Comments on: Star Trek On Cover Of Newsweek

By: Rush Limborg

Rush Limborg — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:39:42 +0000

#20 GOOD MAN, Great Barrier!

Hat’s off t’ ye, lad!

By: The Invader (In Color!)

The Invader (In Color!) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:11:49 +0000

Cover looks COOL!!!

By: trekette

trekette — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:35:40 +0000

Actually, FWIW, I think the bussard collector is missing because this is an old model of the original Enterprise and it has been played with for so long (maybe it belonged to his parents – who didn’t keep it MIB), it has gotten beat up, like most of our toys over the years.

I think it is really sweet that it is not a perfect pristine model. It adds to the dreamy quality of the whole cover.

By: thenewK2

thenewK2 — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:33:39 +0000

It’s always nice to see the Enterprise on the cover of a mainstream mag, like Newsweek, although I could do without the constant Obama references everywhere I turn…that, and I’m hoping this movie cures the world of thinking that just because someone enjoys the medium of science fiction, (i.e., Star Trek), that automatically makes you a nerd or geek.

It’s funny that no one seems to think getting drunk, painting yourself your team’s colors and screaming like a fool from the stands on Sunday for a sports team is nerdy or geeky, but wearing a Sci-Fi related costume to a movie premiere is?

Speaking of the “politics/economics” of Star Trek, I thought that Jacques Fresco’s Venus Project, as seen in the film, Zeitgeist, is very much in tune with the future put forth in Star Trek.

By: marissa Gastel

marissa Gastel — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:12:15 +0000

I am truely excited for the new Star Trek movie. I admit I was not a fan of the original series but this movie looks incredible and star-studded. Chris Pine as Captin Kirk does not really look like William Shatner but i so do not care because Chris Pine is gorgeous and that sex scene in the trailer looks very scandalous. And that one bad guy from Heroes playing Spock is like a dead ringer for the original man. And Eric Bana plays the evil enemy, the leader of the Romulans which means the fight sequences will most likely be amazing! And I just saw Anton Yelchin will be in the movie which makes me want to see ten times more! I think that boy is going to be a truely wonderful actor and I feel he is already on his way.I have seen hin in Charlie Bartlet and Alphadog and both performances were incredible. These roles will only show the great range all of the actors that have been cast really have. I have no problem seeing the midnight showing of Star Trek and standing next to a nerd with fake Spock ears on.

By: John Sullivan

John Sullivan — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 02:29:08 +0000

On Sunday I heard “Newsweek On Air” speak with some excitement about the next Star Trek movie. They described the show as “The Original Series plus three follow-on series.” Oh yeah? TAS. TNG. DS9. I’m all the more willing than most to dismiss Voyager, but what about “Enterprise?”

The dingbat who wrote this article was then interviewed, and it’s pretty obvious to me that the only thing he got right was that innovative people behind the theory of the cosmos (Stephen Hawking), the Apple and Windows computer operating systems, and the inventor of the IPod and Padd are all Star Trek fans. No Tribble-trail, Sherlock.

I can’t thank the editors at Newsweek enough for featuring the shape of the ship we all know, and not the abortion of an altered and unrecognizable version of it on the cover.

Even they knew that the new design wouldn’t sell, or be recognizable as Star Trek.

By: Balok

Balok — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:40:40 +0000

Great to see TOS E on the cover. I like Mr. Orci’s story that lets events, charactrers, and the big E to be changed. But it would be nice to see a pic of the TOS E from the “prior” time-line in the new movie. Maybe these guys threw us a cracker? Anthony, you’ve seen the new movie, any chance?

By: moauvian moau

moauvian moau — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 18:23:17 +0000

184. Your point is a valid one. Maybe it’s just that many don’t feel the reasons ARE legitimate since they often seem silly and beneath serious consideration. (Hand shakes, bowing, not wearing his suit-jacket in the Oval Office, to mention a few), when those same critics were not only silent for the last eight years but issuing similarly silly excuses for worse behavior. Maybe.

By: krikzil

krikzil — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:44:18 +0000

No cover but there is a 2-page article on Trek in the new TIME as well.

By: Jorg Sacul

Jorg Sacul — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:33:51 +0000

__I’m ignoring the left/right/anti-religion arguments in the posts above.__

“In “Balance of Terror” Kirk must destroy the Romulan ship before it cross the neutral zone. ”

To be fair, the Romulans had been destroying Federation outposts, and violating a century-old treaty by not only entering the neutral zone, but conducting warfare in Federation space. Although Kirk was pursuing the ship, there never was the order given to outright destroy them. Disable and capture, yes, but only Stiles was all gung-ho ready to vaporize the Romulans (and by facial association, Spock).

in response to the Kirk quote, ““You’ll learn to build for yourselves, think, work for yourselves, and what you create is yours. That’s what we call freedom. You’ll like it a lot.”

Apparently there was no taxation structure imposed on those people. :-)