Star Trek #2 Film At Flixter + Strong Seller For Holiday Home Video | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek #2 Film At Flixter + Strong Seller For Holiday Home Video December 30, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,DVD/Blu-ray,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

We have been doing a lot of reporting about how well Star Trek is doing during the award season with critics, guilds and members of various academies. But Star Trek is also one of those few films that is also playing well with the mainstream. This is evidenced by a new announcement which ranks Star Trek as the 2nd most popular film at Flixter. We have more Star Trek rankings and the latest home video data below.

 

More Star Trek on the charts

As noted in our recent awards summary article, Star Trek is currently the #6 film in domestic box office, but it isn’t just money that ranks Trek, the film is also on the top 10 lists for the Broadcast Film Critics. And today the website Flixter (which claims to be the "world’s biggest online movie community") released the rankings of their users and Star Trek came out #2 on that list. Flixter’s votes for the year are based on 55 million ratings for the year by Flixter users.

Flixster Top 10 of 2009

  1. Avatar (92% positive)

  2. Star Trek (91%)

  3. The Blind Side (90%)

  4. Up in the Air (88%)

  5. Inglourious Basterds (87%)

  6. The Hangover (87%)

  7. Zombieland (87%)

  8. Up (86%)

  9. Michael Jackson’s This Is It (85%)

  10. Taken and I Can Do Bad All By Myself (tie, 83%)

Flixter is not alone. Star Trek is also in the top 10 of 2009 of the other big movie sites that rank user votes. Here is a breakdown from the various sites.

Star Trek ranking of 2009 films by site users (not critics)

One final new Star Trek ranking is that Yahoo Movies has listed their 10 most viewed trailers for the year, and the Star Trek Trailer #2 (the one that showed with Watchmen) came in at #7. Just for fun. let’s all watch that great trailer one more time.

Star Trek home vid strong in holiday sales- especially Blu-ray
In its fifth week on home video (ending Dec. 20th) Star Trek was ranked 7th (dropping three slots as three big movies were released). What is interesting is that 43% of Star Trek’s sales are for the Blu-ray edition, which is the highest percentage of any film in the top 20. This makes the Star Trek Blu-ray the 6th best seller for the week. For rentals, Star Trek was ranked 11th for its fifth week (dropping two places). Look at downloads at iTunes (which is more current), Star Trek is ranked 12th after six weeks in release. Finally in a statement about holiday sales, Amazon listed Star Trek, along with Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince and Up as the top holiday Blu-ray sellers for the online retailer.

What does all this mean?
Well even if the Academy doesn’t honor Star Trek with a nomination for Best Picture, it is clear that this Trek film has successfully worked its way into the mainstream. It also means that even months later, the film continues to be well rated, which bodes well for the sequel.

 

 

Comments

1. ryanhuyton - December 30, 2009

Great news! I have the Blu Ray. 4 hours of bonus features. Certainly one of the most important Blu Ray releases yet.

2. somethoughts - December 30, 2009

gogo Star Trek!

3. ryanhuyton - December 30, 2009

YES!!!!! I WAS FIRST!! Hoo hoo! Hee hee! Ha ha! Splendid!

I have already watched the Blu Ray 5 times on top of the 5 times I saw the movie in the theatre. What Paramount should have done was make dvd/Blu Ray combo packs for people who don’t have a Blu Ray player so that they don’t have to buy another copy when they do upgrade.

4. George - December 30, 2009

I bought a Blu-ray player just for this movie and it was well worth it. It’s so good to hear that Star Trek is being accepted by the main stream after 43 years the general public finally knows what we have known all along.

Thanks JJ, Robert and Alex, can’t wait for the next one

5. Tobias Richter - December 30, 2009

Thanks for that trailer again. This is one of my favourite trailers of all time. Incredible atmosphere and intensity…

6. AJ - December 30, 2009

I’m curious as to how many chose to wait to see Trek09 on disc rather than in theaters. It happens often. I hope we pick up some more newbies in the process.

It also could be a second chance at some improved overseas exposure.

