Academy Rule Change Sparks Oscar Buzz For JJ Abrams Star Trek |
jump to navigation

Academy Rule Change Sparks Oscar Buzz For JJ Abrams Star Trek June 24, 2009

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

Today the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced a change in the rules for the Oscars, which could open the door to more popular movies being considered for Best Picture. Returning to rules it used up until 1943, the Academy will be doubling the number of nominees to ten. The change already has some wondering if Star Trek could be on that list.

Academy’s big change
The announcement came this morning in a press conference. Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences President Sid Ganis stated: 

After more than six decades, the Academy is returning to some of its earlier roots, when a wider field competed for the top award of the year. The final outcome, of course, will be the same – one Best Picture winner – but the race to the finish line will feature 10, not just five, great movies from 2009.

Star Trek buzz begins
This big news reverberated around the entertainment community. Industry trades The Hollywood Reporter and Variety both cite how the five-movie limit kept the more popular films out of contention. Variety notes:

Acad’s decision will undoubtedly add heat to next year’s Oscar campaigning, especially in a year when no obvious front-runners have emerged in the first half. The move also comes on the heels of biz complaints that the Acad’s rule of limiting the pic nominees to the top five vote-getters elbows out some of the more popular titles, such as last year’s B.O. champ "The Dark Knight."

Other’s have jumped to the logical conclusion that this means the current number one movie is now in the game. EW ran a very early "Oscar Watch" column today, which notes:

I’d say this could really help the chances of some more commercially popular films, which are often edged out of the running by typical "Academy films" like The Reader or Frost/Nixon. Certainly The Dark Knight and WALL•E would have made a top 10 Academy list this year—will we now see Up and Star Trek on the Oscar ballot?

E has an article ‘Star Trek for Oscar?‘, which notes:

The move could mean typically overlooked genres like sci-fi, comedy and animation could get a crack at the big prize—and could spell good news for this year’s biggest hits, Star Trek, The Hangover and Up.

Time Magazine is also talking Trek for Oscar:

If today’s announcement did anything concrete, it certified a Big Picture nomination for Pixar’s Up and maybe — I mean, why not? — Star Trek. Wouldn’t it be nice to wake up on Oscar-nomination morning and hear, for once, "And the nominees for Best Picture are … movies you’ve seen"?

And SciFi Wire ran a story asking "Could the Academy’s doubled Best Picture category help sci-fi nab an Oscar?", which notes:

The move comes on the heels of complaints that the Academy’s rule of limiting the Best Picture nominees to the top five vote-getters elbows out some of the more popular titles, such as last year’s blockbuster, The Dark Knight.

The rules change could help some of this year’s contenders, such as Star Trek, which otherwise could be overlooked for consideration.

The LATimes is running a poll on ‘What fanboy film might get a best picture nod‘, and Star Trek is currently leading with 30.9%.

Does Star Trek have a chance?
Although genre films (including past Star Trek films) have often been nominated for technical awards at the Oscars (editing, sound, effects, etc), but it is rare for them to be acknowledged in the actor, writer, director and Best Picture categories. One recent notable exception was the three Lord of the Rings films, which were all nominated for Best Picture, with the last one Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King winning in 2003. The last science fiction film to be nominated was E.T. The Extra Terrestrial in 1982.

The Star Trek movie is currently #1 for 2009 for the domestic box office, and will likely end the hear in (or very near) the top 5. But it has also been one of the best reviewed films of 2009. The Rotten Tomatoes Rating for the film is 95%, which is higher than all of the 2008 Best Picture nominees, including the winner Slumdog Millionaire (which was at 94%). The Dark Knight, which is being cited as an example of a popular film that didn’t make the grade due to the previous rules, also had a 94% rating. The rating for Pixar’s Up, which soon pass Star Trek in sales, is 97%, so it too should be considered a contender for the 10 nominee list.

With all that in mind, it looks like Star Trek has a pretty good chance to get on that list of 10 films. Of course the year is only half over and the ‘oscar movies’ tend to be in the Fall/Christmas season. As for winning Best Picture, well that is probably not going to happen, but JJ Abrams and Damon Lindelof (the producers of Star Trek) should certainly start thinking about what to wear to the Oscars in 2010.

We will find out in Feb 2010
The 82nd Academy Awards nominations will be announced on Tuesday, February 2. The Oscar® ceremony honoring films for 2009 will again take place at the Kodak Theatre at Hollywood & Highland Center® in Hollywood, and will be televised live by the ABC Television Network.


1. Mark - June 24, 2009

Easy in top 10

2. Jeyl - June 24, 2009

No, no, no.

3. cw - June 24, 2009

Star Trek: Best Picture Award 2009. I don’t care how great the movie was, if that happens, hell has pretty much frozen over.

4. KennyB - June 24, 2009


5. Matt D - June 24, 2009

It won’t happen. We’ll see ten “prestige” pictures. Maybe “Up” but that’s as far as the Academy will be able to stomach

6. CJS - June 24, 2009

Hellta Vega?

7. mdbchud - June 24, 2009

I’d SO love to see the new Star Trek nominated, but I’d never believe the stogy old academy would EVER lower itself to give the Oscar to a Trek film. In MY opinion it has already won in my heart though…I can’t imagine anything better this year.

However, if I could only get one “Oscar” wish it would be for somehow Leonard Nimoy could be nominated and win for his role as Spock. I think everyone here would agree, that our elder statesman should be recognized….it is the logical thing to do. Unfortunately, the Academy very rarely does the logical thing.

8. Will - June 24, 2009

Loved the movie, but if Trek wins Best Picture, the Oscars will turn into a bigger joke than they already are.

9. Joe - June 24, 2009

have to agree, it should be nominated for something, but def not win best picture. maybe best director?

10. SChaos1701 - June 24, 2009

Forget the haters they have NO idea what they are talking about. I think Star Trek could be good enough to be a nominee.

11. Eric Cheung - June 24, 2009

I thought Star Trek was a fun, quality, movie but I think that if a genre picture wins it should be Watchmen.

12. Another Q - June 24, 2009

I thought the acting in Trek & Watchmen was
fan-dang-tastic! Awards to both!

13. Chris Rod - June 24, 2009

This Movie Deserves:


Amongst many other great accolades!

I LOVE THIS MOVIE! I should watch it again this week.

14. Cody - June 24, 2009

Great movie, but not “Best Picture” Great. Dark Knight would have made sense last year.

But I hold out hope for Trek 2A. I have a feeling the next one will be better than this one. :)

15. DJ Neelix - June 24, 2009

If “Star Trek” or JJ Abrams (for this picture) should win an Oscar, then the Academy Awards would loose all credibility. Why don’t they just give it to “Tranformers 2″ and Michael Bay instead? It’s the same crap from the same crappy writers. It is forgetful, unoriginal throw-away entertainment… No awards is deserved.

16. Commodore Kor'Tar - June 24, 2009

And the Oscar for Best use of Time travel creating an Alternate Universe goes to ……

*opens up envelope…..dramitic pause*

Star Trek !!!!!

17. DiDi - June 24, 2009

We’re talking about nominations, not winning an academy award for best pic. A nomination is definitely possible.

18. DiDi - June 24, 2009

15. Who crapped in your cereal this morning?

Once again, we are not talking about winning, but a nomination.

19. Check the Circuit! - June 24, 2009

Watchmen for best picture?! Did we see the same movie? Just check rotten tomatoes for a dose of reality.

20. Chisel - June 24, 2009

it’d be nice to get a nom, but it’s not gonna win.

21. Pyork (JE) - June 24, 2009

people people, if Star Trek wins then the stereo of “Star Trek is for n3rds” will be vaporized. You see, the reason people think that is because films like slumdog win awards. Non-nerds love Lord of the Rings because it won best picture in 2003. If it hadn’t, it’s popularity would have dropped and people would think the same about LotR as they do about ST. If Star Trek wins, there’ll be a bigger hype for Star Trek XII. After Lord of the Rings won best picture, people wanted a fourth, but we all knew that would ruin it. Star Trek isn’t bound to any book or predestined history therefore it can go anywhere for a long time

22. BurntSynapse - June 24, 2009

It seems unlikely that such a profoundly flawed story, with dialogue that might earn a ‘B’ for a freshman film student could possibly earn best picture, regardless of terrific acting, cinematography, musical scoring, makeup, sets, SFX, etc. Those categories? Obviously ST could/should win something.

Best film? ‘fraid not.

23. OneBuckFilms - June 24, 2009

Star Trek should at LEAST get the Sound and VFX awards.

Best Picture would be absolutely fantastic.

24. greenappleman7 - June 24, 2009

It could get a nom for best pic, now that there are 10 nom.s.

25. Admiral New - June 24, 2009

Eheh, I don’t think you can place ‘Star Trek’ up there with TDK and LOTR. Trek 09 is a fun movie, but it’s not a Best Picture contender.

26. Lou - June 24, 2009

the only movies that ever get nominated for best picture are the boring artsy movies that are 3 hours of dialog and drama and no action.

27. Dr. Image - June 24, 2009

There are always…. etc.
Hey, it was a damn good movie, dammit!
(But at LEAST cinematography and FX.)

Is it still playing?? I wanna see it again!
(That Russian bootleg does NOT cut it.)

28. Simon - June 24, 2009

#15 – “then the Academy Awards would ***loose*** all credibility”

People who can’t spell *lose* have lost all credibility.

Or, you may want to tell JJ Abrams to retitle his show to “Loost”.

29. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - June 24, 2009

Well. Oscar had no choice. because no one was watching the show. Especialy after last years Fiasco of a joke of a oscar. it would be great to see Trek Nomanated. it would not win because everyone liked it. Oscars do not go to films people like. It goes to a film that no one has seen. Rarely does it happen. When Lord of the Rings won there was simply no choice. But if you remember not one Actor of the Rings was even Nomanated even though that Movie had Much better acting then the others that won that year. For Trek to win would be a Complete Miricle.

30. Jeyl - June 24, 2009


He meant what he said.

