http://www.entertainmentearth.com/cjdoorway.asp?url=aff-home.asp

Star Trek Box Office Still Strong + Abrams Fan Q&A + More ST09 Tidbits

For its fifth day Star Trek continues to show box office strength as it approaches the $100M mark in the US, and Paramount is already making money in the home market as well. We have those details and some more ST09 Tidbits including an Abrams fan Q&A, the Star Trek ARG in video, and more…even a look at how TOS would look in the hands of Star Trek’s cinematographer.

 

Box Office Watch: Trek stays strong
Star Trek continues to stretch its legs with a $6.51M showing on Tuesday domestically. For comparisons, Wolverine made $4.63M on its first Tuesday and Batman Begins brought in $5.40, so Trek continues to show sustainability with a domestic total of $93.3M so far domestically. For some interesting ‘showdowns’ at Box Office Mojo, check out Star Trek vs. Wolverine & Iron Man and ‘Franchise Reboots.’

FX buys TV rights
Are you too cheap or too broke to go see Star Trek in theaters or on DVD or on pay TV? Well mark your calendar for the 2011 holiday season, when Star Trek will air on the FX cable network, for which they just shelled out $24M according to Variety. For pay TV, you will be able to see Star Trek exclusively on a new channel called Epix, which should premiere later this year. Epix is partially owned by Paramount and will also be making films available in HD over the internet. 

Abrams talks to Memory Alpha
About a month ago, we announced that Wiki community leader Wikia was hosting a user-generated interview with Star Trek director and producer J.J. Abrams on Memory Alpha, the Star Trek wiki. The community submitted nearly 150 questions, 15 of which were submitted and 10 of which were answered by Abrams. Here are a couple:

Did the vast Trek canon help or hurt your work to make this film? 31dot

Well, it was hugely helpful because it gave us parameters. We knew that within that framework we could create, explore, and experiment. It’s actually nice when you’re given a box…. when you’re given parameters that you have to honor because it gives you limits and then you know that within those boundaries you can be creatively risky.

Being that this is a movie that involves time travel, if you could go back in time and change one aspect of this film, what would it be? JerryJoe216

That’s a tricky one. I guess that the answer really is a million little things. Its so hard to think of one thing that I would change. All I see when I watch the movie are all these little things. I think "Ah damn it, I could’ve done that better, or I blew that". I’m incredibly proud of the work that everyone did, but I always find there are things. I’ll think, "Oh my god I should’ve had it look that way instead of that way…. I should’ve done this, should’ve done that." So its not just one particular thing.

Go to Memory Alpha to see the full Q&A

Star Trek ARG in 4 minutes
Yesterday the alternate reality game tied to the Star Trek movie came to an end, with Leonard Nimoy handing out some prizes. We have been tracking this game all along the way, but the detailed updates could be a bit complicated. Now that the game is over, ElliRico has summarized it in a nice video.

The Spill Review
Popular site Spill have put up their enterainintg and animated round table review:

 
TrekMovie in the news
Over the last couple of weeks members of the TrekMovie team have been making comments to the press regarding fandom and the new Star Trek movie. Yesterday I was a guest on The World Tonight on Canada’s CHQR (should appear in their podcast soon). I am also quoted in a new article at Globe and Mail. And since I didn’t feel like going to a TV studio at 4AM, our own Toronto boy (and comics editor) appeared Alex Fletcher appeared on CTV’s Canada AM last Friday (video not online). Speaking of Canada TV, if you caught the recent Star Trek movie marathon on the Space Channel, you may have caught clips of me talking about the various Star Trek films. Also our merchandise maven John Tenuto is quoted in an article in Toy Collector Magazine. And finally our science gal Kayla Iacovino was interviewed by her local Fox affiliate while in line for the Star Trek movie, watch that one:

MSM again misunderstand TrekMovie commenter
Regular readers know that I have a bit of a pet peeve when it comes to those in the mainstream media who continue to push stereotypes, especially when they use this site to do it. It has happened again with an article in Reuters, which quotes TrekMovie community member James Heaney talking about the recent appearance of Chris Pine and Zach Quinto on SNL. Here is the section:

Then Pine, who plays Captain Kirk, tried to explain how the movie portrays the famed Star Trek transporters.

“I swear that the transporters on this enterprise utilize the Heisey … Oh God I have no idea what I’m talking about,” Pine said.

Well, the “Trekkers” have noticed the jab they took on “SNL.” On the fan site Trekmovie.com, one commentator using the name James Heaney wrote, “Oh my Q… Chris Pine doesn’t know what a *Heisenberg compensator* is? We’re all screwed.”