7. P Technobabble - December 30, 2009

For Trek fans (especially Trek09 fans), this is all great news, as it indicates what we all hoped for: Star Trek is back! Star Trek is important again. Star Trek has a voice again. Maybe — just, maybe — the vision of Star Trek, the message about a humanity that can find a way to put away violence, confrontation politics, and other 21st century stupidities, will give us all something to think about.

5. Tobias Richter

Love your work! Awesome!

8. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - December 30, 2009

I think is it very safe to say that Trek is BACK!!!!!!!. Trek 09 was a great movie and it had the best trailers of any Trek Movie. Though Trek 6 was right up there. I think with all of this exposure the next Trek Move could easily make over 300 illion here in the U.S and another 250 to 300 Million World wide or even more.

9. Lore - December 30, 2009

You never got the Utopian Society until TNG. I don’t recall TOS mentioning war, disease, poverty, obliterated. TNG shows conveniently left out how this was accomplished. Oh I know, when humans found out they weren’t alone in the universe they all began to work together for the greater good. If you believe that one, have I got a deal on a great little bridge in San Francisco.

10. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - December 30, 2009

Hey Bob Orci. No pressure on the next Trek ok. We all know you have it in you to come up with a story so HUGE that would blow us all away. You are da Man!!! You can do it. If you don’t then we trek Fans will be in Riot mode. Again Bob No Pressure. Ill have the Agoniser Booth ready if needed ok. No Pressure.

11. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - December 30, 2009

#9. You forgot the Tos Ep. Let that be your last battlefield. Shreon did destroy it self due to racial strife. So yes. Tos Did talk about and show war and strife and what can happen if there is no balance. Also. it was talked about with regards to Vulcan and Romulan in Balance of Terror.

12. charliebob - December 30, 2009

I saw the movie 10 times at the cinema, 2 times at the Imax (the only Imax in Scotland I might add). It’s brilliant. Still haven’t got the movie on DVD yet, but I did get Trek socks and cufflinks for christmas, along with the model enterprise and series three of TOS. Woo!

13. P Technobabble - December 30, 2009

9. Lore

Besides “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield,” there were other episodes that addressed the issue of war or political conflict. In addition, Kirk often explained to other races how human beings managed to overcome their need for war and violence. Spock often explained how Vulcan was a barbaric race until they embraced the world-saving philosophy of total logic. Perhaps you have not watched TOS closely enough. Sometimes, even when the show was not about war, specifically, there was something in it about cooperation and the ability to control one’s actions.
The “Utopian” notion of society was Gene Roddenberry’s, and it appeared in Trek right from the start. It did not start with TNG.

14. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - December 30, 2009

#9 and #13. Don’t forget the Ep. The Omega Glory. A Great Example of war and plague. I could go on and on. Trek not only talked about it. It showed it. From Tos to Enterprise.

15. niall johnson - December 30, 2009

Got the target limited edition set where the two discs are nestled in the saucer of a more detailed model then the mainstream toy. Sweeeet! Still wish they used a tripod in the movie though.

16. Will_H - December 30, 2009

I got the blu ray for christmas but i still have yet to get a blu ray player, hopefully today. Still even the digital copy looked excellent, a lot better than even the high quality pirated versions i downloaded. Makes it worth the money for sure.

17. BiggestTOSfanever - December 30, 2009

Star Trek is best!

18. jas_montreal - December 30, 2009

Anthony, Do you know how much profit margins a blockbuster film like star trek makes in blu-ray/dvd sales ?

19. New Horizon - December 30, 2009

That was the trailer that sold me on the movie. The music, the editing. It felt epic. One of those odd situations where it felt like the movie didn’t quite deliver on the trailer in a few areas…for me it was often the musical score of the movie, I found it didn’t deliver the same level of awe and spine tingling emotion as that trailer did. Whoever scored that trailer should have a crack at the 2nd movie. No offense to the guy who scored the actual film, but it felt pretty standard at times although it did have some good cues. The Spock scenes with Kirk and right before Kirk transports…one of the best cues in the whole film. OH, that and the destruction of the narada.