31. screaming satellite - June 24, 2009

Trek has popped up at the oscars b4 – i believe TMP, TVH, TUC and FC all recieved nominations for tech stuff like score, makeup, sound?? surprisingly TWOK didnt get any noms despite having the first use of CGI a movie (if there was any justice TWOK wouldve been up for best picture, director, actor (shatner) and supporting (montoban), and screenplay)…cant recall if any films have won an oscar or not?

correct me if im wrong but i think TVH got the most noms and i *think* it won for best score…that was certainly the most popular trek film with audiences and critics (b4 the new one)

now obviously the new film is gonna get tech nominations and probable wins for those (the academy tends to nominate and give the tech awards out to the films that proved the most popular with the critics and BO – like T2, Matrix, TDK – over stuff that got trashed by critics – like the SW prequels, Matrix sequels, Indy 4 etc)…but a best film nom?…its possible…10 films is quite alot of choice – and its obviously been done to recognise films from genres not traditionally assiociated with picture nominations (i.e. sci fi).. trek has hit big both with BO and critics and audiences…plus theres serious nostalgia for (original) trek now…its a great american insitution that has never properly been recognised by the oscars (unlike star wars which got nominated for best pic)- plus the fact Obama likes it etc…

its possible….theres no way itd win..but it could get that all important nom and then itd always be known as the oscar nominated Trek film

plus dont forget Avatar….

32. MORN SPEAKS - June 24, 2009

Wow, wouldn’t that be something?!?!?! I don’t i know if Trek deserves to be nominated, BUT it is number 1 on my top ten list thus far. I’ll reserve judgment til the end of the year.

33. MORN SPEAKS - June 24, 2009

On a side note DAMN!!!! I wish this was last year, so The Dark Knight would’ve been nominated!!!!!

34. Charles Trotter - June 24, 2009

I love Star Trek, but there is no chance it will be among the top ten Oscar nominees for Best Picture. No matter how well-reviewed the movie is, I highly doubt the Academy is going to open its doors for a movie like Trek.

Up also won’t be nominated, since animated films have their own categories. Unless they decide to make an exception. Can’t recall if they’ve done that before.

The following movies probably have a much better chance than Trek in being nominated: Away We Go, The Hurt Locker, My Sister’s Keeper, Public Enemies, Funny People, Taking Woodstock, The Damned United, A Serious Man, Shutter Island, The Road, Amelia, Nine (starring Daniel Day-Lewis), Brothers, Invictus, and The Lovely Bones. And these are just the potential critically-acclaimed, Oscar-worthy movies with *set* release dates.

That said, I would love to be proven wrong. If Trek turns out to be nominated, I will cheer louder than pretty much anyone else. But I just don’t see it happening.

35. Third Remata'Klan - June 24, 2009

While that would be fantastically cool….


36. Capt Krunch - June 24, 2009

I could see Bruce Greenwood for best supporting, best musical score, best technical, best screneplay etc…, don’t know about best picture though…

37. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2009

It was a fun summer movie, but that’s all it is. It’s not even remotely Best Picture material.

38. nscates - June 24, 2009

A nomination for anything other than effects or sound design seems pretty unlikely to me. Frankly, I’m not sure how I would react if ST09 received a Best Picture Nomination. It would almost be like stepping into a parallel universe of all my own.

39. Troubled Tribble - June 24, 2009

Who cares? The Oscars are all about advertising.

The film industry self promoting by giving it’s self a big pat on the back.

The reason they have increased the number to 10 is because of the recession. Now more films can put the “Oscar Nominated” sticker on their box and increase sales.

40. Michael Hall - June 24, 2009

With all respect, Mr. Pascale, citing the “Rotten Tomatoes” score for Trek (or any other film) is pretty meaningless in the context of discussing an Academy Award nomination for Best Picture. The film is an enjoyable summer romp, nothing more, and all that 95% rating means is that the majority of critics wound up agreeing that it was, in fact, enjoyable.

To put it less charitably, the filmmakers aimed low, and wound up scoring a direct hit. That’s fine for the careers of the people involved, and for Paramount’s shareholders, but it mean this movie will have any lasting impact as cinema, science fiction, or even as good Star Trek.

41. Trey - June 24, 2009

It Should be nominated

42. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2009

#40-Michael Hall

Couldn’t have said it better. Well done.

43. John James - June 24, 2009

The acad has no cred in my mind. Stanley Kubrick and Alfred Hitchcock never won best picture. Enough said.

I wish someone would win the award and tell the acad to stick it.

44. Brian Kirsch - June 24, 2009

#40 –

I disagree, strongly. The filmmakers aimed high, and scored a direct hit! This film was good cinema. It was good science fiction. And it is GREAT Star Trek. A nomination, out of 10, would not seem inappropriate.

I want to officially start the “Leonard Nimoy for Best Supporting Actor” campaign

45. SChaos1701 - June 24, 2009

DJ Neelix and BurntSynapse are acting like nothing but trolls. They are just trying to get a rise out of people.

BTW, I got to see Watchmen for free and I still want my money back.

46. Admiral New - June 24, 2009

@ 40

RottenTomato ratings do seem to give this impression that movies are objectively, or numerically comparable. Yet, I think everyone would agree that Trek 09’s 95% rating hardly makes it more Oscar-worthy than, say, the 92% that Frost/Nixon got. It’s always more important to read what the reviewers actually wrote and in this case, as you pointed out, 95% of them simply agreed that Trek 09 was great fun, but nothing more.

47. Trey - June 24, 2009

i hope this movie will get nominated for an oscar because i think it was an excellent movie. any one agree with me??

48. Charles Trotter - June 24, 2009

36. Capt Krunch — With all due respect to Mr. Orci and Mr. Kurtzman, I don’t think the script is exactly “Oscar-worthy.” They did a great job with the characters, but the plot was pretty muddled, even a bit contrived. Nero’s motives, in particular, were pretty weak. Of course, some of the deleted scenes may have solved some of these problems, so perhaps it was not the writers’ fault but that of Mr. Abrams and his directions to the editors.

49. DiDi - June 24, 2009

I love the sweeping generalizations like “critics thought it was good fun, but nothing more!’ Let’s take a look at metacritic who have a better rating system, IMO, than Rotten Tomatoes when it comes to analyzing quality. ST09 received 13 out of 37 reviews scoring it from 90-100 in grade. Regardless of how you feel about the movie, that’s no small feat for a “mindless, low-aiming summer action movie.”

Since when have the Oscars been good markers of quality anyhow? This is the same academy who gave one of the worst movies of its respective year (“Crash”) a best picture award.

50. Charley W - June 24, 2009

Fredric March won Best Actor for Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde in 1937 or ’38, I believe.

51. Robert H. - June 24, 2009

Star Trek will most likely sweep the Saturn awards, including best picture and best supporting actor, Karl Urban. But wouldn’t it be sweet that Star Trek was nominated for best picture, or even won the Oscar? With all the crappy films that have been coming out, what are the chances that Star Trek would be in the top 5 regardless?

52. Kathryn Janeway - June 24, 2009

Why all the negativity? We’re not saying that ST will WIN for Best Picture, just get a nomination… I know that most films who are Oscar-worthy usually come out towards the end of the year but so far there aren’t too many movies that can claim to that title…

53. joblo - June 24, 2009

This movie does not deserve to be nominated for best picture. Common, folks, get real.

Either you appreciate what the oscars stands for, and you readily admit that Star Trek is in no way one of the 10 best movies released this year, or you’re living in a fantasy.

54. SChaos1701 - June 24, 2009


Why the negativity? Because these trolls just want attention.

55. Spockish - June 24, 2009

Star Trek win an Award, it is possible for best movie, but the reason it could lose is that most are still in the old cowboy style of life, In time as Sci-Fi becomes more connected to real life events the more normal that type of life becomes. In the 30’s & 40’s people used Movies to set dreams of a better future. Now days with 24 hour cable, movies are more like looking into a window of life. And how I’ve seen the rewards given the tend to be still frames for good portrails of real life. When movies become opening a book and exploring totally new adventures in life Star Trek may start becoming a valid reality to every day people and be honestly given truly honored awards.

Personally I’d love Trek to win but I feel the voting people today would give those odds less of a winning chance that me wining the lottery.

But I do think Lenard Nimoy is worthy of a life time award for showing us that others different from us can be of equal or even greater value then yourself. But those odds are getting less each year with our courts moving from logic of law to the emotion of pain deserves money.

56. DiDi - June 24, 2009

Since when have the Oscars ever nominated the 5 true best pictures of the year? What the Oscars stand for is nominating the movies that have massive studio campaigns and money behind them. Never have they been about recognizing true quality but prestige and what qualifies as an award picture. What I’m trying to get across has little to do with Trek 09, but let’s stop kidding ourselves about what the AMPAAS stand for.

Wall-E wasn’t even nominated last year.

57. Rocket Scientist - June 24, 2009

Oscars? Meaningless! I like what I like, and no award can validate or invalidate that.

58. cagmar - June 24, 2009

So because The Dark Knight was a smart, emotional, in-depth film of extremely high calibre, the academy thinks it needs to make up to the Dark Knight by nominating a nonsensicle, half-written action flick like Star Trek XI? Completely unnecessary. They want to increase Oscar viewership? This kind of thing will completely discredit and destroy the meaning of an Oscar.

LOTR won for a reason and that meant something. If ST wins, or even gets nominated, the Oscars will have become a joke.

Sure, STXI is a fun movie… but it’s not Academy Award material. If so, they might as well Knight Mr. Orci while they’re at it.

59. Sarah - June 24, 2009

I would love to see Star Trek win an Oscar, but no Star Trek movie has ever won one before (although I think 6 was nominated). What I’d really like to see, would be for Leonard Nimoy to take home an Oscar. In any case, I woudn’t cry too many tears if Star Trek doesn’t win. What I bet it would have a really good chance it, are the People’s Choice Awards. I haven’t seen the Oscars in years. If Star Trek is nominated I’ll watch, but if not, I’ll be watching something else like always.

60. Greg2600 - June 24, 2009

The movie was well done, better than what will probably be nomiated, but it is not “Oscar”-worthy.

61. Radio - June 24, 2009

I saw the movie today.

It made me throw up. I had to leave the theater and go barf. My family was upset as this was a belated fathers day outing they had planned for me.

No I am not kidding or making an editorial hyperbole. Like the herky-jerky non stop and completely unnecessary camera movement that had audiences hurling in the aisles in “Blair Witch Project” this film is totally ruined (for me) by this stupid “MTZ/MTV” wiggle-waggle cinematography.

J J Abrams, what the hell were you thinking??

