision for an optimistic future. Yeah it had a strong heart, but at the time, it was thought of by critics as too fun and kid-like!

Now if you say this Trek is too sexy and funny and action-packed to be the Trek of the last 20 years, than yeah, you’re dead on.

112. Andy Patterson - April 13, 2009

96

Good point.

113. Chuck Fu - April 13, 2009

it looks like another version of The Matrix.

who is the target audience for this spot I guess.

114. deekay - April 13, 2009

my father didn´t care about trek…much more do I. :)
and what´s with our moms?

115. freddy - April 13, 2009

Sorry to disagree #107:

I asked several different people ranging in ages and they all said that Wolverine just does not look that good. Plus the leak of the film will definitely hurt its box office and in turn help Trek to be a monster when it opens.

116. Jeff Bond - April 13, 2009

I stand corrected about “This is not your father’s Star Trek”! I hadn’t seen that spot when I wrote about that. It’s dumb, I’m actually surprised we haven’t gotten an ad this pandering until now–but if it gets a few more butts in the seats more power to them.

117. DGill - April 13, 2009

The footage is awesome as usual, but the tagline is ridiculously desperate. The freakin’ footage is proof that this film “isn’t your father’s Star Trek”. I admired the tact based on every trailer and commercial I’ve seen up to this point. It’s just so obvious that they’re pandering now; the footage always spoke for itself.

Still waiting on May 8th! :D

118. David - April 13, 2009

@26

That might have been true, but we have three scifi action movies in the same month. Can’t remember the last time that’s happened. I’m personally predicting Star Trek is #1 until Terminator arrives.

And it doesn’t matter if X-Men is “good” or not. You know alot will see it and it will still be a big movie in it’s second week. But I personally predict Star Trek will knock it off it’s #1 spot.

119. INFINIG35 - April 13, 2009

at :16 you can see the enterprise in the background while pike’s ship is heading for the Narada

120. U.F.P. - April 13, 2009

Wolverine can wait for dvd, Terminator gets my ass to the theatre once. Star Trek will get me to the theater at least 3 times. First I will be in awe, second I will gather details . Third just because I can.

121. Tim - April 13, 2009

“Now if you say this Trek is too sexy and funny and action-packed to be the Trek of the last 20 years, than yeah, you’re dead on.” Suddenly i’m feeling very old with my 25 years. I don’t hate the trailer, but the Star Trek i want and know is about science and diplomacy and characters, not action, sex and dumb one-liners.

122. Chadwick - April 13, 2009

Meh, this is no different than the last TV spot, or Scotty in the water pipes. Yes new footage, yes its great we have all these commercials, but none of the other trailers or TV commercials have impressed me the way the third “FIRE EVERYTHING” trailer did. As for TV spot or ads other than trailers my favorite was still the super bowl spot.

I think its actually quite funny that they put the “this is not your fathers star trek” tag line in there, yea its marketing, and people have been verbally communicating via word of mouth, but to actually put it in the commercial, it made me laugh more than anything, least of which offended me.

123. martin - April 13, 2009

I am a little bothered by the “This is not your father’s Star Trek” because it is a tired take on an old Oldsmobile slogan, and Oldsmobile died with that slogan. (Ironically, if Oldsmobile was making something equivelent of the Hurst Olds, the 442s, or the Toronado’s which was my father’s Oldsmobiles, they probably would not have died)

But if someone would just recut this commercial to say “This is not….” “…Rick Berman’s Star Trek” – wouldn’t we all be overjoyed?

124. Donald G - April 13, 2009

“This is not your father’s STAR TREK”.

My father was born in 1942 and hated STAR TREK. I was born in 1966 and love STAR TREK. My son was born in 1990 and loves STAR TREK (all generations). What the advertising tag line is really saying is that this is not *my* STAR TREK.

What this whole thing reminds me of is Marvel’s launch of Mark Millar and Bryan Hitch’s THE ULTIMATES around the turn of the millennium. Kurt Busiek and George Perez and Alan Davis et al. were on a critically acclaimed run of THE AVENGERS (of which THE ULTIMATES was an alternate universe reboot/revamp). By the year 2000, Busieks’s run was was starting to receive criticism from the kewl kids with the constant whine, “It’s not 1978 anymore.” Marvel’s honchos at the time, Editor in Chief Joe Quesada and bad-boy then-publisher, Bill Jemas, stoked the flames with their publicity for the ULTIMATES, using the constant refrain, “This is not gonna be your father’s AVENGERS” and implicitly criticizing the established book and its fans.

The funny thing is, when Marvel did their animated adaptation of Millar and Hitch’s ULTIMATES as ULTIMATE AVENGERS, the DVD extras largely ignored Millar and Hitch and their work on their book. Instead, the extras focused on Busiek and Perez’s version and effectively sang hymns of praise to the classic run from issues #150-200 (published between 1976-1980), the very run that had previously been ridiculed as “your father’s AVENGERS”.

In relation to the marketing of the current iteration of STAR TREK, certain aspects of the Abrams/ Orci/Chambliss hype of their project since last November is very familiar to me and it rubs me the wrong way and evaporates the good will and cautious optimism I had for their version when casting was announced.

For me, this is not a matter of hatred of change, or mindless canon worship; this is a matter of respect – respect for the concept, respect for the characters, and respect for the intelligence of the viewers. When those principles are followed, you get good stuff like “Journey to Babel”, “Amok Time”, “The Doomsday Machine”, “Obsession” and “The Ultimate Computer”. When those priciples aren’t followed, you get drek like “Plato’s Stepchildren”, STV: THE FINAL FRONTIER, and ST: NEMESIS.

The proof will be when the film goes into general release and I can see it and judge for myself whether Abrams and Company succeeded in making good STAR TREK movie or a kewl movie which is “STAR TREK: IN NAME ONLY”.

125. Selor - April 13, 2009

Here is a picture of what 119 means, really nice view of the Enterprise ^^

http://img2.abload.de/img/enterprise4rji.jpg

126. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

Never been a Marvel Comics guy. Not interested in Wolverine. Saw the second spiderman; never saw 1 or 3. Didn’t like any of the X-Men films, FF. I did very much enjoy the Hulk tv series with Bill Bixby. It was intelligent.