20. "Check the Circuit!" - December 30, 2009

Slightly off topic but related to the article…..what’s the deal with all the love for Avatar? Clearly the 3D and animation are breaking new ground. As a movie though, I thought it was pretty weak. All humans are greedy and evil. The military has no conscience. The natives are all peaceful and noble. The science nerd is jealous because the wheelchair guy is adapting faster to his avatar than he is….but he gets over it. The moon goddess (or whatever) sends all the animals to wipe out the tech-troops. Disney-cartoon happy ending.

Huh? What?

I’ve been an admirer of James Cameron since the first Terminator. I’ve watched Titanic many times…and still get misty when I do. I love that he breaks down techincal boundaries. But, IMHO, Avatar was laughably bad at some points and a pile of cliches at best. I must have missed something though….it’s raking in the box office bucks.

(Of course I didn’t understand the appeal of Transformers 2 either.)

21. Jordan - December 30, 2009

Avatar deserves to be #1

22. startrackie - December 30, 2009

#20 “I must have missed something though….it’s raking in the box office bucks.”

It’s the eye candy and the 3D glasses putting a very pretty bow on a, otherwise, mostly empty package.

23. Devon - December 30, 2009

#19 – It was a movie trailer company that did music called “Two Steps from Hell”

24. jas_montreal - December 30, 2009

@ 20 and 22.

I thought it was a package that did not do everything extremely well, rather it balanced everything with satisfactory grades. Personally, I was swept away with the movie, story, 3d and beautifully sweeping soundtrack by James Horner.

I guess each their own.

25. BiggestTOSfanever - December 30, 2009

Star Trek deserves to win everything! It’s the best movie ever!!!!!

26. John from Cincinnati - December 30, 2009

It’s Official: Star Trek officially cooler than Star Wars!

http://www.spitefulcritic.com/2009/12/news-flash-star-trek-now-officially-cooler-than-star-wars/

27. Trek Ahead - December 30, 2009

I’ve been a Star Trek fan throughout all the incarnations, until the 09 movie.
I know I’m going to get raked over the coals for this, but it is the biggest pile of predictable suck I have ever seen! It’s not science fiction, it is pure fantasy! Maybe the story line would be plausible and believable to audiences from the 60’s but c’mon!
With all we know about astrophysics today, they expect me to swallow that a black hole can be created with some red goo, and that it can be destroyed by detonating antimatter next to it! JJ Abrams just doesn’t get it.
Thankfully, James Cawley is creating new Trek the way it should be! And not with a narrow, younger, and so called edgier cast who seem to just want to bone each other.
I will stick to the tried and true version of Star Trek, and reject this spastic shallow eye candy.
At least Avatar mixes science fiction and fantasy well, and it works. The story was a bit formulaic, but the characters were interesting and engaging. The 3D was just enough and didn’t have to be right in your face. And the cgi was incredible. Everything was fluid, and I just enjoyed watching this movie!
I’d like to see James Cameron’s take on the Star Trek franchise! I’m sure he’d do a better job than JJ!
That’s just my opinion, and I’m sticking to it!

28. Charla a long time STAR TREK FAN - December 30, 2009

#27 you said what you wanted, sounds like you don’t like Star Trek. So, why are you here? If you have watched ANY Star Trek, you would know that many episodes are pure FANTASY. We don’t want a class in astro-physics or aeronautical engineering, but a movie like the one that was delivered this summer of 2009. I love the sciences as much as the next guy but I don’t have to compare my lecture notes from quantum physics class to Star Trek to enjoy it. LIGHTEN UP AND ENJOY IT!

As for James Cawley, he even has been quoted on this very site as liking what JJ has done for Trek.

“One of the conversations with JJ I had was about his feelings about Star Trek. And that’s what absolutely sold me on JJ Abrams. He said how much he believes in the philosophy of Gene Roddenberry, the humanity, and the message that The Original Series delivered. That ’s his focus. That put everything in perspective for me. I thought ‘things don’t have to look the same as long as the message and the heart is there.’ And he’s got it”

He also says “No two people are going to share the same ideas. I can like aspects of it, even though they are not my choices…If I had been in his position I would have done things a little differently because I am not JJ Abrams. He has an idea and is going to follow that to the end, just like we do with New Voyages…We can have differences of opinions and still enjoy each other’s work. Would I have made some design changes? Sure! Would I have made a red button, blue? Ya! Are his sets spectacular? You better believe it!”