When it comes out on DVD I’ll watch it again on a tiny screen, just so I can see all the stuff I had to turn away from just to regain my composure so as to not puke in the theater.

Not an old man issue either, my 25 yr old son was also effected, though not as much.

It will probably win an award for best camera work. Go figgure

62. Radio - June 24, 2009

If they had done the right thing with the camera, I’d say they hit this one out of the park, whether it wins anything or not.

I think Shatner and Nimoy should share in a lifetime achievement award. Maybe DeForest Kelly too, posthumously.

Yeah, I’m a die hard trekkie. I just wish I could have watched the thing.

63. VOODOO - June 24, 2009

Don’t get me wrong I loved Star Trek, but there is no way the Academy nominates this film. I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt it.

The Academy doubling the number of nominees to ten seems to me nothing, but a see through attempt to boost ratings and garner more interest to the Oscars in general.

64. thebiggfrogg - June 24, 2009

I am a Star Trek fan. The actors did a good job. The effects were great. Set design meh. I enjoyed the film, but no way is this “best picture” material. The opening sequence was probably Oscar-worthy and seeing some of the backstory to our favorite characters was great, but the main plot of villain seeks revenge was hackneyed formula we’ve seen a million times before (not only in Trek, but in other Hollywood action films). Now if any Trek film deserved consideration it should have been Trek II, or maybe even Trek IV. (And Battlestar Galactica should have swept the Emmys for acting every year and gotten a few best drama series nods). The scifi genre bias notwithstanding (I do wish it would go as there are credible scifi competitors for these awards), this is not an Oscar-worthy film.

65. cagmar - June 24, 2009

Wow, #61, 62 Radio – I’m so sorry to hear that, man! I hope somebody refunded your ticket or something. No movie should treat a fan that way and make you physically unwell. Here’s hoping the DVD treats you a little better.

66. Ricker's Dad - June 24, 2009

61. Radio

Your 25 year old was ‘affected’? What does that even mean? Did you literally barf because of the lens flares?
I’m sorry to ask so many questions, but as a doctor I’m concerned that you may be suffering from some kind of brain tumor or disorder. Yes, the lens flares annoy many people on this site, but not to the point of ruining father’s day or to the point of physical illness. That’s very irregular and could be an indication of a more serious medical problem.

OK, I jest, but come on guy…get real. You wish you could have watched the thing? It just wasn’t that bad, which is probably why nobody in the main stream press has made mention of the lens flares being in any way annoying in their reviews.

Oh and by the way. If your family set this movie outing up in advance and set aside time for you on father’s day you could have at least told them you liked it. Why hurt their feelings by telling them what a crappy movie they dragged you to?

67. USS TRINOMA - NCC-0278 - June 24, 2009

Why not dare to believe that “Star Trek” can be at least nominated!?!?! There should be a campaign to put this movie at least in the nominations!!! Let’s really make history!!!

68. thebiggfrogg - June 24, 2009

13. Hoiw is Quinto Best Supporting Actor? The film revolved around his character. I don’t know if I see it, but if he were to get the nomination it ought to be Best Actor.

69. Ryan O'Brien - June 24, 2009

Nimoy is seriously worthy of Best Supporting Actor. His part was integral and tied it all together. He was well loved and people ate up very scene of his. He has had a VERY long career.

I could see a nomination for picture. I really can. It was a great show, well made, and entertaining the whole way through. I had a smile on my face for two non-stop hours the first time I saw it.

70. Shatterhand - June 24, 2009

Star Trek is too good for Oscar shenanigans. Those awards shows? Completely meaningless. And I wish I was only saying that because the TV shows and movies I love are never nominated. If only I could use that as an excuse for my hatred of these insipid awards. From the overhyped “red carpet” coverage to the over-long, overblown ceremonies themselves, it’s just a big Hollywood circle-jerk.

71. Radio - June 24, 2009

Cagmar #65

I think the DVD will be easier to watch. Thanks.

Rickers Dad #66 said…

“It just wasn’t that bad, which is probably why nobody in the main stream press has made mention of the lens flares being in any way annoying in their reviews.

Oh and by the way. If your family set this movie outing up in advance and set aside time for you on father’s day you could have at least told them you liked it. Why hurt their feelings by telling them what a crappy movie they dragged you to?”

My family thought it was a bit funny after I recovered, so their feelings weren’t hurt. They know that I am prone to vertigo in certain situations like working under the car. I take medication for it. We all enjoyed the movie except for the excessive and unnecessary camera movement. Lens flares? What lens flares? Camera movement and lots of it was the problem. That kind of camera might be OK for a 4 minute music video on TV, but 2 hours on big screen in a dark theater?

And my son mentioned it made him a bit dizzy and my daughter (23) though it annoying.

J J Abrams…hold the camera still…do not detract from an otherwise fine effort.

72. VZX - June 24, 2009

What if Star Trek won Best Picture?

73. Rastaman - June 24, 2009

“Not an old man issue either, my 25 yr old son was also effected, though not as much.”

Perhaps not an old man issue, but definitely a genetics issue.


Did you see it in IMAX? Because I’ll admit sometimes IMAX can get me a bit nauseated.

As for the Academy thing, all I can say is that I enjoyed Star Trek a hell of a lot more than Up, so if Up wins I’ll be pissed. Other than that though, I haven’t seen very many films this year.

74. Daoud - June 24, 2009

#61, 62, 71:

I’d be curious to know your opinion of the recent series, Battlestar Galactica.

And have you ever been in an IMAX theater, or something like Disney’s Soaring?

My 20 year old, 2 18 year old and 15 year old daughters all loved it; as did my 16 year old son. I’m 44 and loved it and had no problem with the camera. The sequences on the Kelvin especially were made gritty by the camera moving.

If your son and daughter were both made dizzy, I strongly encourage you to take 66/Ricker’s Dad‘s advice and have this looked at medically. He’s just made a Greg House-worthy diagnosis, I think.

75. Charles H. Root, III - June 24, 2009

Sure, ST 2009 was fun, but the closest thing to award worthy was Bruce Greenwood’s portrayal of Captain Pike and the special effects.

76. Sci-Fi Bri - June 24, 2009

the academy wouldn’t know a good movie if they pulled it out of their ass… no nomination. if nominated, no win.

77. Buzz Cagney - June 24, 2009

All I know is I’ve never-NEVER- before seen any movie 8 times at the cinema before, until now. Number 8 yesterday and having had a three week break between viewings I can honestly say that I sat down to watch it as excited as the first time. And I wasn’t disappointed. Totally loved it again.
Best picture? Hell yeh!

78. Trekwebmaster - June 24, 2009

This is great news…surely STAR TREK has a very good chance for best picture…at least one would hope!

Well, we (trek fans) know that STAR TREK already IS the best picture in 2009!!!



79. Douglass Abramson - June 24, 2009

I love the Oscars, but they were set up by the major studios to promote their product. Don’t take them too seriously. IF Star Trek is nominated, it would be unusual but not in precedented. Raiders of the Lost Ark and ET were nominated for Best Picture. If it won (and that is a BIG if), it would be unprecedented, but stranger things have happened. For everyone that thinks that the film was crap and can’t get a nomination, find a copy of The Greatest Show on Earth. It is a film that I can’t understand how it ever got made or released. I’ve never met anyone who likes it or thinks that it is a good movie (although I’m sure that it has fans). It won an Oscar for Best Picture. If that movie can win, any movie can win.

80. Andy Patterson - June 24, 2009

Even if I wasn’t one of the ones who didn’t like the movie I think it’s a bit of a stretch to think it’s “best picture” worthy.

81. William Brennan - June 24, 2009

Ive never posted on here before, but I felt that I needed to ass my two cents to this discussion….

There are a couple of good points that Ive seen on here. Yes, adding 5 more nominations is probably a scam to allow for more movies to put the “Oscar Nominated” title all over their commercials, which in these times is probably not a bad idea (if it translates into more $$). Second, I agree that is is TOTALLY is response to the critics of the Oscars over last year snub of The Dark Knight, which in my opinion was good enough on its own to deserve a nomination without the extended field, but I digress.

I think the thing that bothers me about this discussion is the lack of respect the Academy gives to the opinions of the people that actually make their movies profitable: the consumer who actually take their hard earned money and take a chance on MAYBE going to see a good/great movie and not wasting their 10 bucks. For too many years it seems they have gone out of their way to find the movies that little if any of the American public has seen let alone even heard about until it was nominated for Best Picture. I think adding 5 more films to the discussion is not only logical, to borrow a quote from Mr. Nimoy, but also is LONG overdue.

As for ST getting a nomination for anything other than music or effects is an interesting topic all to itself. I think the real question is: Is popularity alone enough to be considered for Best Picture? In my opinion, No. I think a movie that is to be considered for BP should not only have some popularity but also an in depth story that takes you in and provides a look into a time and place that is different than yours. Movies are about the experience not just the lights and magic of effects.

So does ST have what it takes? I really do think that, even with all the movies set to come out later this year, that there is room for ST on the list of 10. You can complain all you want about what you think is lacking in the script and story. For most hardcore fans there was never going to be the perfect script or story so back off. But for the 2+ hours I saw the movie (both times) I was intrigued and brought into the world that Abrams and company had created for us. Yes its a summer movie, but whats wrong with that? Cant a good/great movie come out in the summer? Cant a good movie be fun, enjoyable and entertaining? Why do all the movies that win have to be dark, boring and depressing with a message thats crammed down your mouth so far that you wanna throw up after watching it?I think that ST covers all these bases and deserves to be considered at nomination time.

That was probably more than 2 cents worth but oh well, its just my opinion

82. freddy - June 24, 2009

I hope that you get that nail out of your head or you are the biggest p*ssy ever……..

Also battlestar galactica wasn’t all that good – it totally sucked.

Star Trek will sweep the awards this year and next……

83. Trekwebmaster - June 24, 2009

Sometimes I just don’t know what is up with people. Some criticize and point out every little detracting item in a film and say it is cliche or some other piece of crap, and you know what, some “item” might be crappy alone by itself, but when an “ordinary item” which is considered insignificant is COMBINED artfully, with a couple of other ordinary items in an innovative and thoughtful way, is a work of art, a masterpiece, and truly an innovative “reboot.”

