Watch Star Trek Into Darkness International Trailer In 3D + POLL: Will You See STID In 3D? | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Watch Star Trek Into Darkness International Trailer In 3D + POLL: Will You See STID In 3D? April 5, 2013

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Marketing/Promotion,Poll,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Star Trek Into Darkness will be the first Star Trek movie in 3D and to give you an idea of what it is going to be like in the third dimension you can see the trailers at 3D theaters – and now you can see the international trailer in 3D on your computer. Watch it below (but 3D glasses are going to be helpful).

 

Watch Star Trek International Trailer In 3D

The following video is an unofficial release of the official Russian 3D International Star Trek Into Darkness trailer – available in resolutions up to 1080p (via avidustries13 on Youtube).

NOTE: Click the 3D button to adjust the settings for your preferred method of 3D

 

POLL: To 3D or not to 3D?

Are you ready to go to the next dimension of Star Trek? Sound off below and in our new poll.

Does Star Trek: DS9 fit with Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek future?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

Thanks to Anton for tip

Comments

1. antovolk - April 5, 2013

BFI IMAX just announced they’ll be showing STID in REAL 70mm IMAX 3D – that means the IMAX scenes should fill up the whole screen like TDKR…

2. Mad Mann - April 5, 2013

2D for me only. After watching a few movies in 3D and being underwhelmed, I will never again pay the extra price for something I don’t like.

3. Clinton - April 5, 2013

Already have a ticket for the 5/15 IMAX showing! Woot!

4. RenderedToast - April 5, 2013

Absolutely! Star Trek has always lead the way for me to care about new technologies in film (first VHS, first DVD, first Blu-Ray)… now I might have to get a 3D TV!

Also, can I say how impressed I am by this? Even wearing the old style Red/Green glasses, this is genuinely in 3D, albeit quite a flat version of it. Looking forward to the real deal. Just over 1 month to go!

5. Sputnik - April 5, 2013

I can’t watch 3D films because of strabism (is that the right word in English?). It will be almost impossible for me to watch the movie in 2D and English because movies are always dubbed here in Germany, and only very few theatres will show the movie in 2D anyway (and even then only once a day at an inconvenient time). :-(

6. antovolk - April 5, 2013

@4. This version is a convert of the 3D version they play in cinemas, best watch it on a big screen!

7. Ciarán - April 5, 2013

I have 3D glasses from the movie theaters and they still don’t help with the 3D image. Does the computer monitor have to be 3D enabled as well?

8. Simon Jessey - April 5, 2013

I have never been impressed by 3D movies, and having to wear 3D glasses over prescription glasses doesn’t help. Glasses-free 3D or forget it.

9. Damian - April 5, 2013

I’ll probably wait to see reviews of how it looked in 3D before springing for it. If it looks as though people are impressed, I’ll go for it. But if I see a lot of complaints about the 3D, I may just stick with 2D.

10. Simon Jessey - April 5, 2013

I just watched the trailer in 3D by crossing my eyes. It looks pretty cool, but by the end I was about ready to puke LOL.

11. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 5, 2013

I saw the first 9 minutes in IMAX (in another city for Christmas break), so I’ll definitely see it in 3D (no IMAX here), but I’ll probably see it in 2D first if possible. I did find the IMAX a bit overwhelming, hence my desire to see it in 2D first so I can take it in. I was very impressed with the first 9 minutes, as I usually find 3D too dark and frankly underwhelming.

12. antovolk - April 5, 2013

@7. they won’t work…

13. SherlockFangirl - April 5, 2013

The film comes out in the middle of my end of semester exams in college, so me and my friend have agreed to go to the first available showing, and we’re guessing it’s in 3D. But we’ll definitely see it in 2D afterwards though Our preferred choice though is 2D.

14. crazydaystrom - April 5, 2013

I’ll most definitely be seeing this in 3D IMAX. We have an IMAX-lite theater in town so I’ll see it there. But I’m planning on taking a little road trip to the nearest true IMAX to see it there as well.

SIX WEEKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

15. Mel - April 5, 2013

3D, not that I have a real choice. I want to see it on the first day of opening and I bet my local cinema will only show the movie in 3D then. Most of the times 3D movies won’t be shown in 2D at all in my local cinema, even later in their run.