As for James Cameron, Here is a quote from him on the website, heatvisionblog.com-

“I loved “Star Trek.” I thought J.J. Abrams reinvented that franchise in a way that we all wanted to see in a long time. But that’s typical. I had quietly resigned myself that “Avatar” would be thought of in that way: celebrated commercially and by fans of science fiction and fantasy but not necessarily by critics and reviewers. ”

SOOO, anything else do you want to complain about? I mean give your opinion about? :D

29. Capt. Roykirk - December 30, 2009

@26. Duh!!. Trek has allways been cooler then Wars.

@27. I for 1 will not “rake you over the coals” as I agree with you 100%. This new Trek is not My Star Trek. All “flash and no bang” as it were. Yes this movie had great special effects, good looking and acting actors. Yeah, I agree that they are lacking in the science facts. Overall it just wasn’t a Trek movie. To me a Star Trek movie involves, The Earth, Universe, some planet etc.. are in peril. Kirk and co. come to the aid of what ever is in trouble, they save they day, and we all learn a lesson. This had Spock saving the day, and not completely, as Vulcan is destroyed, I don’t think we learned a lesson. Plus everything from the ship to the uniforms has been redone, when I think they needn’t be.
I give props to Cawley as well. Those guys rock.
Ok, getting off my soapbox now.

30. Sickly Sweet Cloud Creature - December 30, 2009

threadjack

It’s official…Patrick Stewart will be knighted as SIR Patrick by Queen Elizabeth II as of January 1, 2010!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091231/ap_on_en_mo/eu_britain_honors

Good on ya, Pat!

/threadjack

31. Mel - December 30, 2009

Sadly enough there is one important ranking where Star Trek is a disappointment and that is the yearly box office ranking of all countries outside of the USA.

Star Trek will probably get the 7. place in the USA box office ranking.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=2009&p=.htm

In the “overseas” ranking Star Trek is only on the 18. place at the moment with $128 millions. Even “Michael Jackson’s This Is It”, “G-Force” and “G.I. Joe” were more successful. The best movie “Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs” made for comparison $691 millions. There are 10 movies which made more than $200 millions. Star Trek made only 33 % of its grosses outside of the USA. This is bad.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/weekend/yearly/?yr=2009&p=.htm

So I hope the next movie will do better. The movie from this year is good promotion for the next and hopefully they won’t show it again against other big movies. I think it would be good if they show the next movie in January, February or March 2012. The competition isn’t so strong then.

32. Mel - December 30, 2009

Star Trek is at the moment on the 11. place in the yearly worldwide box office ranking.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2009&p=.htm

33. Trek Ahead - December 30, 2009

#28, I respect your opinion, I do. But I do love Star Trek. I’ve seen every single episode of every series, and the movies more than a dozen times.
Star Trek has been a part of my life for as long as I can remember. I watched TOS during it’s first run.
I have Trek uniforms in my closet, starship models hanging from the ceiling, action figures, props, and the license plate on my car is a Trek phrase. I just don’t like this new movie.
Will I go see the next movie in the theaters? You bet! I am hopeful the next one will be better.
I know there are very many people who like this movie. I am just not one of them. And I harbor no ill will to you, or those fans who do like the movie.
I read the same article with James Cawley’s comments. I just prefer his version of classic Trek, that’s all.
It would be interesting to see what Mr. Cawley would do if he was given the same budget to do a Trek movie. That said, can we agree to disagree?
#29 Thanks, I’m glad I’m not the only one!

34. Captain Robert April - December 30, 2009

The only positive aspect of this piece of hyperactive eye candy is that, by association, will draw attention to the original series, and hopefully bring in more long time fans. Otherwise, it was a typical brainless explodapalooza popcorn flick (and that aspect alone would be enough for Gene Roddenberry to have denounced this thing from every convention podium he could get to; I don’t care what Majel and Rod said, GR would’ve hated this thing, because it is the very thing he feared Star Trek would be prostituted into once he was gone from the scene).