The article was trying to make the point that Trekkies don’t have a sense of humor and are nitpicking losers, but the irony is that they again missed that the commenter was being ironic. James even wrote ‘this is a disaster’ in his comment.

To be honest, I really am not fond of the fact that the MSM are trolling through the comments of TrekMovie.com and looking for examples to fit into their stereotpyes. Keep that in mind next time you want to go off on the size of some nacelles.

Finally: Star Trek done like Star Trek
A lot has been said about Cinematography of the new Star Trek. A fan has decided to see what TOS would look like in the hands of JJ Abrams and Daniel Mindel.

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
May 14, 2009 12:10 am

Lens flares!

One good thing about them is that if the new crew came across Vin Diesel’s character Riddick, he would be rendered incapacitated by the Enterprise’s interior lighting!

“The goggles! They do nothing!”

cagmar
May 14, 2009 12:11 am

LOL That video “Star Trek done like Star Trek” is awesomely right! Awesome! … because it’s true. LOL

Illogical
May 14, 2009 12:12 am

Love the TOS vid done JJ style!

captain_neill
May 14, 2009 12:13 am

I wish to god the mainstream media would stop pointing out the trek fans as sad losers

It sickens me when they try to give us a bad name, this is worse than misunderstanding us.

May 14, 2009 12:14 am

100 million before the week is over?? Unthinkable! but quite possible!

May 14, 2009 12:15 am

“…that Trekkies don’t have a sense of humor and are nitpicking losers…”

Doesn’t sound too far off actually…

JJ_roddenberry
May 14, 2009 12:16 am

HA HA HA!!!!

Nice lens flares video. I hope it’ll prompt him into finding a better ‘trademark’… Hitchcock had the reverse dolly zoom and Tarantino has a foot fetish. Surely Abrams can come up with something more memorable than ‘point torch at camera. shake well’.

Jordan
May 14, 2009 12:16 am

This film deserves every success it earns. It is by far and away the finest Star Trek film I have ever seen, and I’ve been a very discerning Trek fan for years. I am eternally grateful to JJ Abrams and crew, for they have delivered to me and every other fan the film we all have been wanting for years but have never been given. I have seen this film 3 times and plan to see it as many times as I can whilst it’s still in theaters!

May 14, 2009 12:18 am

“Surely Abrams can come up with something more memorable than ‘point torch at camera. shake well’.”

Except it adds a nice look and real feel to the film, since we see “lens
flare” in real life and nobody is on a steady cam…

cagmar
May 14, 2009 12:24 am

Woah, #8 Jordan, cool your jets man. Save some money for the next one. There has to be better Star Trek still to come.

Sci-Fi Bri
May 14, 2009 12:28 am

the MSM is a bunch of jocks, so w/e…

Dan
May 14, 2009 12:31 am

This movie is well made, but I hate that it erases the TOS and TNG timelines as they were/are!

TrekMadeMeWonder
May 14, 2009 12:34 am

Looks like they will get more of my money. Trek is good enough for a second viewing. Pehaps a third.

May 14, 2009 12:36 am

Lens flare video = Perfect, true, and yet more perfect.

Now that the film’s done, I’d really like to see Abrams speak more candidly on how the Writer’s Strike affected the film. There was a lot of talk and speculation at the time, but if he or the writers have ever come clean in any detail, I missed that post :/

JonBuck
May 14, 2009 12:38 am

Great movie, but next time…

Less shaky cam, less lens flares.
Build a much better Engineering set.

Please.

ety3
May 14, 2009 12:39 am

#12 —

It doesn’t. If it did, Nimoy’s Spock would have the same memories as Quinto’s Spock. Remember, Uhura said, “Alternate reality.” TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, etc., all happened as we saw in a different universe.

May 14, 2009 12:39 am

That video is so bright, I think I need to see an eye doctor now.

Sogh Ho'neH jorDe' taI-VamPyr
May 14, 2009 12:44 am

JJ Abrams just needs to bring the Klingon Empire into the mix, if he wants to make a film with a lot of Action.

Qapla’

Dan
May 14, 2009 12:50 am

http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob-orci-explains-how-the-new-star-trek-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/

Q: Why do some things appear different in the new Star Trek movie?
A: There is an alternative timeline created by Nero traveling back in time.

Q: Is everything different in the alternative timeline?
A: No, some things remain the same.

Q: Does this alternative timeline wipe out the original timeline (from TOS -Nemesis)?
A: No, quantum theory says they both co-exist.