I have heard it said that alot of people would never go see a film 8 or 9 times, but alot of Star Trek movie-goers surely did. This is not a “fluke” either, as evidenced by the MASSIVE amounts of money the film made.

Mind you this is NO BLAIR WITCH film either. It is most definitely a film which resonated with Non-Trek and Trek fans equally, since most have said the fan-base surely couldn’t have supported the film alone, but what with the profits so far? Profits indicate that many more than fans went to see it.

Suffice it to say, Star Trek is indeed worthy of a nomination, and it is worthy of WINNING an OSCAR, nay-sayers notwithstanding. Star Trek opened a new door to boldly go with FRESH ideas which began almost a half-century ago, and this is just the “beginning,” which is reinforced by audience appeal garnered by the film so far. We have much past history in Star Trek and now through a brilliant team of creative geniuses, we have at least another 40 years, hopefully.

Everywhere you turn, somewhere, someplace, and somebody mentions Star Trek. From new technical advances, even in all of the real-life scientific and inspirational television series, there is a mention of Star Trek. Just look in your pocket, at your cell-phone, there is Star Trek. I seriously doubt another television series which branched out to where we are now, can claim that broad of an influence, and is shared globally.

Toward that end, even for that reason alone, Star Trek deserves at least an Oscar for this great accomplishment. If this film is not at least nominated, it will be just plain wrong!

Star Trek, you already have an OSCAR in my book!

Keep On Trekkin’


84. Michael Hall - June 24, 2009

#75 Charles Root,

“Sure, ST 2009 was fun, but the closest thing to award worthy was Bruce Greenwood’s portrayal of Captain Pike and the special effects.”

Well, sir, you should know. You folks have done exemplary work of late. New Voyages’ “World Enough and Time” was a real gem, full of heart, wit and imagination, and all done on about 1/2000th the budget of J.J. Abrams’ megapalooza extravaganza. You have every reason to be proud

85. CapnJake - June 24, 2009

All of you claiming the oscars would lose all credibilty clearly do not realize that it allready did lose credibilty years ago by passing over talented performers for no reason such as when they refused to acknowledge Jim Carrey for his career changing performance in the Truman show, or again in Man on The Moon or yet again in Eternal Sunshine. And when they decided to give Denzel the oscar not for the movie he deserved it for but, simply because they felt it was TIME.

or all the times they passed over Martin scorsese.

the list can go on and on.

surely Star Trek wont win BestPicture, but a nomination does seem likely if the movies this year, dont get any better.
It is after all awarding the best films of the year, and how many other movies out this year are better than trek.
At this point not to many i can tell you, (though public enemies is pretty good, having just saw it last night)

86. Trekwebmaster - June 24, 2009


I agree…110%!!! “World Enough and Time” is an excellent piece of work!

Keep On Trekkin’ Star Trek Phase II!!!


87. MC1 Doug - June 24, 2009

I went to see “Star Trek” today, but the newspaper had the showtimes listed wrong, so I saw what will win this year’s best picture award. NO, NOT “Star Trek,” but “Transformers 2.”

cough cough heh heh

What a dumb movie. What a fun movie… so I guess it is a fun dumb movie. Not to be taken any more seriously than for what it is… a feel good yarn with lots of actions, nice SPFX… some heart, and (spoiler) I almost cried when my USS Harry S. Truman was attacked– Gee, that is two times in two months that the Truman has been ill-fated (in ST09 and in T2). Hey, Roberto, what have you guys got against Harry Truman???

and unfortunately a little bit of misguided humor.

Also noticed a couple of references that had a TREK tie-in (the Laurentian Trench, for one)

Next week I will see “Up.” and still have to see ST09 one more time before it pulls out of the theatre.

88. Schultz - June 24, 2009

ST09 was great, but it wouldn’t stand a chance against Avatar.

89. Canon Schmanon - June 24, 2009

Oh my God. How much longer is this going to make the Oscar broadcast?

90. Sarah - June 24, 2009

#25 “Eheh, I don’t think you can place ‘Star Trek’ up there with TDK and LOTR”

What is so great about TDK and LOTR that elevates them above Star Trek, let alone other movies? I enjoyed The Dark Knight, but to me it was nothing special. As for the Lord of the Rings, it seems to me they were just incredibly long-winded with innane conversation inbetween some big boring cgi battles that literally detracted from the best part – the non-cgi scenery.

I can’t speak for the technical side of movie-making, but as a faithful movie-goer I can say that Star Trek is much more fun to watch than either TDK or the LOTRs.

91. Max B - June 24, 2009

I love the film but its basically a big valentine to itself. I don’t think it deserves to win.

92. S. John Ross - June 24, 2009

I liked the film a lot, but I’d be very shocked if I didn’t see ten better films by year’s end (I’m pretty sure I’ve already seen a half-dozen).

Anyway, quality never seems to have much to do with the Academy Awards, so it’s a moot point :)

93. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2009

The new Trek is nowhere near the same class as Dark Knight or Lord of the Rings. Trek is a just a silly fun summer movie, but that’s all it is. I just saw “Up”, which is, in my opinion, the best movie of the summer thus far, and would be far more worthy of a nomination than Trek. The gang at Pixar are geniuses. They tell great stories with a great deal of emotional depth and humor.

Abrams and his colleagues knew they were making a populist film for a teenage audience; I highly doubt that Oscar noms were what they were aiming for.

94. S. John Ross - June 24, 2009

#93: “I just saw “Up”, which is, in my opinion, the best movie of the summer thus far, and would be far more worthy of a nomination than Trek. The gang at Pixar are geniuses. They tell great stories with a great deal of emotional depth and humor.”

Amen, brother. Amen.

95. Liz - June 24, 2009

TEN! Some years there are barely two movies that deserve to be nominated! Star Trek deserves recogniation in so many ways. No just JJ but I would love to see Leonard get a Best Supporting Actor award. I bet he’d receive a standing ovation if he won.

96. toddk - June 24, 2009

it won’t get best picture, director or best actor, even though all did a fine job. we will see nominations for sound, music and of course special effects. and yes the academy should have more films in the running. I still think star wars should have won best picture in 1977, concidering how many lives it changed.

97. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2009

If Leonard ever got any kind of Lifetime Achievement Award, it would be from the Emmy folks. He’s considered a television actor, as is Shatner. The Academy would never give him one.

98. SChaos1701 - June 24, 2009

Wow the trolls are out in force tonight. Stop making crap up and trying to get attention, please.

On another note, The Dark Knight only did so well because Heath Ledger died. It’s not that great of a movie.

99. Ensign RedShirt - June 24, 2009


Not agreeing with you is being a troll? And what exactly is “made up”?

100. Iowagirl - June 24, 2009

– Forget the haters they have NO idea what they are talking about… –

Good to know your mental superiority keeps this board in balance.

101. Millennium Vulcan - June 24, 2009

HELL NO!! I have been trying to keep my contempt for the thoroughly mediocre Trek09 at bay but this is ENOUGH. The only people involved in the film who deserve any consideration for an award are the visual effects team.

Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman thus far have done NOTHING in their careers that deserve any such distinction or recognition. They should be happy with their millions and their legion of fawning fan boys.

Leave the Oscars for those with true talent and vision.

102. George - June 25, 2009


Finally someone with a little perspective .

103. ety3 - June 25, 2009

Eh, no. I mean, yes, there’s a chance and it would be cool, but I doubt it will and I don’t think it really deserves it.

And I loved the movie.

The move is a year too late. “Dark Knight” and “WALL-E” deserved to get that nod. Hell, they deserved it when there were only five slots.

104. Trekwebmaster - June 25, 2009

Dear me…so much vile opinionated folks here.

I admit that Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman are relatively “new” to the arena, but that is not the point.

You all are missing the “BIG PICTURE,” but just in case you can’t see it, I will spell it out for you:

STAR TREK is more than just one single movie. It embodies the most endearing quality of the “human equation,” to explore the unknown. And in all this, and even more, STAR TREK is to human exploration as is the U.S.S. Enterprise is to NCC-1701. It is just that simple.

Pardon me for speaking out, but I am no “fanboy,” or belong to the “legion of fawning fan boys,” as #101 viciously remarks, but a person who can appreciate the ideal which STAR TREK represents.

Even though, Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman, among others, might have made some small insignificant errors in how big a ship is or God forbid, using a Budweiser Brewery for an engine room, still, they deserve credit for the major accomplishment of making a great film AND reviving a failing franchise. This is no small feat. They did it well and I will give them their salute and remain grateful for it.

While this reader will appreciate other reader’s concerns about “how large the ship is,” or “wishing for a better engine room set,” but the vile and vicious remarks from readers wishing to “sling hate” around for no real and relevant reason deserve contempt and do not represent even a non-fan’s perspective. Only an annoyance to be looked-over.

I do…appreciate it (the new Star Trek film!)


105. will - June 25, 2009

Batman would have won, because it was about ethics. Trek will probably get nominated, but the story is far too thin to win. If there was an award for most-awkward-insertion-of-slapstick into a dramatic movie, then perhaps the Scotty-in-the-tubes scene would have earned it a trophy. Don’t get me wrong, Trek was a fun romp, but it was fluff, and very light fluff at that.

106. Browncoat - June 25, 2009

I won’t hold my breath…..the academy has been notorious for ignoring my favourites and going with what I thought was crap.

Its artsy-fartsy and all Merrill Creep.

107. Admiral New - June 25, 2009

@ 90

Hi Sarah!

TDK is considered great because it pushed the boundaries of superhero stories. Rather than simply tell the tale of a caped crusader beating the bad guy, TDK told the tale of good guys who ended up questioning the morality of their own actions. And then, of course, there is the chilling performance by Heath Ledger.

LOTR is considered great because it captured the epic quality of Tolkien’s tale. With excellent production value, LOTR brought Middle Earth and the different peoples living in it to life. With an intelligent adaptation of the book, LOTR told the story of the cosmic struggle between good and evil–with good triumphing in the end. Six years onwards, LOTR is still more immersive than most, if not all other movies in the genre which came afterward.

These two movies, I think, can be grouped with other SF&F productions that show that the genre can be taken seriously, either in a dramatic or technical sense. This, for me, is why TDK and LOTR are better than Trek 09. :)

As for TDK and LOTR being better than other films, well, I never said that, haha! The year LOTR won Best Picture, I was cheering for Mystic River. And though I liked TDK, I liked Frost/Nixon a lot better. :D

108. OtterVomit - June 25, 2009

This movie is not even in the top 10 Trek films, much less top 10 films of the year.