35. devon - December 30, 2009

I disagree that Gene would not have approved of Trek 2009, as he was quoted in various Magazine and live interviews as saying that he hoped some day someone would come along and re-imagine his “baby” and reintroduce it to a whole new legion of fans! That his vision wasn’t necessarily the only or the best version of Trek, that he simply wanted it to evolve and continue to live long & prosper! And I believe that he would approve of Star Trek’s current success, and of J.J.’s vision, and I also believe that Majel & Rod would know how Gene felt moreso than most others! I’m not so certain that Gene would approve of your namesake however, Captain Robert April of the Starship Inflexible!

36. Jim Nightshade - December 30, 2009

avatar deserves all the attention and praise–the acting is as good as the new trek,story,music,effex etc all better and groundbreaking–I luv the new trek movie tons i basically got a ps3 and hidef tv to watch it on–but,avatar is a better movie-besides technically stunning music n actors were all wonderful-i dont think avatar is simpleminded at all-its great to watch a movie with a point-hope the new trek movie will do likewise n be about so ething

37. Capt. Roykirk - December 31, 2009

@34.
Just because this is a re-imagining of Trek doesn’t mean it’s a good one. I’m sure Roddenberry would be ok with the general idea of it being done by different people, but maybe not this incarnation.
I don’t feel though that this movie taught us a lesson like Trek should. The original series seemed to all ways talk about important aspects, Racism, Cold War, Sexist issues and so on. I don’t think this movie did. Maybe “Don’t be controlled by revenge” but Khan all ready showed us that.
Maybe ST12 or whatever they call the next Trek movie will do better. One can certainly hope.

38. Charles Trotter - December 31, 2009

31. & 32. Mel — Fortunately, despite what many people believe, a movie’s placement in a chart is irrelevant. While having it at a high placement in the charts would certainly be an added bonus, what really matters is A.) the amount of money it earns in relation to its costs, and B.) the response from audiences and critics. A is well covered, considering the movie broke even in June (as previously reported), and B is definitely covered, considering it’s one of the most highly-praised movies of the year. In fact, taking into account the average ratings on RottenTomatoes and the rating on IMDb, Trek is the fourth highest-rated major motion picture of the year. With this much success, box office chart rankings are fairly irrelevant. Besides, 7th in the US and 11th worldwide for a Star Trek movie is pretty damn good; before the movie’s release, very few expected it to get *that* high.

39. Charles Trotter - December 31, 2009

35. Nightshade — The effects were groundbreaking, this is true. And the acting is fairly good, as well. But that’s all Avatar really has going for it. The story was previously used in such films as Dances with Wolves, Pocahontas, The Last Samurai, even FernGully. Not saying Trek didn’t borrow story elements itself (*cough*Star Wars*cough*), my point is the story for Avatar felt much more derivative than in Trek. Also, Trek has the advantage of strong characterizations.

As for the movie teaching us a lesson, its main theme was living up to one’s potential despite insurmountable odds. The idea was not to make the first movie too preachy or cerebral, to make it more accessible to the more “simple-minded,” effects-loving audiences of today. Also, it was an origin story, and like most such stories, plot and morals were pushed into the background in favor of character and action. This movie was not necessarily supposed to teach us a lesson, rather its purpose was to make Trek more accessible to a wider audience. Now that the first movie has successfully captured people’s attention, and now that they have successfully re-introduced the characters to a wider audience, the filmmakers will likely focus on a moralistic story for the sequel.

40. Charles Trotter - December 31, 2009

Addendum to #38

“Also, Trek has the advantage of strong characterizations.”

I meant to say, Trek has the advantage of *stronger* characterizations.

41. Mel - December 31, 2009

@ 37

Critics don’t matter. Transformers 2 has only a 20 % positive rating at Rotten Tomatoes and the RT community gives it 53 % positive, but the movie is still much more successful wordwide than Star Trek.