Q: Does the original timeline continue?
A: Yes, again as explained by quantum theory.

Q: Does this quantum theory approach conform to ‘Trek science?’
A: Depends on the episode, but it is explicitly cited by Data in the episode “Parallels.”

TrekMadeMeWonder
May 14, 2009 1:13 am

Too bad they did not realize Engineering had problems. Perhaps the Writer’s strike was a problem. I can just imagine Scotty’s first comments.
Hey, come the thnk about it, I don’t remember a Scotty-meets-Engineering scene at all. I have to take care of that this weekend to be sure.

Careful… S P O I L E R A L E R T !

It was so nice that JJ nailed the core characters. I must admit, as a movie goer who is not afraid to let a tear roll when it feels right. There were three moments. Geroge Kirk’s sacrifice and their naming Jim. Kirk doing his magic in the Koby ashi maru simulator. That was real nice to see played perfectly. And Uhura’s moment with Spock on the Turblift.

The movie does have a real nice way of moving the story as a very fast pace.

Now that I think about it, I guess there are many quallities that are being missed, or dismissed. I have not commented on the lens flares, but I am sure they are there for a reason.

Dan
May 14, 2009 1:18 am

While watching the movie, no where was it mentioned or infered that the film was an alternate timeline. With Nero following through with his revenge he believed his actions would restore his future timeline. Even Spock was surprised to see that Kirk wasn’t captian yet, as he believed he was in his own pasts timeline.

Shunnabunich
May 14, 2009 1:18 am

Fixed:

Q: Why do some things appear different in the new Star Trek movie?
A: J.J. Abrams has an unhealthy degree of affection for lens flares.

Q: Is everything different in the alternative timeline?
A: No, the characters’ names remain the same.

Q: Does this alternative timeline wipe out the original timeline (from TOS -Nemesis)?
A: No, the movie is an entirely separate “what if” take on Star Trek which has only the necessary connections to the original canon.

Q: Does the original timeline continue?
A: Not bloody likely, considering Enterprise (such as it was) got canned back in 2005 and nobody’s heard anything since.

Q: Does this quantum theory approach conform to ‘Trek science?’
A: Data said so, and he is a pimp, so don’t you be mouthing off. He will smack a b*tch.

:D

May 14, 2009 1:22 am

12. Dan

“This movie is well made, but I hate that it erases the TOS and TNG timelines as they were/are!”

No, it didn’t. See link below:

http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob-orci-explains-how-the-new-star-trek-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/

May 14, 2009 1:24 am

Oh, I see people have already answered with that same link. Good good. :)

Jack
May 14, 2009 1:30 am

#20 — I think they totally realized engineering had problems (although I still think it worked in the film — definitely more convincing than the neon reactor on TNG) — they chose the beer factory route because they couldn’t afford to build engineering sets.

Geoffers
May 14, 2009 1:54 am

6 – I think your right mate!

M-BETA
May 14, 2009 2:09 am

21 – There was a big discussion on the bridge regarding the alternate timeline.

Spock told everyone his theory on the matter and Uhura chimed in with

“an alternate reality”

Also, we know that both timelines exist due to Prime Spock keeping all his old memories.

SPOILERS

Regarding a paradox, if Vulcan was destroyed then the Jellyfish wouldn’t have been built, red matter wouldn’t have been collected and Prime Spock wouldn’t have the means to create the black hole that caused the time travellng problem. So if all that is true then then this MUST be an alternate timeline/reality.

Otherwise time and space would just implode or something equally terrible.

May 14, 2009 2:36 am

We already know there is the “Evil” mirror Universe so now there are three universes in Trek Canon.

Now if JJ’s crew were to meet their evil counterparts? Or would that be a fourth universe?

M-BETA
May 14, 2009 2:59 am

28 – I personally would theorise that there are an infinite number of parrallel realities. Each with a difference to our own. The black hole that the Narada came through was just a doorway to that specific reality.

Hence why in Yestrday’s Enterpise, they only affected their own reality and changed their own timeline, yet in this film the original timeline co-exists with the new alternate one. It depends on which rift in time/space you go through.

James
May 14, 2009 3:24 am

‘Point torch at camera. Shake well.’

LOL! New monitor was nearly required!

4 8 15 16 23 42
May 14, 2009 3:34 am

Hi folks, I’ve been away from this site for 2 weeks avoiding spoilers of all kinds, but I saw the movie tonight in an IMAX theater and I loved it! Not only that, but the whole audience totally dug it, start to finish, too. So, I have seen for myself how well it is doing, and I have to say, amen to the rebirth of Star Trek!