Superman, Batman, Smallville; that’s me. Looking forward to Green Latern whenever that happens.

127. DGill - April 13, 2009

#124

“For me, this is not a matter of hatred of change, or mindless canon worship; this is a matter of respect – respect for the concept, respect for the characters, and respect for the intelligence of the viewers.”

Wow, you got it!

128. Dr. Image - April 13, 2009

Star Trek: Revenge of the Fallen.

129. Therealtrekfan - April 13, 2009

For all you homers ripping apart the movie and complaining that it’s not canon, please see this set of videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1chtJQFQNs&feature=related

After 43 years of Star Trek, numerous movies, mistakes have been made. What’s important about Star Trek is the message and the entertainment aspect. Keep in mind, it’s NOT REAL. Star Trek has broken canon and made mistakes since day one! Come out of your mother’s basement and see the sunlight!

130. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

111-

i couldn’t agree more. I grow disturbed when anyone representing a supposed moral high ground attempts to hijack Star Trek. It amazes me to see someone retroactively crown Trek as an example of “good Christian” values, when Trek is in fact beyond all of that. Trek is about a future and social system that is NOT reliant on organized religion to save it’s “soul”. It’s a future where respecting everyone for who they are is a sign of good morals.

I see nothing in this new Trek that hasn’t been done before in both TNG and TOS, it’s just packaged differently.
I also recommend we wait until seeing the film before accusing it of promoting potty talk and orgies on the bridge.
Even attempting to look at is from the moral high ground perspective: you really can not show “right” behavior without show “wrong” behavior anyway. You’d have nothing to compare it too.
Example: how can you understand the “fall” of a tragic character without showing the “rise”.
That’s why Milton wrote Paradise Lost (Space Seed reference) for heavens sake.

131. Amazing Bizarro - April 13, 2009

…but I like my father’s STAR TREK.

132. The Governator - April 13, 2009

130. SpocksinnerConflict

Well, i don’t know about that. There are certain things about Star Trek that can be seen as meaningful in a religious sense, but I don’t want to get into that. Too many people have definitive religious views here. I’ve been attacked before for being both a very, very religious person and a Star Trek fan and I have found that to be very insulting. You are right, however, when you point out that Trek does not rely on religion to state its purpose. That’s not what it was made for, but I do think it represents something of great value within its optimism. I feel silly comparing the two to tell you the truth. Trek is a tv show, and a fictional universe. Religion is a real world phenomenon, and I see no real place for such discussion here. Best to just leave it at that.

133. AJ - April 13, 2009

130:

SpocksinnerConflict:

Back up a second. I think Trek adequately covers the general Judeo-Christian values that have ruled the West for centuries: While it definitely presents its society as one which has outgrown the greedy outreach of organized religion and its guilt/salvation, hell/heaven vicious cycle culture, it does call upon its main characters to be compassionate beings. “Let me Help” is as much a product of our past as it is a hope for the future.

God, that sounds corny.

134. subatoi - April 13, 2009

There realy should be an official site with all these trailers\spots. Too bad the official movie site don’t have all of these, and not Nimoy’s trailer.
I tries to do one like that on our site, but I put only some of them:
http://www.starbase972.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=397

135. Jay - April 13, 2009

#129

Well played, sir!

136. Capt Mike Of The Terran Empire - April 13, 2009

#84. I hear you and im going to be a mainstay at the Theater.
#85 Chris Doohan. You Da Man!!!!
#104.Oh no, it’s not my father’s Star Trek! Wait, wait…I just called my dad, and he wants to see this more than he wanted to see the last 4 Star Trek movies. So I guess it’s not such a bad thing.) I agree. I was born in 1968 and Im looking forward more to this film then Treks 9 and 10 combined.

137. John from Cincinnati - April 13, 2009

What bothers me is the notion that long-time Trekkers haven’t wanted to see Trek done with speed, action, zip and a great production budget.

The tagline should read: The Trek your father has always wanted.

138. Dunsel Report - April 13, 2009

#96 has said it correctly for all time.

139. The Last Maquis - April 13, 2009

People are either getting blown away or sucked out into space, “Either We’re going down, or they are.”….indeed.

140. TheWon - April 13, 2009

All it is saying with out saying it is. Star Trek is now cool. Since it has never been in the eye of POP culture before. Don’t be surprise to see the cast on TRL the week of it’s release.
I’m hoping it’s good, and everything, but stop trying to say. The Trek we love was wrong.

141. tribble farmer - April 13, 2009

I agree with 137 on what the tagline SHOULD say. These people are making it sound like existing Star Trek is somehow inferior/uncool.

142. freddy - April 13, 2009

#141 – guess what, alot of people think of trek is nothing more then geeky, nerdy, and way uncool and that’s why trek was dying.

PS:
I’m one of the biggest nerds possible.

143. iplaicawd - April 13, 2009

damn i kind of wanted to see my father’s star trek

144. Harry Ballz - April 13, 2009

How about……..

If You Think You Know Star Trek…………LOOK AGAIN!

145. Geoffers - April 13, 2009

This is the first thing I haven’t liked about this new movie… this tagline… I LIKE my father’s Star Trek

146. Christine - April 13, 2009

My friend David got sold out on this one. xD

I like my father’s Star Trek.

But this looks AWESOME. :D

147. Number9 - April 13, 2009

What is wrong with all of you people up in arms about the tagline? It is simply a case of targeted marketing, of which you are all clearly not the target. “This isn’t your father’s ..[insert item here]” is a general saying that can be used for anything if you want to convey that it is different from what came before. I am 23 and have been a Trek fan since 5th grade, and I’ve really enjoyed all of the original movies as well as the most of TNG ones, as well as all of the series. The reason why they didn’t make a new TNG movie and the reason why the ratings for Voyager and Enterprise sucked so badly was because the only people who watched them were the people on here saying “oh my god I’m a father I’d like this, oh my god my father hated the old trek..blah blah blah”. I think there are a lot of people in denial about the status of Star Trek’s reputation among the general public- its the nerdy, less exciting, less interesting version of Star Wars. The people who feel that way are the ones that these “extreme” TV spots are targeting, not the avid Trek nerds that prowl this site.