16. Dr. Image - April 5, 2013

Eyes crossed. And blown away! Pretty damn epic.
3D all day for me.

17. Darrell - April 5, 2013

I’ve been making 3D stereo images for over 15 years. There are strict rules to follow in 3D composition, and like most 3D movies, this ignores every one of them.

It’s also a conversion, so things look like cardboard cutouts, which is unavoidable by its very nature of not being filmed with 2 cameras or a stereo camera to start with.

So it’s 2D for me.

18. Mel - April 5, 2013

I saw a trailer on German TV on Easter Sunday. The Star Trek premier will be on the 8th May. So they started with the trailers more than a month before it.

19. Kapten Kerk - April 5, 2013

Wow! This new sci-fi film CTAPTP3K looks good! And I have never played spot the differences with moving images before!

20. drapera - April 5, 2013

Yes, the lens flares have the top layer…I assumed as much from the preview with the Hobbit…and they really show it off with the trailer here.

21. AyanEva - April 5, 2013

Both. I have IMAX 3D tickets for the 15th and I’ll be seeing it in 2D and/or 3D however many times I can manage (I’m trying to beat my previous record from 2009).

22. rolltide1017 - April 5, 2013

I refuse to pay for 3D converted movies. Don’t mind giving movies that were actually shot in 3D a chance but conversions never look good IMO. All these old movies being converted always look like cardboard cutouts.

All that to say, 2D only for me!

23. Planet Pandro - April 5, 2013

I’m thinking both. My quandry is which first? I’m thinking 3D (no IMAX here, tho )first, for the full-on sensory experience, then a hopefully a return visit or two in 2D to catch any details I may miss the 1st time through.
The only 3D movie I’ve ever seen (outside of Captain E-O, or the Muppets @ DisneyWorld) in theaters was Tron Legacy. Thinking of hitting up Jurassic Park next week to see how a 2D to 3D conversion looks and that may sway my decision a bit too.

24. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 5, 2013

Come on May 15th. Can’t get here soon enough. I do not want to see any more trailer’s. I want to see the Whole Movie.

25. Disinvited - April 5, 2013

#22. rolltide1017 – April 5, 2013

Just read Roger Eberts review of the converted JURASSIC PARK 3D release and guess what? He liked it. Says the conversion process didn’t detract or get in the way.

26. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 5, 2013

May 15th. My wife and I will be seeing Star Trek in IMAX in 3d at 7pm.
Maybe I should do a little Time Traveling.

27. Smike - April 5, 2013

The problem will be to find a 2D version of the film in Germany. Many 3D blockbusters are shown in 3D exclusively over here. We had no chance to see The Avengers, Thor or GI Joe Retaliation in 2D anywhere near our location, not even in the bigger cities. It’s a nuisance. I don’t oppose 3D completely but I’m not going to see the film more than once or twice in 3D. I saw ST09 fourteen times back then, but that was before 3D took over the market. I hope a 2D version will be available somewhere…

28. Elias Javalis - April 5, 2013

Great. July 11 for us here. I have high hopes for a strong opening in US.

29. Do You Wanna Dance - April 5, 2013

Got my 2 IMAX 3D tickets for 5/15. Then I heard the early screening (our shows) are sold out everywhere. Great for the Star Trek franchise, not great for us, as I know it’s going to be mayhem 1-2 hours before the show starts.

Look, I’m a Trek fan like everyone here, and I like to think of myself as hygienic and sociable like hopefully most of you are here, but damn! At the last line up for Star Trek ’09, we lined up among some of the grossest looking and foul smelling dweebs who looked like they’ve never stepped out of their parents’ basements except to take out the garbage (nod to Shatner on SNL and Galaxy Quest), and barely had the social skills on how to act appropriately in public.

Lining up for the iPhones and iPads, at least we had regular folk among the artists and hipsters, so my wife didn’t mind so much, but the look on her face when we were trying to get in for ST09 was priceless. Not sure I’d ever be able to take her to a ComicCon or Trek convention without administering chloroform first.

30. somethoughts - April 5, 2013

I used the old fashion blue and red 3d glasses and it looks awesome! tickets in hand for may 15th!