109. Geoffers - June 25, 2009

~2 Etc… I will say it again.. if you think the film was so crap, why keep visiting a web site called “trekmovie”, there is a subtle hint in the title there!….What else do you do in your spare time, poke yourself with hot irons!

110. Paulaner - June 25, 2009

ST09 has a point for reinventing, reintroducing and reinvigorating a 40 years old, iconic show, bringing it back to mainstream from the grave. A daring project. Part of the success comes from this, in my opinion.

111. Luke Sutton ('The Tenth Doctor') - June 25, 2009

Star Trek for Best Picture nomination? Perhaps. I’d like to see it. Gonna win? Doubtful… and it probably shouldn’t.

Nominations and winnings for other categories on the other hand? Go for it.

112. LetKubrickMakeTheArtMovies - June 25, 2009

Sweet Baby Jeebus, what’s with all of the haterade?

This movie is on the same level as Raiders of the Lost Ark, and that thing got a nom! Hell, and that’s when they only had FIVE slots.

So far this year, of all of the movies that have been released, Star Trek and Up should be at least in the conversation, if not seriously considered. What else are you going to throw out there that has been released? Some one give me 10 movies that have come out in the last 6 months.

113. Mitch - June 25, 2009

It was a good movie, but it wasn’t a GREAT movie. Best Picture? Come on.

114. LetKubrickMakeTheArtMovies - June 25, 2009

*that have been better than Star Trek

115. LetKubrickMakeTheArtMovies - June 25, 2009

**and one more thing, since most of the haters here seem eager to disregard Rottentomatoes and other second hand critical feedback, the movies you name have to be ones that you’ve seen.

116. sebimeyer - June 25, 2009

Kinda reminds me of that quote by Rick Berman who said Insurrection was shaping up so well they may even be able to grab an oscar for best movie.

117. CJS - June 25, 2009

Lets face it, Trek 09 may have been slightly deeper than your average popcorn flick, but not by much. It’ll probably make it to the number 9 and 10 slots on plenty of critics top ten lists for 09, but it isn’t going to win any Oscars for Best Picture, Director or any of the performances. Probably won’t win many technical awards either given the presence of Terminator and Transformers on the scene. Sucky movies to be sure, but technically well done.

118. Jorg Sacul - June 25, 2009

wow… freedom of speech and all that, but why don’t you Trek haters leave until the next movie comes out, so maybe you’ll have something new to say?

119. Remington Steele - June 25, 2009

Hold on, you mean if these rules were like this then the chronically overlooked “Stop! or my mom will shoot” could have been in contention for an Oscar???

This is a travesty.

120. AJ - June 25, 2009

I have the impression that the Oscars are simply losing both TV viewers and societal relevance. Adding some blockbusters into the mix will bring the audience back and a hoped-for increase in advertising revenues.

I myself could not give a rat’s ass who gets nominated and wins if none of the films I know of are in the running. Instead of expanding the field for “Best Film,” why doesn’t the academy create a new category: “Best Popcorn Film,” or “Best Blockbuster”? It will eclipse “Best Film” in a matter of years, and will reflect the reality of American cinema today.

121. Selor Kiith - June 25, 2009

All those haters crouch out of their holes :D Kinda Sweet “NOOOO I DIDN’T LIKE THE MOVIE AND MY OPINION IS FACT IT CAN’T WIN!”

I think, there is a pretty good chance of winning… but at least it will get nominated!

122. 16309A - June 25, 2009

Come on people, really. I do love Trek and the movie was pretty good, but really, an Oscar? This movie isn’t even close.

123. JimJ - June 25, 2009

You know what, I have professed my love for this movie since I first saw it. After 6 additional viewings, my mind has not changed. Should it win for best picture? NO!!!

HOWEVER: There are several people on here that are WAYYY over-reacting to this news. There is absolutely no reason why this shouldn’t be NOMINATED. TEN films will be nominated. Frankly, there’s no way in hell that this movie should be left out of the top ten.

Chill out all of you doom and gloomers. It won’t win, I promise. But, it would be cool to finally see/hear some nominations. I’d sure be depressed to carry around so much hate with me all the time, as some of you seem to do. Sad……

124. Johnny Ice - June 25, 2009

Star Trek is good generic and formulaic empty summer flick, and nothing more. It isn’t Oscar material for best picture or any of the top prize.
Get real people. Star Trek had awful writing in the middle of the film. Kirk getting promoted to Captain within day e.c.c.

125. selcem - June 25, 2009

You know its quite likely to swipe up other noms.. like Best Film Editing, Best Makeup, Best Original Score, Best Costume Design, Best Cinematography and , Best Art Direction, and technicals …Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing,
Best Visual Effects……

126. CaptainDonovin - June 25, 2009

As much as I love this movie it won’t get a nod (if it does I will say oops here). Maybe for VFX & lose to UP or some other movie but scifi movies don’t get noticed for Oscar®s.

127. selcem - June 25, 2009

nd alll the years iv been watchin the Oscars itd be nice to hear.. nd th nominees are.. Little boy touched by priest, naked portrait of a loose woman, placing the stars and stripes on the hill… Star trek… dont get me wrong itd be a great moment for the franchise.. it will show appreciation for the 43 years of entertainment commitment.. stories that we all grew up with.. and gene’s vision.. why not get nominated.. it wont win .. but Trek will be back for good.. chill out peeps ..

128. Saul - June 25, 2009

Lets not get carried away here…this was an excellent sci-fi movie but beyond FX and music, or a stretch director, this movie was not Oscar-worthy of a Best Pic nod.

129. Andy Patterson - June 25, 2009

I’ve noticed a new word or concept that has come into being in the last few years – “haters”. That concept used to be called more appropriately – critical thinking.

130. Star Trek: Voyeur - June 25, 2009

This is merely an attempt to suck in viewers.

Academy ratings have dwindled.
No one watches because they have not seen nor care about their five arty picks.

So they throw us a bone (adding five mainstream titles) to get us to tune in…
…to watch them pick an arty entry from the field of ten.

I’ll be shocked if they pick anything that made money.

131. RM10019 - June 25, 2009

Let’s get Shatner a nomination for best cameo not made in a motion picture.

132. Check the Circuit! - June 25, 2009

It’s pretty simple….go to and rank the movies of 2009 by “fresh.” Of the wide-release motion pictures (non-documentaries) there are only two that are at 95% or above; Star Trek and Up. It’s one thing to be a Hater, but open your eyes to the facts. Star Trek isn’t an empty popcorn movie. It isn’t just for nerds. HUNDREDS of PROFESSIONAL critics have weighed in! It’s one of the best reviewed movies of the year…period.

If the Academy Awards is about quality moviemaking and storytelling, then there’s no reason to believe Star Trek couldn’t be nominated for Best Picture.

End of Story.

133. JimJ - June 25, 2009

#129-The word “haters” is being thrown around because some doom and gloomers feel it isn’t a top 10 movie for 2009. I disagree. Critical thinking is the realistic concept that it will not WIN. Haters are the people who are here to spread doom and gloom and make fun of people who think it deserves to be in the top 10 movies of the year. It sure deserves it a lot more than Night At The Museum 2, Terminator Salvation, Transformers 2, Angels & Demons, and The Hangover. Sorry if the word hater offends you. To clarify, I didn’t call anyone a hater, but I did say I’d sure hate to carry around so much hate with me day after day…and I meant every word of that.

134. lodownX - June 25, 2009

#130… I agree… more nominees… more viewers. A genre picture may make the top 10 … but its a certainty that it can’t win on artistic merit alone… The culture of perceived artistic integrity removes Star Trek from serious consideration as “best film”.

although… the Fan Boy in me must also agree with an earlier poster… A nod to Mr. Nimoy for his portrayal would be a generous gesture to a performer that has created arguably one of the most iconic characters in the history of popular culture. Ben Kingsly will win of course ..(?)… but Mr. Nimoy would get the biggest applause.

135. JimJ - June 25, 2009

#132-Here, here! But, of course, people will make fun of you mentioning rottentomatoes because they quote it when it suits them, and ingore it when it doesn’t. It’s a top movie there, also at IMDB, and several other places…but let’s just ignore that because we have to whine because it isn’t our daddy’s Star Trek and we can’t stand that it’s doing so well. I think I’ll go to the brewery now to have a warp core breach-lol! Sad.

136. krikzil - June 25, 2009

Dark Knight, yes. Trek, no. It was fun but hardly best picture worthy in my opinion. Sure, it was beautiful on screen, JJ’s direction was good and the actors did a fine job but let’s not go over board. As much as I love TWOK, I’m not even sure that rates up there with a Best Picture. I do wish the Academy had a separate category that did recognize films of this nature — big sci-fi or fantasy blockbusters.

137. Gummy - June 25, 2009

Sci-Fi Movies don’t make the Oscar List for anything but costumes and Special FX.

138. KevinA Melbourne Australia - June 25, 2009

Are we in an Alternative Universe?

12 months ago, who would have thought we’d be talking Oscars for “Star Trek” at this time? Unbelievable!

JJ, you the man!

139. Charlie - June 25, 2009

The Dark Knight is overrated. To hell with it.

140. Chris J - June 25, 2009

I got halfway down the comments, and decided that I am fed up of people saying “oooh why the negativity” and things like that. Look, we all love Star Trek on here. It is the common reason we are here, posting hundreds of comments. But seriously, some people didn’t like the movie. I myself had to watch it two times just to be certain whether I did or not.

So I’m sorry, but the people who have negative comments have just as much right to post as those of you who have positive ones. Sure, having a nomination would be great. However, be realistic… it was a *good* movie. But it wasn’t Oscar worthy in a Best Picture category. Effects- yes. Sound- yes. Best Picture- no.

Negative comments will make the next ‘Trek better, so embrace them.

141. JimJ - June 25, 2009

#139-Ouch! As much as I dislike people being doom and gloom about Trek, I feel about the same way regarding your attitude about The Dark Knight. That was a brilliant movie, also. So much better than Batman Begins……

142. Crusade2267 - June 25, 2009

They’ll get a nod if nothing else. Trek is notorious for getting emmy and oscar nominations in non-technical categories and not winning. TNG’s 7th season is my favorite example.