If you can’t get over a very good example of targeted marketing and trying to make the Star Trek property a one that will profit beyond the 3 million nerds who went and saw Nemesis on opening weekend, then you’re beyond a nerd and are living in your own little world. I mean, come on, Anthony is clearly as much of a fanboy as the next guy here- hell he started this website JUST because they announced the movie two years ago- and he LOVED the movie and enjoyed it for what it is.

148. cagmar - April 13, 2009

Yeah, not a lot of respect for those of us who’ve loved ST for what it is for 40+ years. We kept it alive. I think someone’s forgetting that Nemesis was NOT our father’s trek, either. That’s why it failed, because it had an idea that it did not discuss, and it had too much action without any intellect. That’s why Nemesis didn’t work — BECAUSE it wasn’t the star trek we value.

This new Trek better rock. Like, I’m starting to get tired of JJ et al telling me I’m boring and lame and a loser for liking it before now. They have this job because I liked it before now. And so did my dad.

149. oby - April 13, 2009

I’m really looking forward to the new film but I think it should be entitled, “Star Trek: The Rollercoaster Ride”

150. Darrksan - April 13, 2009

“This is not your father’s Star Trek”

Star Trek is in it’s early 40’s just like JJ.
A “Young” vision by a 40 year old man like JJ.
JJ’s Vision of Star Trek is an 40 year old man’s vision of what is cool to a 20 year old.
JJ’s Vision of Star Trek is so dated looking.
a more fitting tagline would be: “rad, to the Extreme”
I’m in my 20’s and I see this movie as just lame looking and look like something which would have been made in 1990’s like the old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles moviefrom the 90’s.
This new movie seems like your dad trying to be cool.

151. Mark - April 13, 2009

Just when you think you’ve seen it all another interesting visual pops onto the scene like those people on the outside of the Kelvin. WOW they’re pulling all the stops out on this one!!!!

I can’t wait!

152. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

132–

Just for the record: I wasn’t attacking your religion or even religion in general. I was addressing the habit of those you attach their religious perspective onto Roddenberry vision.
Can you be religious or part of an organized religion AND be a Trekkie?
Of course.

Did Roddenberry create Star Trek to promote Christian Values and beliefs?
NO. Like you said, he created a fictional world in the future.

153. Christine - April 13, 2009

#14, Mr. X :: Now, now, that’s not fair to say. They’re just trying to tell audiences it’s something a little different. And, for the record, the promotion HAS spiked interest among teenagers. And I would know — I’m one of those teenagers.

#17 :: Hahaha!!! You make me laugh. xDD I love TOS. But I don’t care about the lighting. I CARE ABOUT THE MOVIE. (oh, shock!!!!!!!!)

#21; C.S. Lewis :: Excuse me? Okay, I think you might have the wrong idea about teenagers. We’re not all sucked into the media. In fact, the majority of us aren’t really influenced by it at all. And don’t pretend that Kirk didn’t try to get it on with some hot girl in every. Single. Episode. So, really, it’s NOT THAT DIFFERENT.

#27 :: “..I always thought the more melodramatic language gave a more timeless feel to the other shows …”
Well, Twilight had melodramatic language, and I thought it was… okay (*cough*awful) but I see your point.

#30, 39 :: I don’t think that’s at all what they mean. I think they just mean the franchise is getting revamped. People seem to not be realizing that without what happened in the ’60’s, this movie wouldn’t even be being made. It’s paying homage to the awesomness that started it all.

#45 :: You know I love you man. :D

#63 :: No, I think you just said that to him. :(

154. Capt. of the USS Anduril - April 13, 2009

#150 Wow, and I thought Stanky was negative….

I think that a lot of people are still taking offense to the “action movie vibe” that these spots are putting out. That’s what they’re supposed to do. I highly doubt that Anthony would’ve written such a good review of the film if it was just another action movie. Just my 2 cents.

155. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

133-

I would, maybe, read my post again.

I never said Star Trek doesn’t uphold moral values shared with the Judeo Christian religions. In fact, that’s my point.

Christians don’t have a monopoly on the kind of “values” we’re talking about here. It’s kind of a dis to the other world religions out there who uphold these same values, and those who uphold the values without religion.

I love that as soon as I write “religion” people assume I am A.) attacking their religion and B.) Religion=christian.

All I had a problem with was someone accusing something of not being Trek, because it doesn’t meet their specific moral standards based on contemporary christian family values.

Its cool, I’m not anti religious/spirituality.
jeesh.

156. The Governator - April 13, 2009

150. Darrksan

I couldn’t possibly disagree more. I, too, am pretty youthful, and to me, this looks nothing like you describe it to be. Sorry, but I just don’t agree with you. Then again, I never have.

157. Christine - April 13, 2009

#150 :: My dad’s 43, and I think he’s pretty cool.

But seriously. Don’t put down the movie before you’ve seen it.

158. S. John Ross - April 13, 2009

#115 sez (about Wolverine): “Plus the leak of the film will definitely hurt its box office and in turn help Trek to be a monster when it opens.”

Nobody really knows if it will hurt its box office (though certainly, if the movie tanks, all the bean-counters will show up in sackcloth sobbing about it and pointing fingers). Remember that “Iron Man” suffered a pre-release leak too … and went on to be one of the highest grossing films of all time (#21 domestic, according to BoxOfficeMojo).

Might Iron Man have netted even MORE ticket sales if not for the leak? Maybe, maybe not. Does it make a difference that the Wolverine leak is a month before the movie instead of Iron Man’s week-before leak? Probably, but nobody can prove whether that’s _better_ or _worse_ for the film. There aren’t any available facts either way; it’s all conjecture. Arguments on both sides appeal to “common sense,” and if there’s one thing sense isn’t, it’s common.

159. David_Alexander - April 13, 2009

“This is not your father’s Star Trek”

I’m pretty sure that they ripped that off from something I said on here about a year ago…

I want royalties!

:-P

(Seriously, though, that is a DIRECT quote from a post I made on here about a year ago, albeit under a different screen-name, and the writers do frequent these boards… Magpies!)

160. Remington Steele - April 13, 2009

#22 and 39

Ah I see Mr Mang is back to ply his awful wares yet again.

Not getting much work done is it?

Working on YOUR star trek story getting too much for you???

RTF(remeber that???)