You point A is what matters and of course Star Trek was overall a success in this regard. But it could have done SO MUCH BETTER! Other movies with a big budget like Star Trek made much more money outside the USA. Star Trek was beaten outside of the USA by movies which were much cheaper to produce and some other cheap movies behind Star Trek did still make quite much money in relation to the production costs.

Just look at the list about worldwide grosses. That half or more of the overall profit is made outside the USA is usual for most blockbusters. Star Trek could have made $500 or $600 millions if it would have done better international. I just think they should try to improve there. The more successful the new Star Trek movie is, the better it is for the whole franchise.

42. "Check the Circuit!" - December 31, 2009

UPDATE: Star Trek did not get into the Top 10 movies by USAToday film Critic Claudia Puig. However, the paper took an on-line poll of their readers…and the Best Film of 2009 by popular vote (with 25% of total votes)…STAR TREK!

Well…we may not get an Oscar, but this bodes well for a People’s Choice Award.

43. star trackie - December 31, 2009

40 “The more successful the new Star Trek movie is, the better it is for the whole franchise.”

The movie did well enough to warrant a sequel. For me, THAT is the bottom line. So people n France don’t like it…their loss. I’m still getting a sequel! :)

44. "Check the Circuit!" - December 31, 2009

@33

So what if Gene Roddenberry would have “denounced” Star Trek 09? He denounced every movie he didn’t directly produce. He denounced that Saavik was one of the conspirators in the original script for Star Trek VI….before Kirstie Alley refused to return to the franchise that gave her a start to her “career.” It wasn’t even a character he had anything to do with. He pretty much denounced the franchise in the 70’s when he thought he was going on to bigger things…until nothing sold. THEN…he wanted to wring every dime out of Trek that he could. And TNG was a train wreck until he moved out of showrunning. Apparently he was a pretty spiteful guy that got lucky once with the right mix of general concept, writers, actors and producers. I (for one) couldn’t care less if he liked Star Trek 09.

And besides, did you know him? Who are you to speak for him and ignore what his own wife and son suggested? If you are trapped in the past…just say so and don’t try to justify your opinion by fabricating someone else’s.

By the way, being the savvy businessman that he was…the “prostitution” of Star Trek (that he began with Lincoln Enterprises) has made him, and his estate, boat loads of cash.

For the majority of us, the success of Star Trek 09 is GREAT news! It means we have lots more of Trek to look forward too in the future. (Not to mention a pipeline of money to the Roddenberry estate.)

Thanks JJ and Company!

45. star trackie - December 31, 2009

43- I agree, Roddenberry’s contributions to Trek, via TMP and TNG did nothing for me. They were alien to me. He had long since abandoned the formula that he and other legends, like Gene Coon, had developed and fine-tuned for the fanchise’s namesake.

JJ brought back the style and mindset of TOS that Gene had abandoned long ago. And for that, I am forever grateful!

46. Sci-Fi Bri - December 31, 2009

F**C the Academy. bunch of Film Actors GuilderS that don’t know a good movie if it jumped out and bit them.

47. Red Skirt - December 31, 2009

Check the Circuit!, I’m actually surprised I agree with the USA today’s list!

It is a bit disappointing that Star Trek didn’t at least get a mention for the USA Today’s Hottest Shirtless Male Star – I mean Capt. Kirk without a shirt on is one of Star Trek’s trademarks!

It had better get some attention at The People’s Choice, since the nominees were announced before Avatar was shown to anyone, it is likely to be the only coverage Star Trek will get and the only semi-legitimate award it will be nominated for.

On another note, Star Trek will finish 2009 officially in 7th place. Avatar made another $18 million yesterday pushing it $10 million over Star Trek.

48. devon - December 31, 2009

Gene Roddenberry was a man of vision, The Great Bird of the Galaxy, and we have him to thank for the concept of Star Trek, but many other wonderful people deserve credit for making Trek what it is today : Gene Coon, D.C. Fontana, Theodore Sturgeon, Matt Jeffries, Nick Meyer, Rick Berman, Ronald Moore, Brannon Braga, Michael Piller, Jeri Taylor, Leonard Nimoy, Jonathan Frakes, Harve Bennett, etc., etc., and Orci, Kurtzman, and J.J. Abrams can be added to that list too! can’t wait to Boldly Go forward with hopefully many more sequels @ the Movies and on TV too! Long Live Star Trek! The best sci-fi franchise ever!