Ironic, isnt it? Trek’s always been too cool to be considered classy enough for an Oscar!

143. CJS - June 25, 2009

To be fair, Slumdog Millionaire had a pretty thin story, and none of the main characters were that compelling. The movie sucked you in with this question of how the protagonist knew the answers to all those questions. The characters didn’t have any particular depth and the chemistry between the leads was rather weak. So why did that film win Best Picture? Crushing poverty? Musical numbers?

144. CoolHandMelo - June 25, 2009

It’s a shame this “rule” didn’t come out a couple of years ago.
THE DARK KNIGHT truly deserved to win best picture last year.
Hollywood still snubs the voice of the people.

145. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009

Best Picture nomination? I doubt it. Best director nomination? That I could see.

And although I have one or two issues with the story, Star Trek (2009) isn’t the empty film some continue to make it out to be. The only explanation I can think of as to why some deny that the film has anything to say is that, unlike in Trek in the past, all of it isn’t spelled out for the audience directly within the dialogue of the film itself. Let’s see—not treating the audience like children? What a concept!

The Human Condition:
—-The psychological significance of a paternal relationship (regardless of whether or not the father is alive or dead) is explored through both of the story’s two main characters.

Social Commentary:
—-We also see the blatant racism depicted in Vulcan society in its treatment of Spock, and that arrogant bigotry is only mildly toned down (in the form of underhanded praise) in the council scene as compared to the Vulcan equivalent of the schoolyard playground. Indeed, Spock’s biracial heritage is perhaps even more socially significant today than it was 43 years ago—particularly given that such a large portion of the population (including the current US President) now deals with similar cultural issues in their lives.

—-Add to that the philosophical ground covered in the fatalistic/deterministic manner in which certain events and relationships in the story are almost naturally predestined, and I would say that this film gives the audience more than enough to chew on besides a couple of hours worth of action.

“Best Picture” worthy? Certainly not. But calling it “dumbed down”, “empty”, or “mindless” is equally ridiculous, IMO.

This film has far more heart than some are willing to acknowledge.

146. rob - June 25, 2009

i think it should win the razzie awards..god what an awful film star trek is

147. Jim Smith - June 25, 2009

I though that ‘Star Trek’ (2009) was a marvelous movie. Genuinely loved it.

Is is Best Picture material? In a sensible world, probably not. However, over the last fifteen years or so plenty of movies that are not, in any sensible world, Best Picture material have won that gong.

‘Star Trek’ (2009) is, while no ‘The Godfather Part II’, ‘Annie Hall’, ‘Rebecca’, ‘Casablanca’ or ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’ it is clearly and obviously a much, much better movie than, say, ‘Forrest Gump’, ‘Braveheart’, ‘Titanic’, ‘Chicago’ or ‘The Return of the King’. (To name but a handful of recent, unworthy winners.)

So, in short, you can’t rule it out – movies nowhere near as good as this one have walked away with Oscar. If they can, so could this.

148. RM10019 - June 25, 2009


149. DGill - June 25, 2009


“‘Star Trek’ (2009) is, while no ‘The Godfather Part II’, ‘Annie Hall’, ‘Rebecca’, ‘Casablanca’ or ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’ it is clearly and obviously a much, much better movie than, say, ‘Forrest Gump’, ‘Braveheart’, ‘Titanic’, ‘Chicago’ or ‘The Return of the King’. (To name but a handful of recent, unworthy winners.)”


150. danpaine - June 25, 2009

That would be an embarassment to the Oscars.

No way.

151. BrF - June 25, 2009

Star Trek was a great, fun, summer movie, but its ambitions and interests were pure pop entertainment — like a theme park ride, I think Abrams said. Anything the movie has to say about fatherhood or racism or society it says as lightly and slightly as possible; the themes aren’t there to be addressed by either the script or the director, just to add a little texture to a film that is 99% about the simple visceral thrill of motion and speed. That’s fine; not every movie needs to offer piercing new insights into the human condition. A fun movie, I saw it twice, but best picture, no.

152. RM10019 - June 25, 2009

Movie criticism while valid, is ALWAYS SUBJECT TO OPINION. No one here can argue the merits of one film without bias or one sort or another. Hundres of thousands of people have seen the new Trek movie. Tens of thousands have enjoyed it, a few thousand didn’t. Not one of them is right or wrong for their take on it, and neither will the Academy be should it get nominated or not.

153. DGill - June 25, 2009

#151 hit the nail right on the head.

154. Michael - June 25, 2009

I always found it frustrating that Patrick Stewart never won anything for his performances. Back in the heyday of next gen he delivered some really obvious performances that should have been at least nominated for. Patrick had a way of making what was otherwise a week script worth watching.

I really hope Star Trek finally breaks this barrier this year and gets at least a nomination for something other than a technical category.

155. Brett Campbell - June 25, 2009

131 – lol. Funny, in a bittersweet way.

“We couldn’t figure out a way to fit Shatner in in our alternate time-line Trek story.”

How about a category for best horse-hockey-pucks excuses?

156. Brett Campbell - June 25, 2009

125 – And best lens flares! Don’t forget best lens flares!

157. Jorg Sacul - June 25, 2009

129. Andy Patterson – June 25, 2009

I’ve noticed a new word or concept that has come into being in the last few years – “haters”. That concept used to be called more appropriately – critical thinking.

I don’t mind critical thinking at all. It’s just that there is an element here that, no matter if this movie were the third tablet of the Ten Commandments, it isn’t their interpretation of Star Trek and therefore, sucks.

I love critical thinking, lively discussion, and even pig-headed, er, Tellarite arguments… However, the people who hate it because they hate it and want all of us ignorant people to hate it because they hate it… really need to find a new forum.

They are called haters because they thrive on the hating. It empowers them.

158. Jim Smith - June 25, 2009

@ 149 None of those movies are even the best film nominated for Best Picture in their Oscar year. Most are solid examples of what they are but no more than that. ‘Star Trek’ is also a solid example of what it is.

By that criterion, it’s surely in with a shot. I’d not give it to it, but then I’d never give it to ‘Gump’ (moronic), ‘Chicago’ (inane and flat) or ‘Titanic’ (well made fluff, but released in the year of “LA Confidential’) either.

159. Capt Krunch - June 25, 2009

I think the 250 million TREK will make and perhaps 400 million internationally will be reward enough..let’s face it…it’s all dollars..and this TREK has surely won that race…

160. oby - June 25, 2009

It would make more sense to create a new category for sci-fi/comic book movies.

161. Author of "The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers" - June 25, 2009

Winner, Best Use of Lens Flares in a Franchise Reboot….

162. Sarah S. - June 25, 2009

161. Author of “The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers” – June 25, 2009
Winner, Best Use of Lens Flares in a Franchise Reboot….


163. Paulaner - June 25, 2009

#145 “This film has far more heart than some are willing to acknowledge.”

Indeed. The social and philosophical themes are there. They are presented softly if you compare them to the plain moralism of TNG, and the comic relieves are something we were not accustomed to since a long time. I compare ST09 to TVH: fun, comedy and reflections about society, all together.

164. DGill - June 25, 2009


I thought “Forest Gump” was a great film and deserving of the Academy’s attention because it was well-written and had likable characters. If Gump himself wasn’t likable to most, the supporting cast was equally good and elicited a variety of emotions as per the narrative. It was about the passage of time, death, and the perserverance of love and self-belief in the face of it. A lot of people didn’t like “Star Trek” because it violated canon, but I didn’t like the film because it contained a lot of asine dialogue (“I’m impressed…and I thought you were just a dumb hick who has sex with farm animals.”), contemptable characters (Kirk, Spock, and Uhura included), needless product placement, huge plot holes, and jagged pacing. The film came from the same writers who thought robotic antagonists in “TF2″ would have the audience rolling by saying “Get all up in that ass” and dry humping Megan Fox’s leg! If “Star Trek” was handled with more competence, the explosions, fist fights, space battles, and love scenes would have been much more enjoyable because I want to have fun too. I had more fun with “Terminator Salvation”, but I would still be up in arms if that was considered for an Oscar nod as well. I’m just saying a line has to be drawn somewhere for the right reasons.

165. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009

#151—“Anything the movie has to say about fatherhood or racism or society it says as lightly and slightly as possible; the themes aren’t there to be addressed by either the script or the director, just to add a little texture to a film that is 99% about the simple visceral thrill of motion and speed.”

Although I agree that it isn’t what I would consider “Best Picture” material, I still think you’re selling it short by suggesting that it is “99% about the simple visceral thrill of motion and speed”. The action and thrill-ride effect is there, but it doesn’t overpower the characters—who are the real driving force in the film, as it should be in Star Trek.

As for being relatively light material, Star Trek has rarely been anything else. In fact, almost all of its past social commentary and exploration of the human condition has been done in quite elementary fashion—even spelled out by the numbers directly within the dialogue of a given television episode or film. Star Trek’s intellectual capacity has always been exaggerated by the fanbase. The truth is, while it usually has something to say, what it says is hardly groundbreaking and not particularly thought-provoking either. It is often quite superficial.

While ST09’s commentary isn’t any less about the obvious, I think it holds it own quite well against the rest of the film series.

166. Ensign RedShirt - June 25, 2009


Agreed about Patrick. It’s a shame he never won an Emmy for some of the amazing performances he gave as Picard.

I don’t hate on the new film…at the same time I don’t think it’s as good as some of the earlier entries in the series. I just thought it was a typical summer movie which was technically well executed. I can definitely see multiple Oscar noms for technical categories, but that’s about it.

167. Ensign RedShirt - June 25, 2009


Interesting perspective. You make valid points, although I have to admit I found it difficult to figure out what the film’s message was.

168. John from Cincinnati - June 25, 2009

WALL*E an academy award nominee? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Yeah right.

169. John from Cincinnati - June 25, 2009


Sorry folks, the scene that will keep Star Trek from getting nominated is the same one that keeps me from fully embracing the movie (I gave it 8 out of 10). Kirks inflated big hands scene, like Mickey Mouse. The humor in it just didn’t work and it took away from the, admittedly, good attempt at trying to bring more realism to the franchise. It was slapstick, it was droll, it wasn’t funny and it was out of place with the rest of the film.