Shame you probably wont see this….

Cant wait to read YOUR star trek story…….

161. Jordan - April 13, 2009

There will always be some fabians who gets offended by some marketing scheme that tries to make a movie look exciting, or has some irony to it. These people are boring, and I generally ignore them. What matters is whether or not the film is ultimately come combination of enjoyable, exciting, meaningful etc. As none of us have seen the film, we can only get so far in the debate on it.

As for religion or spirituality (people often get them confused), star trek puts foreward a number of views on the topic, from hard atheism (star trek V, Who Watches the Watchers) to agnosticism (picard’s views in general) to monotheism (“mankind has no need for gods. we find the one quite sufficient”).
But in terms of morality and ethics, it is almost strictly secular humanistic. I think it’ll probably continue along those lines, exploring different notions of God but promoting the dignity and self-determination of humanity. It’s a pretty stoically liberal franchise, I imagine thats why most of us keep watching it!

162. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

161-

I agree.

163. Bryan - April 13, 2009

Star Trek’s ideals and design have always resonated with my father and I, the Franchise has brought us close together, and It is Tradition for my Dad and I to go to the Star Trek Movies together, it always has been since I was old enough to understand Star Trek. So this might not be many people’s Father’s Star Trek… but this one is something him and I talk about a lot and we are both very excited to see the Revisioning and Rebirth of the Trek Franchise. We’ve already got plans to see it opening day in IMAX. and as much as I love seeing these Trailers, paramount needs to STOP TEASING us. May 8th cant come soon enough

164. Christine - April 13, 2009

#163 :: Mmm, I agree. Star Trek has brought my own father and I closer together. It gives us something in common (aside from music).

And, ergh!!!! Enough trailers, let’s get ON with the movie! xD

165. 750 Mang - April 13, 2009

160. Remington Steele – April 13, 2009

“Ah I see Mr Mang is back to ply his awful wares yet again.
Not getting much work done is it?”
Actually got quite a bit done today. Thanks!

“Working on YOUR star trek story getting too much for you???”
That would be cool, but sadly I’m not writing a Star Trek story.

“RTF(remeber that???)”
I will not forget Captain Garrovick, the tragedy of the USS Farragut, and Lieutenant James Kirk on his first deep space mission.

“Cant wait to read YOUR star trek story…….”
I’ll keep looking in the mailbox for a check from Paramount, but I don’t think it’s coming. So you probably won’t be seeing a Trek story from me. I don’t work on spec.

Hey Remington, I think Pierce Brosnan was underrated as a Bond. I’m a big fan. Seriously.

166. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

I don’t think we should take this whole “father” thing literally…or seriously.

It’s just marketing.

167. Remington Steele - April 13, 2009

#165

I couldnt give a monkeys whether or not paramount accept it, put it up online somewhere we can all download and read you slice of Star Trek life.

Like I said before, you know all, what’s good and what’s bad, so this surely wont be the best piece of star trek written-it will surely be the greatest manuscript of all time.

Plus, It’ll probably be good for Orci and Kurtzman to read how a real fan of star trek sees it.

God knows they havent a clue(according to you-and since you know all, you’re surely right)

And I wouldnt be waiting by the mailbox for a CHECK from paramount…I’d look for a cheque myself but hey, maybe that’s just me…

So it’s put up or shut up time – get your story written and put up online for us all to read…show us all what’s what.

Im sure I wont be the only one waiting…..

168. 750 Mang - April 13, 2009

167. Remington Steele – April 13, 2009

Breathe. I picture you screaming into your monitor MANGGGGGG!

lol.

Like I said, there’s nothing for Paramount to accept or reject. Like I said before I don’t work for free. No time for pet projects.

I could see how it might be fun. But I’d have to hear from people like me all day long. No reward is worth that.

But do I have to write Star Trek to say when I think it works or not?

Do you have to be a fireman to say the house burned down?

Seriously, Remington, I like Stephanie Zimbalist too and pre-Raymond, Dorris Roberts. Classic!

169. fwise3 - April 13, 2009

I saw a new spot on SPIKE last night, and it is NOT this one, or any other that TrekMovie.com has mentioned. I shall upload it to youtube, and let you all know when I’ve done so!

170. The Governator - April 13, 2009

169. fwise3

look forward to it.

171. jonboc - April 13, 2009

#153 “And don’t pretend that Kirk didn’t try to get it on with some hot girl in every. Single. Episode. ”

This is the kind of dangerous mis-information that spread and fuels uninformed opinions. Yes, it’s easy to say Kirk tried that, because everyone always says that and it’s a good line always good for a laugh. But if you watch the entire 3 seasons, you’ll see that it just aint so.

Kind of like the “red shirt curse”. People like to say the red shirts always get killed. Again, it’s always good for a laugh, but the fact is, in the course of 79 episodes, it just didn’t happen that often.

And yeah, the studio really needed to distance itself from the Trek of the last 20 years and remind people that TOS was really quite different. So I understand the “Father” angle completely. And I think it will work. The marketing for this film is pure genius.

172. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

159. David_Alexander – April 13, 2009
“‘This is not your father’s Star Trek’ I’m pretty sure that they ripped that off from something I said on here about a year ago…I want royalties!”

So you were the first EVER to use the phrase “This is not your father’s__(BLANK)” and you trademarked it???

173. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

Just saw the ad during House at 8:37 p.m. ET.

174. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

I like the ad “It’s exciting!” (I know that quote’s getting old already)

hee, hee! :p

175. Christine - April 13, 2009

#171 :: Okay, okay, I was exaggerating. I was comparing him to the other captains. The thing is, though, that that was the style back then. Back in the ’60’s, when NASA was getting started, space was sexy! I think Abrams, Orci, and the rest of them are trying to bring that notion back. It’s that same 1960’s feel — only up-to-date.

176. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

160. Remington Steele – April 13, 2009
#22 and 39
“Ah I see Mr Mang is back to ply his awful wares yet again.
Not getting much work done is it?
Working on YOUR star trek story getting too much for you???
Cant wait to read YOUR star trek story…….”

LOL! LOL! LOL!