31. Daniel Broadway - April 5, 2013

Just a random curiosity, but is STID done? Like completely finished? Or are they still doing VFX, music, and editing?

32. Spock's Bangs - April 5, 2013

The recent conversion on GI Joe was awful. And the image suffers unless they kick up the brightness, which they normally don’t. Nice crisp 2D for me, at least for the first couple of showings. Then ill go 3D.

33. NoKhanPlease - April 5, 2013

Why would I pay more to see the exact same movie? While 3D is ok, it’s not worth a cost. I will lose absolutely nothing by seeing this movie in 2D.

34. rogerachong - April 5, 2013

IMAX 3D for the first 2 times at least, where I’ll be rocking my Starfleet finery (for the first time)!! After that we’ll see.

35. AJ - April 5, 2013

I’m skipping the pre-opening hubbub, as I plan to be traveling back in good old Russia. I’ll try to catch it in 3D, as, obviously, it will be in 3D there.

Anton, if you are here, will it be dubbed or sub-titled?

36. jerr - April 5, 2013

not enough choices in pole

3D if I can find it in Doldby3D (Real 3D is terrible and he most popular)

37. Capt. Roykirk - April 5, 2013

They forgot to put the option of will you be watching it in theaters at all.

38. rogerachong - April 5, 2013

32. NoKhanPlease – April 5, 2013
Why would I pay more to see the exact same movie?

It’s Star Trek baby!!!. I will pay five times as much to see that movie today!!! I have been waiting for 4 years now and praying for the day to come quickly.

39. antovolk - April 5, 2013

@34. Dubbed, although this cinema: http://www.formulakino.ru/cgi-bin/show.pl?option=cinema_description&id=49 sometimes show new films with subtitles…

40. crazydaystrom - April 5, 2013

@25. Disinvited-
I saw the trailer for Jurassic Park 3D before Oz the Great and Powerful. The conversion was impressive.

41. wild m - April 5, 2013

i said it before and im saying it again…for me the true star trek was in the original 6 movies and the tos of course, as for the next gen yes definetely almost 9/10 !!!but the new movie just dissapointed me…except carl…for the next one i m going to see it hoping to be a better one…

by the way the music in the new movie was awful..much of the magic of the original cast movies was the music..why they dont change this approach for a more trek one…?

this is the proper aproach….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8W7X5_30DE

42. Aqua - April 5, 2013

Just watched, instead of true 3D this is cardboard cutouts at various distances on a flat background. I absolutely will not be seeing this in 3D. If this is what JJ meant by 3D Conversion, it totally sucks.

43. Ahmed - April 5, 2013

@ 8. Simon Jessey – April 5, 2013

“I have never been impressed by 3D movies, and having to wear 3D glasses over prescription glasses doesn’t help. Glasses-free 3D or forget it.”

Exactly, I watched couple 3D movies & I got headache afterward. Not to mention it is very annoying to wear 3D glasses over my prescription glasses.

Until they come up with a 3D system that doesn’t require glasses, I will watch movies in 2D only.

44. EM - April 5, 2013

3D for sure! But not on IMAX. the glasses pull the lenses into my face and that is too annoying. They also pull at the back of my head and dig in and just plain hurt.

@ 40. Aqua – JJ has also said that he is a 3D conversion convert. So, it has his approval.

45. ados - April 5, 2013

The new Superman movie is gonna be a full blow remake…..June 14..so not much Trek comp..

46. Ahmed - April 5, 2013

Reading some of the comments here, I’m surprised that in many European countries, like Germany, Russia, they actually showed movies dubbed !!!

Guess I was lucky when I was living in Egypt, where they only subtitled foreign movies, never dubbed it.

47. AJ - April 5, 2013

38:

Ponyal. Thanks, Anton.

48. steve - April 5, 2013

The format I’d actually LIKE to see the new Trek in is a 2D IMAX version. But I know that’s not going to happen (I’ve asked boborci on this board multiple times if it was possible, but never got a response…) Look, the reason current 3D technology doesn’t work for so many people is just basic BIOLOGY. There is a certain percentage of the population that will always see the flicker in this 3D tech; it’s just the natural byproduct of their visual processing. I worked in the DLP group at Texas Instruments when the whole technology was developed, and all the PhD’s and engineers there knew it to be true.