This is the new canon, and it in no way interferes with the old one. Yes, we’re going to have to keep our timelines separate, but that’s no more difficult than specifying that one thing happened in the Mirror universe as opposed to the normal one. Now, we just have to specify, prime timeline versus reboot timeline. I can live with that. Context will often suffice anyway.

I, Mugsy
May 14, 2009 3:52 am

Hahaha that’s a superb video – J.J. would be proud hehe!

After all this talk about lens flares it wasn’t QUITE as bad as I was expecting in the new film, but still a tad too over the top. I hope with the sequal J.J. reigns it in a little. Handheld for first person scenes, or scenes that demand a bit of disorientation, but not ALL the time. Lens flares don’t happen all the time either, and I still think cgi lens flares suck. I’d like to see a return to more traditional/timeless type filming for the sequal. Let the camera be more stationary, and let us be able to focus more on the actors and take in the surroundings/sets a little more please.

Still jazzed about the film – cannot wait to see it again. Thoroughly surpassed my expectations!

– Mugz

I, Mugsy
May 14, 2009 3:54 am

P.S. I’d LOVE to see in the sequal a first person view of being transported somewhere else – not sure if we’ve ever seen that before? I never watched Voyager or Enterprise so quite possible that it HAS been done. Just thought it would look cool on the big screen and would add to the realism…

May 14, 2009 3:59 am

A bit like going to the optician. I’m just going to shine this light into your eyes.

Doug L.
May 14, 2009 4:05 am

oh yeah… the lens flare clip is HYSTERICAL!

SB
May 14, 2009 4:06 am

Is the entire ST09 like the “old” Trek done as “new” Trek video? That made me nauseous.

JimJ
May 14, 2009 4:22 am

#37-No, it’s not like that. Fankly, I think the video is pathetic and isn’t even close to the style and artistry that JJ used in the movie via lens flares. Are there too many? Probably, but this little 1 minute+ video is pathetic. It doesn’t even actually look like lens flares. Sorry, but I think it is a poorly made video (no offense to the person who put it together for humor). It is funny, but it is NOT a true representative of what the movie was like at all.

May 14, 2009 4:25 am

5 – almost certain we’ll hit $100 million by the time Thursday’s numbers come in (Friday afternoon) at the rate it’s going. I doubt we’ll get over $100 million after Wednesday’s numbers, but we might if we get a bump (though most movies don’t usually go up very much from one day to the next mid-week)

28 – yeah, I kind of like seeing them as thus:

Timeline alpha – the timeline we see through all he previous shows and movies

Timeline beta – the mirror universe

Timeline gamma – this timeline

Sprout
May 14, 2009 4:42 am

Question (SPOILERS):

Pike tells young Kirk that his father saved 800 lives on the Kelvin, but the wide shot shows like 15 TOS era shuttle craft (which seat 8-ish) escaping before he rams the Narada. And the Kelvin didn’t look twice the size of the Enterprise. So, where did all those lives come from? Just wondering.

C.S. Lewis
May 14, 2009 4:53 am

4. captain_neill – May 14, 2009

I wish to god the mainstream media would stop pointing out the trek fans as sad losers

It sickens me when they try to give us a bad name, this is worse than misunderstanding us.

Dear Captain Neill,

In the cinema behind me were perhaps a dozen fat, middle aged fanatics of all genders laughing, nay cackling! at every possible, socially inappropriate moment in the film.

They cackled at emotional tension, they cackled at emotional release, they cackled when something new showed up, they cackled when something old showed up. They cackled when Leonard Nimoy showed up!

These are the people that give Star Trek fans a bad name. I paid $18 for the IMAX ticket, $12 more for junk food, and three hours’ hooky from work to see Star Trek! Eons before “IDIC” it was considered common courtesy to be quiet and unobtrusive in consideration of others when in public. Why is it those most vociferous about the so-called “evolved” ideology of IDIC and absolute tolerance are the most offensive (and annoying) nuisances in real life?

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

TB
May 14, 2009 4:59 am

39.

I’m with you. Not only that, but Shatner’s Kirk was always fretting about the responsibility he had for the lives of his 450 crew members. Also, would any charaterization of Spock–unless it’s the one from the mirror universe–abandon a starfleet officer, unarmed, on a hostile planet? Wouldn’t Kirk be the one eliciting Bones to figure out a way to get him on the ship intead of the other way around? Wouldn’t Bones have made some effort to stop Spock from seemingly trying to kill his friend? And how about the suggestion that Kirk called McCoy “Bones” because he said that’s all his wife left him? Really? Kirk was fond of all things 20th century & I always assumed this was just a shortened version of the term “sawbones,” a widely used nickname for doctors, especially in the military.