177. OrlandoMovieGuy - April 13, 2009

Well I don’t think the tagline “This is not your father’s Star Trek” was really warranted. Paramount’s biting the hand that feeds it. Actually to me it is a bit of a slap in the face of the fans that love the original Star Trek. I mean would J.J. Abrams like to hear “This is not your father’s Star Wars”…..Seeing as he wants to make Star Trek into Star Wars.

178. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 13, 2009

Listen. WHY even produce this trailer in the 3rd place?
This is the definitive Star Trek 11 trailer. It has everything needed to sell the movie. Gaveme chills, Why make more?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0xaCB2nLS0

Goodbye TOS.

179. Christine - April 13, 2009

#177 :: Didn’t Anthony Pascale himself say in his review that it WASN’T anything like Star Wars? (-,-)

People are taking this way too seriously. It’s not even the official tagline.

They’re just following a chliché! Calm down!

180. lizz - April 13, 2009

wait, whats the name of the song they used ofr this? ive been looking for it EVERYWHERE!!!!! they used it on a playstaion 3 commercial too.

181. jonboc - April 13, 2009

#175 “The thing is, though, that that was the style back then. Back in the ’60’s, when NASA was getting started, space was sexy! I think Abrams, Orci, and the rest of them are trying to bring that notion back. It’s that same 1960’s feel — only up-to-date.”

Absolutely. And I think it’s working!

182. Aragorn189 - April 13, 2009

179

Ladies and Gentleman by Saliva

183. Valar1 - April 13, 2009

This isn’t my Star Trek. But it damn sure is going to be my son’s.

184. lizz - April 13, 2009

THANK YOU!! IVE BEEN LOOKING EVERYWHERE!!!!!!!

185. TrekdomKeeper - April 13, 2009

Yea, the catch phrase ‘not your fathers star trek’ implies that no young people liked star trek till this film came out and miraculously pulled them into the fold. And for that pathetic line I would call this false advertising. How would JJ like it if the catch phrase for the new sw tv show was ‘not you fathers starwars’? I mean star trek ALREADY transcended the age barrier so what’s this crap they are spewing here?

186. FSL - April 13, 2009

“This is not your father’s Star Trek”

Why do they have to keep doing that? Perpetuating a stereotype that wasn’t neccesarily true in the first place? Trek was about acceptance. I guess this really isn’t “your father’s Star Trek” any more. At least not the marketing.

187. TrekdomKeeper - April 13, 2009

and besides my 50 year old dad didn’t even like star trek. I concur with what someone else said about how the ‘new fans’ will like this and only this film. And in that sense it will fail. Like what’s the point then if they’re not interested in the rest of trek? Lame lame lame! And did I say lame?

188. Fansince9 - April 13, 2009

Good trailer, a lot like the last few ones though. I would have saved the money. Never the less, not bad.

189. SpocksinnerConflict - April 13, 2009

What’s up with this new TV spot i keep hearing about (not the one posted above)?

Where is it?

And i don’t think this new film will keep folks away from old trek. Friends of mine who are excited about this new film, who are not into trek, are already starting to watch old episodes. In fact, every time I hear folks talking about this new film I always hear “well, i guess i should start watching the old show.”

190. TrekdomKeeper - April 13, 2009

did i say’the rest of trek’? What i should have said was just plain trek! Cause this aint it! It just seems like they’re pandering to low intelligence and short attention spans with this here namesake installment. I mean if the ‘new fans’ like this its nit even star trek they are liking but some effects film featuring the shells of star trek. Where’s the faith in human intelligence with such outright stupid mind numbing trailers?

191. The Original Spock's Brain - April 13, 2009

171. jonboc – April 13, 2009
#153 “And don’t pretend that Kirk didn’t try to get it on with some hot girl in every. Single. Episode. ”
“This is the kind of dangerous mis-information that spread and fuels uninformed opinions. Yes, it’s easy to say Kirk tried that, because everyone always says that and it’s a good line always good for a laugh. But if you watch the entire 3 seasons, you’ll see that it just aint so.”

By my count JTK got amorous (or met a former lover) 21 (or more) times on TOS. And I’m not counting the leering. That’s what I’m talking about.

192. pock speared - April 13, 2009

“this isn’t your boring, condescending, self indulgent, bermanesque wankery that has become star trek” is my take.

screw the farragut, remember the kelvin.

193. Christine - April 13, 2009

#185-187 :: I’ll refer you to my previous comment:

“… People are taking this way too seriously. It’s not even the official tagline.

They’re just following a chliché! Calm down! …”

194. Rick - April 13, 2009

No, this is TOS, this is Star Trek TNB

(the new beginning)

195. Rick - April 13, 2009

whoops means to say this ISNT TOS

196. sans_shatner_1701 - April 13, 2009

Lame – the original Star Trek wasn’t even my father’s Star Trek. (He was too old) But it was my older brother’s Star Trek and then mine in the 70s.

197. jj_roddenberry - April 13, 2009

This spot makes it look lame. I hate TV spots, by and large they’re awful.

198. S. John Ross - April 13, 2009

#194/195:

I think, in honor of the tagline, fandom should officially refer to this as Star Trek: Not Your Father’s (ST:NYF) :)

199. Jonny Boy - April 13, 2009

178:

I totally agree. Trailer 3 owns. In fact, speaking as a fan of film trailers, I think this may be one of the best trailers produced in a long time. Case in point:

My twin brother, who is not a big fan of Star Trek but does enjoy watching the films and ocassionally an episode of TNG, was not that thrilled by the previous two trailers. For the last two months he has been on toru with a band, and on Saturday, he got home and I showed him the new trailer. He was nearly speechless at the end, and swore that Trailer 2 was s**t. He’s pretty excited now.

I don’t mind the marketing team putting commercials out that are aimed at a broad audience (in fact I’m glad they’re making the big push), but I would love to see a couple that are more along the lines of the kinds of commercials that we saw for The Return of The King or the Dark Knight as well. They don’t all need to have contemporary rock music. How about something utilizing an abbreviated version of the music from Trailer 3? Or something from Giacchino’s score?

200. Christian - April 13, 2009

NEW TV SPOT!

Just saw on ESPN! Part of “Future Week” on ESPN this whole week! It was a mix of a commercial for the new Yankees stadium and multiple Trek spots.

ESPN and ST have obviously teamed up! Big Time!