If only the movie carried the emotional impact through the entire movie as the opening scene where George Kirk dies and baby Jimmy T is born. That was one of the greatest scenes in Star Trek, the nod of best going to Spock’s death in TWOK. Unfortunately, I felt nothing when Vulcan was destroyed or when Amanda died. The movie fell flat when those two monumental events occurred. IMO

I am not hating on this movie, in fact there were glimpses of greatness in it. I guess I am so down on it because if it was more consistent through the whole movie, it could’ve been even so much greater. I hope the Supreme court shoots for making a great movie for the sequel, like Dark Knight was to Batman Begins, a sci-fi cinematic masterpiece and not just another Hollywood sequel.

170. SChaos1701 - June 25, 2009

165 – I definitely agree

I also figured I would repost something from another thread. There are 3 reasons why I think the hardcore “fans” (note, I use that work loosely to identify them) are hating so much on this film.

1. They’re ticked off because it messes up their precious canon. I used to be that way, then I finally got rid of that delusion and realized that Star Trek is FICTION and it’s never happened nor will it ever.

2. They’re ticked off because now, due to it’s new mainstream appeal, they have to share it other people and they can’t deal with that. Rather sad and selfish if you ask me.

3. Most likely a combination of 1 & 2.

171. Paulaner - June 25, 2009

#167 “I have to admit I found it difficult to figure out what the film’s message was”

“one movie, one message” is not a written rule, in my opinion. I am all for breaking old schemes. In ST09 we have a range of emotional waves. Family relationships, heroism, sacrifice, fighting emotions, losing everything…

172. Paulaner - June 25, 2009

#169 “Unfortunately, I felt nothing when Vulcan was destroyed or when Amanda died.”

For me, it was the opposite reaction: I felt Spock’s pain and despair just looking his eyes, his facial expression and his extended arm. I felt he was blaming himself for not being able to grab her. And I felt him scratching and screaming behind the wall of logic. Really moving. IMO.

173. Ensign RedShirt - June 25, 2009


I agree. The only major emotional moment in the film occured in the first 15 minutes and it was beautifully done.

My issues with the film have nothing to do with canon. I have zero problem with a reboot. The cast was wonderful. It was something that was long overdue. My concerns have little to do with Trek itself, for that matter. I just thought it wasn’t a very good film script. The writer’s strike may have had something to do with that. They were unable to make changes on the fly as they were shooting.

174. BrF - June 25, 2009


Agreed that the earlier series was not always (ever?) as deep as its sometimes portrayed. But it did sometimes take an honest swing at issues of the day. Sometimes clumsily or melodramatically, but the show had no obligation to do so at all, and yet did. And those ideas weren’t just slapped on for show or a nod to a small audience segment; it’s what some of the old episodes were about and really interested in. It was good, accessible, entertaining, pop culture what-if sci-fi.

I’m saying this to trash the new movie, I just think this is a difference between the movie and TOS that says something about the two.

175. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009

#169—-” Kirks inflated big hands scene, like Mickey Mouse. The humor in it just didn’t work and it took away from the, admittedly, good attempt at trying to bring more realism to the franchise. It was slapstick, it was droll, it wasn’t funny and it was out of place with the rest of the film.”

I’ve seen the film 4 times now, and each time the audience in the theater seemed to feel that the humor in that scene worked quite well. For my own taste, it worked much better than I thought it would (like most who read the spoilers, I knew it was coming at some point). IMO, it wasn’t simply seeing Pine with that symptom that made it funny (although my kids loved that)—-but Uhura’s reaction to it that delivered the laugh for me.

I thought there were alot of different types of humor delivered in the film, and all of them seemed to be well-received by the audience.

176. Ensign RedShirt - June 25, 2009

I had no problem with the Mickey Mouse hands; it was amusing. Pine’s initial reaction sells it.

177. RD - June 25, 2009

#83 – Transformers has already made $16 million since it opened last night at midnight, the highest gross for a Wednesday ever and the third movie to do that behind The Dark Kninght and Star Wars Revenge of the Sith. Blew Trek’s measly little $4M midnight opening out of the water.

Since that’s obviously what the people want and think is the best movie, I think it should be nominated and win the Oscar.

178. captain_neill - June 25, 2009

this is great news and be great to see Star Trek get Oscars.

I hate this mentality that some people have, stating that if you don’t like this film then you are not a true Star Trek fan. Not all fans of the same show and movies like exactly the same things.

and vice versa, I loved the new film, it honours the spirit of TOS but it is a diff entity from the rest of Trek. It is what Trek needed but it did sacrifice a few things I like about Trek to make it big again.

179. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009


I expect it will continue to do well through this weekend, but experience a major dropoff quite soon. All I’ve heard so far is disappointment from all directions.

180. Spockish - June 25, 2009

People reporting to have gotten sick, this reminds me of when IMAX first came out. They had warning for those faint of heart or easily over whelmed by to much action happening in short periods of time. They labeled it as Sensor overload, and could cause those effected by such may pass out or feel unstable.

I know for some 20 years is like back in the stone age when computer speeds where in Megahertz and now super computers can do Terraflops in computations. The brain can be overflowed easily today, but in many cases what makes this easier to occur is Drugs meant to enhance or have you more aroused by things you feel. Or it could be an elevated event in sensations that foods influence.

I am not doctor or play one on TV/Radio, or even wish to. I’m just looking at statements given freely and openly in the public, and applying Scientific thought to facts.

But I have been a patent of many doctors talking about effects on the Brain, and always liked watching shows that cover the topic of thought and influence. These happening could one day give a student doctor a good basis for a Theses paper for there medical future.

And if you wish to comment that it sounds like Lt. Commander Data again, I’ll bet you to it, because it kind of does. But science is based on the reporting of facts and their summation. And it may help that I was a self educated Computer Programmer how’s memory was erased by a Dramatic head injury (in English, head split open and brain exposed) and that was at the time TNG started so I was much like Data and his study to learn how humanity worked. I to had to do the same thing and admired Data’s journey.

181. Spockish - June 25, 2009

In rereading what I typed, I see a few very minor errors, a there instead of their and sentence structure’s that look odd. But I’m always looking for my errors and trying to correct them in hope of bevoming more perfect.

Did not Data once say that in one of the mostly Data was the shows topic.

182. Rocket Scientist - June 25, 2009

181. Spockish

LOL! Brain and brain. What is brain?!

183. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2009

Breaking news: Speaking of award nominees, it was just anounced that film and TV actress Farrah Fawcett has died at the age 62.

I wasn’t really a fan, but am saddened someone so young has passed on.

For genre fans she can best be remembered for her roles in “Logan’s Run” and “Saturn 3.” She also acted in controversial films covering topical issues as rape and spousal abuse.


184. Mister. X. Planetson - June 25, 2009

Not to insult Orci and Kurtzman… but Transformers kinda sucked. Its movies like these that give these guys a bad reputation and makes me question their writing skills. Granted the movie had a lot of good stuff, such as the fact that the humor placement had me cracking up and falling out of my seat. But the story was really kinda screwy. Yet i should also point out that i think most of the blame lies with Michael Bay. I imagine O. / K. probably had a pretty good story in there b/c i sort of got a sense of that when watching the movie… that there was some good stuff there that got unintentionally ruined by his direction. The action was non-stop… to the point where i started to yawn… some of the dialogue was pretty lame… but that is a personal thing and i know that kind of dialogue is kind of expected with transformers so i’ll let that slide. Ultimately i just think it isn’t my cup of tea, but i still look at it as a movie like any other that lacked in certain areas…. and let me say they didn’t lack in hot women. They were so hot they stole their scenes! it was distracting. oh well… i guess I’m being overcritical. I still enjoyed it so i’d give it a 2.5 out of 5 stars.

P.S. I think that Trek should be nominated for best leading male performance. I think Chris Pine did a good job and it was a tough role to pick up so i think he definitely deserves that as much as anyone else. I think Trek will be nominated for best picture but it won’t win… ain’t gonna happen. But then i ask myself.. why nominate something if you know it isn’t going to win?

185. OneBuckFilms - June 25, 2009

One things that is being missed is that Star Trek is likely one of the best films out this year. It is called “Best Picutre”, not “Most Artistic Picture”.

The artistry of movies such as Star Trek are unfortunately overshadowed by pure Art films or dramas, because many of the older academy members who do the voting don’t understand movies like Star Trek.

It’ll win in technical categories, because things like VFX and Sound are voted on by professionals in that area who can recognize the work done in those areas.

Best Actor, Actress etc., as well as best movie, include all academy members, bringing in the older academy members.

It is unfortuntate, because the truth is Star Trek IS one of the best movies of the year. Well acted, well directed, well scripted, well scored, and well reviewed (95% ion rotten tomatoes).

186. CodtsQ - June 25, 2009

It would be so cool if it were to happen. For all of you pessimistic people who have commented or refrained from commenting, you people need to have a little hope. Gosh. “Ain’t gonna happen” is not a good thing to say when you WANT it to happen. For the record, I think it will.

187. Mr. Alias X - June 25, 2009

I hereby change my username from The Governator to Mr. Alias X effective as of this date and time.

The Governator
Mr. Alias X. Planetson (Max)

Have a nice day.

188. tony - June 25, 2009

Nimoy for best supporting actor!!!

make it happen

189. Toothless Grishnar Cat - June 25, 2009

I frankly don’t care if the film gets a Best Picture nom or not. The academy has absolutely zero credibility with me in the first place. The only reason they paid any attention to Heath Ledger’s Joker performance was because of his death (it was a brilliantly-played role, but because it was in a comic book movie, the academy’s first impulse would have been to ignore it).

190. ger - June 25, 2009

This movie deserves no Oscar nomination. Seriously, what’s going on with this overhype? This movie is totally overrated! What the hell happens here?

191. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009

The fact that there is any “buzz” at all—and from legitimate industry specific media outlets like “EW” and “E”, as well as a respected mainstream outlet like “Time”—is in itself an extraordinary turn of events for the Star Trek franchise.

I’ll keep my feelings grounded right there for now.

I think that a nomination for ‘best director’ is absolutely realistic at this point, and a nomination for something like ‘best picture’ (which was unthinkable to me just yesterday) certainly looks a little more possible today. But that’s as far as I think it goes. There are still alot more films to be released between now and then.