49. fubamushu - January 1, 2010

Can we get the group that did the custom soundtrack for the trailer featured here (who are they again? I thought they were mentioned somewhere on Trekmovie…) to do the score for the next Star Trek film? Then maybe it will sound like a real motion picture score and fit the name Star Trek.

50. fubamushu - January 1, 2010

@27

My wife is not much into Sci-Fi at all. She has fallen asleep through all Star Wars films we’ve tried to watch together and gets bored with TOS episodes.

She, however, loves the new Star Trek film. She thinks Pine and Quinto are “kakkoii!!” She even watched it twice on a flight from the US to Japan. And she’ll walk around the house quoting Spock’s (Quinto’s) lines from the film.

Myself, I am not a big fan of the new movie and was disappointed by the story line, the soundtrack, the look of the engineering sets, and the design of the new E.

My wife asked me why I didn’t like it and when I was done with my soapbox, she said, “The reason you don’t like the new movies is that before Star Trek was here (raising a level hand above her head) and now it is here ( below her waist) for the rest of us.”

Never has a wiser or more accurate more accurate sentiment ever been uttered.

51. Trek Ahead - January 1, 2010

Hey since they finally have the facial capture technique down for the cgi characters in Avatar. Maybe we can look forward to to a Trek movie with the original characters again? The cgi work was so fluid and well done I didn’t even notice it was computer generated.
To see a young Shatner’s face, with Nimoy, and the rest, that would be an interesting use of the new technique I think.

@50 You know my wife is the same way. When she wants to fall asleep she asks me to put on a TOS episode. My son delights in telling me it’s older than I am! So I can appreciate the analogy. I just hope they can raise it back up to the level that we are used to, and bring the legions of new fans along with it.

52. Red Skirt - January 2, 2010

#51, yikes! That’s a horrible idea. Yeah they can probably do a pretty convincing CGI rendering for the original cast now, but the performance won’t be them. It’ll be somebody else, or a computer algorithm designed to extrapolate from all known performances. It might make for an interesting experiment, but the essence of who those actors were will be gone. It would be a little like resurrecting the dead as Zombies. They wouldn’t do anything new, just what’s expected of them. A little like watching re-runs with a different story. What you saw in Avatar was the living actor performing through a mask. It was them, acting through an electronic veneer, proving it is not so much how the actors look, but what’s behind the performance. And the cost to do it would not justify the return on the investment as it would have limited appeal to a select set of fans. Movie stars, with all of their off-camera personality sell tickets and expand franchises. I don’t see dead actors packing the same bang.

53. devon - January 3, 2010

Why ever would we need CGI versions of the Original actors to play the characters in Trek 2012 when the acting/characters of Trek 2009 were bang on!!!?

54. Jim Nightshade - January 3, 2010

yah zoe was just awesome in avatar-computers or not u could tell it was her-and her emotions from laughter to sorrow and cries were all so beautiful i almost cried at her characters pain…
Also i agree with some of the points regarding trek09–but i still feel avatar is a better movie mostly due to james cameron being a good story teller-many elements had been seen in other films, dances with wolves etc but never put together like cameron did in avatar–

55. Trek Ahead - January 6, 2010

#52 & #53, OK, you have a valid point. It was just wishful thinking on my part.

But let’s not forget, no matter how sophisticated the special effects are, and how well the new actors fit in, if the writing isn’t good it doesn’t matter. And the story was LAME!
The new actors did their job, but I still think the story was predictable, with the special effects trying to make up for a bad script.
I just hope they portray the characters in the next movie with more depth instead of the shallow parodies they are.
Bang on? I think not.

56. smithindavi - July 22, 2010

Nice trailor. This is one of my favourite trailers of all time. Incredible atmosphere and intensity… Thanks for sharing with us.

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