201. The Governator - April 13, 2009

About thirty seconds ago, I saw a very long and new tv spot on ESPN. The baseball coverage on is currently being sponsored by Star Trek as a part of Star Trek future week on ESPN. The tv spot was not the one above. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get a video of it, but it was truly awesome. Really, really awesome. Made the film look great. With this kind of publicity, this movie is going to blow out the box office. Tune in now before its too late!!!!!!!

202. Buzz Cagney - April 13, 2009

As I’ve said before- it may not be my fathers Trek but as long as its mine i’ll be fine with it. I still have real doubts and the more trailers I see the doubts get stronger and more worrying.

203. Canon Schmanon - April 13, 2009

Would those of you who are offended by the “father” tagline please go smoke some pot?

204. Trekee - April 13, 2009

I have no idea why it took so long for the penny to drop… but of course some of the posters above are quite correct… this ad is aimed at my kids, not me.

This is not *my* Star Trek… now I understand.

The audience for Trek has always had an unusually high percentage of “fans”, wasn’t there a poll in the 80s which said most Americans considered themselves Trekkies? I don’t expect such a poll today would give the same result.

More clearly with this approach, JJ et al are thinking that this will be a far, far bigger film than the current fanbase, so in order to get as many bums on seats as possible, the “fans” will just have to suck it up.

It’s not surprising that this new action only ad which, quite frankly is highlighting all the reasons I’d NOT go and see a lobotomised Trek film, has come along relatively late to the campaign. By now all of us that could get irked at this have already bought in or out to the film, but judging by the woohoos, it’s working with the target audience.

So it’s not a film for fans, but by the time we’ve seen it a few times, we might be fans of it all reborn and have our shiny new Trek katras all retrofitted then. Or is that rebooted?

These ads are starting to annoy me now, I just want to see the film and judge it without the bling and the rock music.

205. ENGON - April 13, 2009

My father, who would have been 80 this year, was not obsessed with “Star Trek” but he really enjoyed catching the better episodes of TOS when they rerun in the 70’s and 80’s. At the end of a particularly good episode he would say, “My god, that’s good writing!” or he would ask me “Where did they find such good writers?”

So, maybe for kids today it won’t be their father’s “Star Trek,” but they’ll be very lucky if it’s as good as their grandfather’s.

206. Steve - April 14, 2009

‘This is not your father’s Star Trek’
Basically it’s a well chosen tagline that plays on a big stereotype-close to the truth.
When I think of TOS I think of cheesy stories, cheesy scripting, unimpressive graphics and action sequences, occasional episode where it annoyingly ends with some crap joke inserted into the script for the sake of it and sometimes being a bit ridiculous.
In other words, it is playing on a stereotype that a lot of young people, especially myself, hold in regard to TOS.
Now,the new film has been made over 40 years after the original series, and if you think they will get everything exactly the same as TOS then you are delusional. A lot has happened in 40 years to raise the standard of action and sci-fi films. Star Trek needs some kind of reboot to save itself. Any sentiments toward the original series have to be put aside UNTIL YOU SEE THE FILM.

207. Omegawrath - April 14, 2009

There are 206 responses ahead of mine, so I’ll just ask: Does anybody remember that Bill and Melanie Shatner were in one of those “Father’s Oldsmobile” commercials?

It’s a tagline. It’s clever. More clever than most of you are realizing.

Water off a duck’s back to me.

208. Chris Fawkes - April 14, 2009

@21 “As always, it’s not the action, the new actors, the visual style, or even the musical score, although I wish it was more reminiscent of Star Trek for my own reasons. It’s about the movie’s sensibility. Bestiality jokes, quickie hookups, smart-mouthed disrespectful language, unearned promotions (i.e., undeserved rewards) etc – these are the problems I have with what I’ve seen thus far. Such unintended lessons learned by young viewers will be powerful — as all Hollywood teachings are powerful, bypassing normal critical gatekeeping — and certainly not what we need to be teaching our children.

Yes, I am a father, a husband, a homeowner and a taxpayer and this is the stuff that keeps me worried. We do not need more punks in the world. May Abrams and Orci be cursed with smart-mouthed teenagers for needlessly indulging in this!

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis”

A friend put a stop to her two year old daughter playing doctor. She justified it to me by telling me she didn’t want her little girl thinking that doctors could do absolutely anything.

As she explained it to me her little girl says “I’m just pretending mum”.

Even a child understood the difference. I’m sure most viewers know it’s just pretend.

209. Jan - April 14, 2009

My father never loved star trek….

But my mom did. I hate the way they always have to call an action/sci-fi movie a “boy” movie!!! It’s not fair. “Oh this movie/game has guns, so it HAS to be for the boys because girls are busy with Bratz anyway…”
It’s like saying “Yesh all the girls love pink stuff and Barbie and all the boys like green and want to be an astronaut when they grow up” WTF???

I wish that stupid standarizing would stop.
It happens too often!

Me and my sister are really looking forward to Star Trek.
We started watching star trek TOS when we were children so it has a special place in our harts.

TOS!Uhura was a beautiful curvy woman. She was THE woman. Perfect.
But the new Uhura seems to be there just because “oh look a pretty girl. Let’s make her a love-interest for Kirk!” and they make her sickly skinny and way too tall. What is it with that? I say!!!

210. tribble - April 14, 2009

luke……Iam your Father!

NoooOOOoOOoooooooo

lol

211. Commander K - April 14, 2009

“SULUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!”””

212. Captain Cohen - April 14, 2009

Is JJ’s film the NEXT next generation’s [lower case!!] STAR TREK?

Of COURSE IT IS!!

BUT ..

My late father would have been in his 90s now. We all watched TOS together. There seems to be a heck of a lot of MY father’s TREK in this new film. “I like this [film] .. it’s exciting!!”

After 40 years of following all the series and films I’m doing a 200 mile round trip to meet up with ..

my older brother – I’m 50, he’s 54,
and our oldest sons [they're in their 20's] …

in order to go see the new film on May 9.

And ..then I’m planning to see it again with my middle lad
who’s just turned 9 and loves Next Gen &TOS.

So .. Is it our sons’ fathers’ TREK??

DAMN STRAIGHT IT IS!!