While it just became “a little bit” more realistic—-I think that’s about it.

192. Closettrekker - June 25, 2009

#190—-“Seriously, what’s going on with this overhype? This movie is totally overrated! What the hell (happened) here?”

‘ What happened here’ is a film was released this year which you obviously did not enjoy as much as did a great many other people. Is this really the first time that has ever happened to you?

I’m not sure there has ever been a film released which pleased 100% of the people who saw it. Some people don’t like “Slumdog Millionaire”, and some don’t care for “Forrest Gump” or “Braveheart”—all of which has been made clear on this very thread, despite the fact that each of these films were not only nominated for BP, but took home the award itself.

While I think a BP award (and probably even a nomination) for Star Trek is a bit much—-given the expansion of the nominee list, I don’t think the early “buzz” should be all that shocking at this point.

193. Andy Patterson - June 25, 2009

I’m not trying to sway anyone to my opinion. I think anyone who has a feeling of persecution for liking the movie is confused. After all you’re in the majority. The fact I didn’t like it aside…I still don’t think it’s best picture worthy.

194. freddy-f - June 25, 2009

Hello, did everyone see the same movie?

As of today Star Trek is one of the best films of this year, as of today! So if voting were to take please now it should be nominated for sure.

From now until the Academy show will 11 other movies be better then Trek not sure but to say that it should not be nominated – sure sounds like a lot of close star wars fan up in here!!!!!!!

195. Scott - June 25, 2009

Citizen Kane.
The Godfather.
Raging Bull.
On The Waterfront.
Laurence of Arabia.
Schindler’s List.

Star Trek ?

Come on guys. Let’s keep things in perspective. It made tons of money. It will spawn sequels. It was “fun”, so it got a thumbs up (sorry for the unauthorized use, Roger) from critics, but Best Picture?

196. earthclanbootstrap - June 25, 2009

I hereby nominate it for “Best Picture that I found fairly entertaining, mostly because of the performances, but which I still had quite a few issues with and didn’t really remind me all that much of what makes Star Trek great”.

197. JimJ - June 25, 2009

I hearby nominate several people that post on this site speading doom and gloom about the Star Trek movie for “best Drama of 2009″. You should win hands down. BTW-Tranformers 2 brings in $60+ million on Wednesday (including the midnight showings). Those of you that want to bitch, now THERE is something to bitch about. I liked Tranformers 1, but Lord. Talk about OVER-hype!!!!!

198. Roderick - June 25, 2009

I think the Dark Knight definitely should have been considered for an Best Picture nod last year.

And I would think Up would be in the discussion this year. My feeling is the Oscar board is just trying to give themselves some wiggle room because they are feeling a little heat.

Star Trek is not a Top 10 movie. Don’t get me wrong, it is a great movie considering where the franchise was a couple of years ago. But there are some really good movies with simply better writing than Star Trek.

Now if they had a category for best action movie Star Trek IMO would win hands down. Also, I don’t think Transformers 2 was overhyped. I saw it last night. Good movie; a little long for my liking and I thought the ending was so-so. But it funnier than what I had expected it to be.

199. Author of "The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers" - June 25, 2009

A few thoughts…

People here are missing the point entirely. The Oscars, as a televised entity, are losing ground annually in terms of ratings. The Oscar, as a commodity within the industry, is becoming a bit more “cloistered,” if you will. It is sitll a thing of great prestige and honor within the industry, but that same industry still wants the public to buzz about what it means to be an Oscar contender or Oscar winner. The result? Expand the list of potential Best Picture nominees such that more *popular* films might make the list.

Even if you don’t think Trek is *really* a “Best Picture” in the spirit of those in years past, are you telling me you might not *watch* the Oscars just for Trek having been nominated? Heck, I remember watching the 1980 Oscars just to see if Jerry Goldsmith won for his TMP theme (and it has always been a travesty that he didn’t…and, no, Giacchino’s score doesn’t even deserve honorable mention in the Oscar talk..but I digress)…

The point here is that the Oscars are looking to increase their relevance…and if that means drawing in the interest of the pop culture crowd more than just the “artsy” crowd, so be it. Maybe, just maybe, what constitutes a “Best Picture” is changing…heck, time was that films that were epic in production scope, much like ST:TMP, were precisely the kinds of movies that won BP….but even that has changed…

To quote his Kirkness: “Open minds, fresh ideas…be tolerant…”

200. freddy-f - June 25, 2009

All I’m saying is that Trek should be at least considered including UP. But to say it is not best 10 movies of the year IS to early to say. The remaining movie could all suck I don’t know no one know yet. But as of today it is definitely top 3 hands down.

And all the people who say that it shouldn’t even be considered are the people who bitch and complain that shatner isn’t in the film or come up with the lamest way to “improve” the movie, please………………..

201. JimJ - June 25, 2009

#198 says: “Also, I don’t think Transformers 2 was overhyped. I saw it last night.” Then he says: “Good movie; a little long for my liking and I thought the ending was so-so. But it funnier than what I had expected it to be.” So, after saying it was a little long and the ending was so-so, you’re telling me that it deserved to make $60+million for Wednesday, for an all-time best opening Wednesday? PLUS, you are telling me that it’s not overhyped? Ok, in that case, then I think Star Trek will win an Oscar for best picture! Holy smokes!!!!! And no, I’m not hating on Transformers 2….like I said, I liked the first one….but “MY……..GOD!”

202. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2009

#195: “Come on guys. Let’s keep things in perspective. It made tons of money. It will spawn sequels. It was “fun”, so it got a thumbs up (sorry for the unauthorized use, Roger) from critics, but Best Picture?”


If TREK deserves any award recognition, it will be for sound, spfx and light flares.

Well, two out of three ain’t bad.

203. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2009

or.. maybe the Academy can create a new award category for:

“Most Improved”

Then they would win hands down…

204. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2009

Wow! I hate being harbinger of bad news… non-genre-related, but as I had reported earlier today of the passing of Farrah Fawcett, news wire just reported singer Michael Jackson (50) has died.

What a day this is proving to be.

205. Sunfell - June 25, 2009

I expect that Star Trek will get a whole cartload of Golden Globes, and a large handful of nominations- especially for the technical stuff. I’d love to see Quinto get a nomination for his performance as Spock- because he was the axis of that film- but I don’t know what category they’d put him in. And I hope Nimoy gets a nod, too- his presence was what got that film in the can.

I’d love to see a special technical category for lens-flares!

I’m an old-school fan- and I loved the movie. And I am so glad that Star Trek is finally -cool- again, and that entirely new audiences are discovering it. That- above anything else- has made this year bearable for me.

206. RD - June 25, 2009

179. Closettrekker wrote: I expect [Transformers 2] will continue to do well through this weekend, but experience a major dropoff quite soon. All I’ve heard so far is disappointment from all directions.

That may be but Transformers 2 just earned $60 million dollars in one day. ANd that’s just he dometic box office. It earned $120 million worldwide. If the rest of the weekend goes like that, then it doesn’t matter what happens to the box office afterwards. Talk about CRUSHING Trek into the dirt. I knew they were gonna stomp on the Summer box office, but good lord! It’s almost earned half of Trek’s entire box office take in ONE DAY!

On a positive note about Trek, it actually jumped up about $250 thousand last night from the $500K territory it seems to have settled into. Looks like it benefited from a sold out Transformers box office and may continue to do so.

207. Xav79 - June 25, 2009

JJ’s Star Trek nominated for the Oscars?

Wow!… I didn’t realize the Academy standards were so low…

208. MC1 Doug - June 25, 2009

Oh, I don’t know. “Transformers 2″ was not any more-or any less–than what I expected it to be.

I liked it for what it is… it is just a slam-bam-thank-you-ma’am movie. I mean, it’s Michael Bay, for goodness sake.. the man who turned the tragedy of Pearl Harbor into a chick flick-love story (and that IS a tragedy)…

and I like chick flicks, but I don’t want my history lessons messed with like that (same goes for James Cameron’s “Titanic”).

209. Christian S. - June 25, 2009

Come on Fanboys out there .I am normally one of you – But this movie does not deserve an Academy Award!!! Honestly!

210. Sehlat Whisperer - June 25, 2009

Miracles Happen.

ST09. Better be nominated for something or I’m going to never watch Oscars again. I mean, unless ST09:somethingsomething gets nominated. Then I’d watch again.

211. Christian S. - June 25, 2009

Gee, that sounds like it really deserves a nomination… in… “something”! ;-)

212. Xai - June 25, 2009

there is nothing wrong with ST getting a nomination. Hell won’t freeze over. It’s about time that movies people actually see get a chance rather than a flick named “My Left Sock” that was seen by only 13 people, but “critically acclaimed”.

213. Will_H - June 25, 2009

If Star Trek gets in this year it’ll make up for Dark Knight being left behind last year, at least to me.

214. GaryS - June 26, 2009

Star Trek nominated for Best Picture?

215. DJ Neelix - June 27, 2009

@28 Simon – June 24, 2009

#15 – “then the Academy Awards would ***loose*** all credibility”

People who can’t spell *lose* have lost all credibility.

Or, you may want to tell JJ Abrams to retitle his show to “Loost”.

Oh, that was mature.
You’ve never considered that english isn’t my first language? So it’s only natural that some spelling mistakes happen from time to time. I wonder how good your swedish, norwegian or german spelling is.

Golden rule in life – think before you speak.

216. ensign joe - July 13, 2009

Et tu, Academy?

If ST09 gets nominated I will eat my shoes..

217. Art - November 13, 2009

I Am quoting someone here as saying, “If Star Trek gets nominated for anything then the academy will lose all credibility”

I am a die hard fan of science fiction. Move your ass over, the academy has already lost all credibility in my mind. The Empire Strikes Back, ET, 2001, Terminator, Aliens – all of these films deserved more than the recognition that they got.

I hate the academy. Fair and impartial means that all films will be considered. If they cannot possibly hand awards to any of the contenders then they are not the authority in who hands out the best awards hollywood has. PERIOD.

218. VOTD: Batman is Confused - Plot Holes of The Dark Knight | Top Movies & Blockbusters | News, Reviews, Trailers, Photos, DVDs - December 9, 2009

[…] Academy Rule Change Sparks Oscar Buzz For JJ Abrams Star Trek … […] is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.