The other two problems are also well known; the first being that the images always look too dark, and the second being that everything looks smaller (since most of the 3D effect is depth “into” the screen versus “out of” the screen…)

And the problem for a movie lover is that we want to see movies on a BIG screen, and IMAX has taken over the big screen market. So if IMAX-equipped theaters won’t show a 2D version, we’re stuck with small screens. My proposal would be for studios to release a 2D IMAX version, and those theaters could at least pick a few showings a week for it, for the (20%?) of the population who see the flicker in current 3D tech. But I doubt that’s ever going to happen. Meaning we either have to hope that 3D finally dies, or wait the 10+ years it’s going to take to get higher fps rate 3D tech rolled out.

49. njdss4 - April 5, 2013

I hate 3D, so no I will not be seeing it in 3D.

I feel that 3D is a gimmick that takes away from movies, and is often used as a way to try and hide the fact that there’s very little depth to a movie, with Avatar being a perfect example. I hate having to wear 3D glasses over my normal glasses, and it winds up giving me a headache before the movie is half over. It’s also just one more way for movie studios to charge people more money for tickets.

50. BatlethInTheGroin - April 5, 2013

#36: Every single person here will see it in the theater, despite their protests to the contrary, so that option is unnecessary.

51. NCC-73515 - April 5, 2013

I think the main reason why studios are pushing for 3D productions is that nobody can bootleg film them nicely ;)

52. Jack - April 5, 2013

I don’t know if I’ve gotten more used to 3D or whether it’s gotten brighter — but I don’t find I hate it quite so much anymore. At best, I don’t really notice it. Usually I see the 2d version if available, but lately that’s getting tougher.

Although, there was a scene in GI Joe (3D) where a bullet is coming at the camera — and, embarrassingly, I did indeed flinch and duck out of the way.

53. Ahmed - April 5, 2013

@ 49. NCC-73515 – April 5, 2013

“I think the main reason why studios are pushing for 3D productions is that nobody can bootleg film them nicely ;)”

I disagree, the main reason is money, pure & simple. After Avatar made over 2 billion dollars, every studio out there start making 3D movies & converting the ones that was shot in 2D to 3D.

It’s All About the Benjamins really :)

54. Calastir - April 5, 2013

They only show movies in 3D here in Holland (it seems) in which case I’ll not be seeing it at all until it comes out on Blu-ray, because I hate 3D.

Even as a long time fan there’s no great loss there, since what I’ve seen of this new universe so far doesn’t seem like Star Trek to me, in spite of the character names and whatever the title says.

55. NCC-73515 - April 5, 2013

Which is no contradiction. Ticket sales will increase if you can’t find a nice rip anywhere. Trek2009 was the most pirated film of that year, if I remember correctly.

56. Bob Loblaw - April 5, 2013

I don’t mind wearing 3d glasses over my prescription glasses and enjoy the 3D effect when it’s well done.

I know Abrams filmed this new trek specifically to make it amenable to the post 3D conversion process (which has come a long way and can look really good). So yeah, I’ll be catching the film in 3D.

57. THX-1138 - April 5, 2013

3D is not worth the extra price, not by a long-shot.

58. Red Dead Ryan - April 5, 2013

#53.

A lot of bootlegs come straight from the source…..the studio. Often someguy who has access to the finished film will copy it when no one is looking and then take it home to upload it on the internet.

3D doesn’t stop piracy. 3D is about studios sucking more money out of our wallets.

59. Ahmed - April 5, 2013

@ 53. NCC-73515 – April 5, 2013

“Which is no contradiction. Ticket sales will increase if you can’t find a nice rip anywhere. Trek2009 was the most pirated film of that year, if I remember correctly.”

Star Trek 2009 was indeed the most most pirated movie in 2009; however, I don’t think that lead to lower tickets sales.
Transformers 2 was the second most pirated movie but still got over $ 800 millions worldwide.

http://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-2009-091220/

A good rip might affect movie ticket sales but not in such huge number. I think most people still want to watch movies & enjoy all the CGI & action scenes on the big screen.

And I still see no need for 3D movies as long as the audiences are required to wear special glasses to see it.