213. therealtrekfan - April 14, 2009

Still waiting….Where are all you snapperheads complaining about canon with TOS and TNG? Here’s the video…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1chtJQFQNs&feature=related

C’mon now, y’all are bitching about the movie before you’ve even seen it. yet you can’t come on and give logical explanations about the issues with canon on TOS and TNG? Did you guys crawl back into your hole because you’re owned?!!!!

214. Barking Alien - April 14, 2009

While I am extremely excited and interested in seeing this film I too think the ‘Not Your Father’s…’ is kinda stupid.

My father’s Star Trek was mine, The Original Series. You know, the…um…CHARACTERS YOU’RE USING IN THIS MOVIE. My father’s Star Trek was KIrk, Spock and McCoy and it got me interested in Star Trek and buying Star Trek stuff for the last 35 years. Why can’t companies tell you how cool something new is without having to imply the past sucked?

AD
Barking Alien

215. therealtrekfan - April 14, 2009

#214 – They’re not implying that past Star Treks sucked. They’re trying to bring in a whole new audience in. I don’t understand why some of you don’t get that. They never said it sucked. When they say it’s not your father’s star trek, they’re basically saying that there’s more action, more adventure, better special effects. It’s more of a modern take on Star Trek, while still keeping the same message that Roddenberry wanted to get out. A message of hope and enthusiasm. How can anybody even say that Abrams Star Trek is not doing that when they haven’t even seen the film yet?

Although I’m a fairly new father, this is definitely NOT my father’s Star Trek, the one with crappy special effects and a lot of cheese in it. This type of advertisement has to be done, unless you want the franchise to fail! If Abrams can draw new people in and still provide Gene’s message of hope and enthusiam, then he’s succeeded.

216. therealtrekfan - April 14, 2009

“Not your father’s Star Trek” is more geared toward the baby boomers. Quit overanalyzing this crap. I can’t believe how many so called “trekkers/trekkies”, don’t even heed Gene’s advice of tolerance, acceptance, and optimism. If you truly understant Star Trek, you’d be a lot more open-minded about this and quit whining and complaining about every little detail.

BTW…still waiting on people to comment about the problems with canon in TOS and TNG based on the videos I posted. Where did you all go?

217. Harry Ballz - April 14, 2009

Never mind this “father” stuff…..did anyone else catch the love angle when they dive off that platform?

Yes, in this movie……Kirk falls for Sulu!!

Yikes!

218. The Optimist - April 14, 2009

In response to #216.

In the past I have always choosen for myself what I think is canon. I don’t need a studio to tell me what is or what is not canon nor do I need other fans to tell me what is canon in order for me to enjoy star trek. Im not saying thats what your trying to do. Its my right as is everyone else’s.
There are some things in this movie that I am more than likely not going to agree with but that is ok. As long as there is a fun story to tell I can still descide what I think belongs in the greater canon for me.

219. Mr. Bob Dobalina - April 14, 2009

“Not your Father’s Star Trek” is obviously aimed at the younger crowd whose exposure to Trek over the last 20 years has primarily been TNG and the other spin-offs of the past 20 years. JJ is right to distance himself from those shows as they were one big snore fest, and have fairly fresh baggage attached thanks to Nemesis and Enterprise This ad campaign is loud and clear. This is Kirk and Company. This is back to fun and excitement. This most definitely is NOT the Trek of the past 2 decades. TOS is back!

220. wilj - April 14, 2009

#216. therealtrekfan
“BTW…still waiting on people to comment about the problems with canon in TOS and TNG based on the videos I posted. Where did you all go?”

I do not care if there is any canon in this movie, as I did not care in the other movies/television shows, sometimes things are a bit different, so what.

BUT

1. as the writers said, it is not canon.

2. they were complaining then, and they are complaining now, so what is your point?

221. S. John Ross - April 14, 2009

#217: And a whole new era of under-the-table Star Trek fanfic is born!

222. TrekdomKeeper - April 14, 2009

Dudes. you can’t pull in ‘new fans’ of trek by making something that doesn’t have the trek message in it cause then you’re just selling tickets to the same people who’ll forget this film when transformers 2 comes out. Appealing to that audience has nothing to do with bringing in new trek fans and everything to do with selling tickets. So like what’s the point of the trek part? Anyway being in my 20s I know people my age and in their teens who were into all the old treks. So this whole fathers trek thing is pure fail..

223. Paul - April 14, 2009

With the tagline “This is not your father’s Star Trek” Paramount is definitely trying to show they are thankless imbeciles who don’t have a slightest respect for property that brought them billions of dollars in last forty years.

It either is Star Trek, or it isn’t. If they are trying to declare this is not Star Trek, well, way to go. Meanwhile I’ll ignore that dumbass Paramount statement and go see the movie anyway.

224. The Optimist - April 14, 2009

What is Star Trek:

1. An optimistic future were Earth survives self-destruction

2. A diverse crew working together on a starship

3. That starship exploring the galaxy and by doing so the crew learns about themselves and the human condition.

4. A fun story that captures the imagination of the audience

Now, does the movie appear to have this? Lets see:

1. check

2. check

3. check

4. check

Seems like this movie is going to be star trek to me father or not!

225. Ryan - April 14, 2009

#223 – For your sake, let it go. Stop blaming people for something you made up in your head.

226. Harry Ballz - April 14, 2009

#223 “go see the movie anyway”

Then their plan WORKED!

227. therealtrekfan - April 14, 2009

#226 +1

The majority of my friends who have never seen or cared for Star Trek, ARE going to see this movie because the preview drew them in.

#223 You’re obviously not a Star Trek fan based on what you’re saying. Sounds to me like someone needs to call you a waaaaaaaaambulance!

Last time I checked, this IS Star Trek. I don’t think Leonard Nimoy would sign on if it didn’t still portray Gene’s message. Unless of course you feel that Nimoy simply has lost his marbles?