Capt Krunch
May 14, 2009 5:01 am

I can see a Klingon story line..they must be pretty pissed at the Romulans for destorying all those warbirds…

39.. good question. on my third viewing .I counted 20 shuttles which would have to be carrying 40 in each?!?……but just how many crewmembers do these starships carry?

I still want to know why the E is being built on the ground in Iowa?

8…I’m with you…seen it 4 times and plan to see it a couple more times…the power of TREK!

May 14, 2009 5:06 am

9: “Except it adds a nice look and real feel to the film, since we see “lens
flare” in real life and nobody is on a steady cam…”

Lens flares are caused by light bouncing around multiple lenses before hitting the film. Unless you have a similar lens setup in your eye, you don’t see lens flares in real life. Don’t confuse seeing the reflection of the sun in a window (and the afterimage it puts on your retina) with a lens flare.

You might see something akin to a lens flare if you wear glasses and the light hits you just right, but it’s rare and usually requires you to be in an otherwise dark environment.

As for the steadicam, of course we do. It’s called our neck. And that our eyeballs will move involuntarily to steady our view almost exactly the way a steadicam does it. The only time you experience the “handheld” effect in reality is when you’re in a bouncy environment (like a moving car) and you’re trying to focus on your fingers, and even then your head/eyes do a lot of motion-compensation for you.

Star Trackie
May 14, 2009 5:21 am

Speaking of making Star Trek seem “real”, A great deal of my day in the real world goes by without witnessing lensflares, so yeah, a few less of those during my visit to the future and outer space would have been nice. They didn’t bother me, but if I had a choice, it’s a filmaking style that I’d rather see handled with a little less saturation.

Duncan MacLeod
May 14, 2009 5:26 am

42. Capt. Krunch.

I cant remember where i read this, but i believe the Shipyard was built in Iowa (riverside!) to honor the sacrifice of George Kirk.

Also in regards to the Kelvin having 800 people saved… I wonder if they were on some kind of convoy mission to transfer personel to/from a colony (thus why Winona Kirk was on the ship) Those certainly could have been 40 person colony transports…

Jorg Sacul
May 14, 2009 5:27 am

#43, you beat me to it. If we didn’t have built-in “steadicams” in our brain, we’d have never evolved past tree dwelling lemurs. That’s why I hate the handheld motif. I don’t want my movies or TV to look like it was shot on a rental camera by a palsied cameraman.

I don’t experience the blur of the rapidly moving camera that slams to a stop on the subject I turn my head to. It is way too overdone as an effect.
I don’t experience lens-flares (see above post), and who could work in that environment, especially with glossy and see-thru displays??
I don’t see things in real life like hand-held “cinema verite’, except when extremely drunk, and even then it’s not that bad.

I loved the movie. LOVED IT. LOVED IT. LOVED IT! Just wish some of the above was toned down.

Duncan MacLeod
May 14, 2009 5:28 am

Additionally, if you have to evacuate that many people in an emergency, no doubt they would CRAM THEM IN THERE with just the pilot having a few inches to maneuver

AdamTrek
May 14, 2009 5:28 am

39. Sprout – May 14, 2009
Question (SPOILERS):

Pike tells young Kirk that his father saved 800 lives on the Kelvin, but the wide shot shows like 15 TOS era shuttle craft (which seat 8-ish) escaping before he rams the Narada. And the Kelvin didn’t look twice the size of the Enterprise. So, where did all those lives come from? Just wondering.

Maybe Pike was thinking 4th Dimensionally. Perhaps 150 to 200 crew members were actually saved and adding future offspring to the mix up to that point of Pike’s comment were at 600 to 650. Starfleet has a different way of counting afterall (e.g. Stardates). It’s a stretch, I know.

=A=

lt1701e
May 14, 2009 5:55 am

does anyone realize that this is not a prequel but a sequel. this movie takes place about 10 after nemesis. but it happens in the past. so the star trek timeline actually isnt gone, its just now they are on an alternate timeline. think about it old spock still has all the memorys of things that happened on the original, but now young spock is experiancing differnent memorys. so to make a long story short you have to watch this movie after nemesis not before where no man has gone before. I also recomend you read star trek countdown. it adds to the movie eminsley

Denise de Arman
May 14, 2009 5:58 am

Lens flare video – Funny!

wpDiscuz