228. Battle-Scarred Sciatica - April 15, 2009

#129

fantastic!
Theres one right up the jeffries tubes of the canon whiners!
“Ooh this isn’t canon, that isn’t canon!” Get over it! You haven’t even seen the film yet!
#129 has shown us that canon hasn’t always been the strongest suit of Trek.
Star Trek will always be Star Trek. The message will always be the same.
If you’re that upset about it-don’t go and see it! It really is that simple…

Myself, I can’t wait for the Hustler version of Trek! I trust they wont be so anal in regard of canon!!!!!!LOL

229. TrekdomKeeper - April 15, 2009

224 ‘the optimist’ you forgot to add ‘a future in which humanity is portrayed as being BETTER than it is today. So far there is no sign of that in this film. What I see is arrogance on the part of the characters not a more civilized sensibility.

230. therealtrekfan - April 15, 2009

#229 – So you’re saying you’ve seen the movie huh? Or do you fail to understand what a “preview” or “trailer” is. It’s purpose is to draw people in. Honestly, if you’re an old trek fan that has no desire to see Star Trek with action, adventure, awesome special effects, the seriously, DON’T SEE THE MOVIE. Most true trek fans have been craving this type film. Draw new people in, then they can see for themselves the wonderful message Star Trek protrays. Star Trek needs an injection of new blood, or it’s dead.

I guess we should all idolize TOS with all the sexism and cheesiness it portrays in the 23rd century. Or perhaps we should idolize TNG outlook on the future that portrays a bunch of stiffs for a human race wearing tight ridiculous looking clothing.

As much as I loved those TNG and TOS, they really weren’t a very realistic view of what humans will be like in the future. Although i’m 100% confident that the human race will eventually better itself, there will never be “perfection”.

231. colin - April 15, 2009

229 : “Civilized” behaviour…hmm…let’s look at civilization, shall we? Arrogance is very much a part of “civilized” behaviour.

But even if I take the meaning you want to ascribe to it : “Polite”, I’m afraid it doesn’t make for a good movie (or even good TV). Conflict is the essence of drama, and Trek in all its incarnations has to survive on conflict. I think you’re unhappy because (for once) that conflict appears to be physical…well, after Nemesis, I’m a bit tired of purely mental dilemmas (like, “how long should I keep sitting in this seat”)…

232. laneiglr902 - April 15, 2009

Excuse me – but what about “It’s not your MOTHER’S Star Trek? I’m female and I’ve been watching the series since 1969 first re-runs when I was a girl. This seems like the Star Trek we’ve all been waiting for since Wrath of Khan. Now my family and I can hardly wait for the May 8th opening.

233. ger - April 15, 2009

DS9 was a realistic view of what humans would be like in the future. Even more so because we’ve seen not only Starfleet officers but civilians.

234. TrekdomKeeper - April 15, 2009

231 stop presuming that the human race will survive another 300 years acting the same way it’s acting now. I am not an ‘old trek’ fan as trek ( especially TNG) has not become irrelevant in it’s social messages. Nor was the human race portrayed as ‘perfect’ in it, just a he’ll of a lot more enlightened, naturally, as it would need to be to transcend current obstacles. I was 11 years old when I saw my first episode of TNG in syndication. I immediately understood the reasons captain Picard exercised patience in his decisions and why the women of the future were as reserved as they were. I never really liked TOS because of the sixism of it. But this film has plenty of that to go around too. Point is it’s even less progressive looking than TOS. Hey I got no problem with people wasting time and money on minlesd action films, all I wanna know (if you can answer me logically) is why does it have to have star trek in the title if the only resemblance is namesake? Why didn’t they just make another mindless action movie for people like you to soak up? Please don’t talk to me about ‘ the message’ of it cause if making it mindless is the way to get it out then what mindless movie watcher is gonna listen? Nevermind talking to some of you is like talking to a lizard in an ape suit, thinking the suit makes them smarter somehow.

235. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2009

As Kirk might have said (like he did to Savik in STII), “Thank you Mr. laneiglr902.”

236. The Optimist - April 15, 2009

Trekdomkeeper-

I think the answer to your question is simply that the times have changed and so does star trek. In terms of style and portray the TOS was a product of the 60s. TNG, DS9, and VOY were products of the 80s and mostly 90s. These are two very different eras with different attitudes. The TOS was more like a western and TNG was more like ER. Shatner’s Kirk fought klingons, Picard talked to klingons. As far as movie and television era that we live in now I think mainstream audiences are hungry for action. Like comics go through phases I think star trek will go through phases. But it won’t go through anymore phases if we fans don’t do our part and make this film a hit. I’ve been a fan for a long time and I like Star Trek in all it’s forms.

237. jonboc - April 15, 2009

#234 “all I wanna know (if you can answer me logically) is why does it have to have star trek in the title if the only resemblance is namesake? Why didn’t they just make another mindless action movie for people like you to soak up?”

That’s very easy. Clearly you’re more accustomed to the Trek of TNG and forward than TOS. TOS was, first and foremost, an action adventure series. It just happened to be set in space. It had romance, it had fist fights, it had beautiful girls in mini skirts. It was very much the wagon strain to the stars, stopping off at a new planet each week so KIrk could fight the bad guys, and with the help of SPock and McCoy, show us the awe, the wonder and the perils of deep space as the nation was feeling those same emotions with new rocket launch. It also managed to slip in that much heralded “social commentary” that so many like to point out. But such direct allegorys were nto really that frequent.

This movie has these elements because STar Trek…not TNG and what came after, but because STar Trek, the original series, had these elements as well and the movie is just being true to the source material. Thank God!!

238. TREK MOVIES:”STAR TREK” Y SU NUEVA BANDA SONORA. « AMIGOS TREK CHILE - May 8, 2009

[...] TV Spot #5 [...]

239. rlp - November 20, 2009

I missed the new movie this summer due to my father’s death. I was very excited to purchase the new DVD. OH MY GAWD! What have they done to my beloved Star Trek???? I don’t need or want to see Mr. Spock kissing pooing Uhura!!!! Don’t get me wrong Uhura (especially the original) is a knock out beauty, but I just don’t need to see them kissing and groping on the bridge!
I guess I am am an old 54 year old man who has watched the original (over and over) for 44 years. They made star Trek a knock off of Star Wars!!! The ship looked terrible, the aliens were stolen from Star Wars and the plot sucked. And they have mysterious stoic mystical Mr. Spock kissy pooing Uhura having Bridge sex! YUCK!!!! It is a terrible movie, bring them back from what ever time-line the producers stuck them in…I want my heros back in “real” Star Trek time!!!!!!

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.