60. NCC-73515 - April 5, 2013

There is no other way, if you have more than a few people in the room, because you have to get different images to each eye separately…

61. Poliander - April 5, 2013

I’ve waited like FOREVER to see the Big E in 3D :-)

62. Trekkiegal63 - April 5, 2013

You know, I love this site. I like the people who frequent this site (well, most of them anyway) and I enjoy conversing with them but a little constructive criticism here?

…was using that particular screenshot really necessary in lieu of recent conversation surrounding it? *scowl*

Having said that, while I don’t normally care for 3D as it gives me a bit of a headache, I’m making an exception for Trek. It is likely, however, that if I return for a second and/or third visit to the cinema I’ll probably see it in 2D thereafter.

63. Nony - April 5, 2013

I might see it in 3D once just to see how it is, but I’ll enjoy it more in 2D. When I saw ‘Dredd’ in 3D I spent the whole movie holding the glasses up by the bridge to get them to stay on over my regular glasses.

64. Dee - lvs moon surface - April 5, 2013

Probably in 2D & 3D… first, the way I get to watch as soon as possible! ;-) :-)

65. Dr. Cheis - April 5, 2013

Not sure if I’ll see 2D or 3D first. The eyes have a hard time focusing whenever the camera cuts, and I don’t want to risk missing anything.

66. pilotfred - April 5, 2013

i will see the film in all 3 formatts,i saw the 9 minutes at the imax cinema and it was good,to be honest i wish they would stop trying to make to mamy films in 3d,im not a keen fan of 3d,a lot of the time i dont see the need for it,now imax oh yeah and i am so looling forward to 8k

67. The Professor - April 5, 2013

I will get to see plenty of 2D when I buy the BluRay. So, 3D on 5/15!

68. Ensign RedShirt - April 5, 2013

I’m far more interested in IMAX than I am the 3D, although I have nothing against 3D. I just like large-format films.

69. James Regulus Kirk - April 5, 2013

While I do wish Mr. Abrams had actually SHOT the film with stereo cameras, I would watch it in 3D. I’d need glasses for 2D, as I’m allergic to Retinax.

70. Trekkiegal63 - April 5, 2013

#67 James Regulus Kirk:

I see what you did there. ;)

71. Jemini - April 5, 2013

the only movie I watched in 3d was avatar and it was amazing but in general I find it too distracting so 2d only for me

72. Drapera - April 5, 2013

I would still like to see a sample of TOS converted (well)…even TMP or TWOK.
Shoot…it may already be out somewhere.

73. RBanks - April 5, 2013

The only somewhat recent film I’ve seen in 3D is Prometheus. In some wide shots I did like the depth the 3D effect gave. But in other close shots, it was just too stark and distracting, and there were some shots that looked to me like they were purposely shot to “show off” the 3D effect.

I know people involved with STID production are saying the 3D in this film will be better than Prometheus, so I’m willing to give it a try. If the effect could be toned down so it’s more subtle, then I’ll probably like it. If not, I’ll go see it again later in 2D.

74. SherlockFangirl - April 5, 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trb5WS9QxAU

^ That in 3D. I’m even willing to forego the cookies.

75. TrekkerChick - April 5, 2013

Ahhh…the one nice thing about aging from 20/20.. Need corrective lenses? Check. Need corrective lenses to see things up close? Check.

Need corrective lenses to see a movie? Not so much. Bring it on! May 15, 8 PM, Lacey, WA

76. 1701 Pike - April 5, 2013

WHAT IF… the injured brunette in the Starfleet HQ scene is Number One?

;-)

77. Get real. - April 5, 2013

I hate to tell you guys but that’s the Enterprise crashing into the bay. You can see distinctly the nacelles watching that trailer in HD. Perhaps this is gonna be a way for them to fix a huge mistake in starship design?

78. JohnRambo - April 5, 2013

@77

Is the Enterprise black? No? THEN SHUT UP!

79. BatlethInTheGroin - April 5, 2013

So, I guess that we now know that the entire crew survives INTO DARKNESS, given that all seven of them will be in issue #21 of the ongoing comic series, which takes place after the film and is overseen by the film’s writers.

http://www.startrekcomics.info/idwstongoing.html

80. James Regulus Kirk - April 5, 2013

@70 Trekkiegal63

Well, I’ve… never been a master of subtlety.

81. rogerachong - April 5, 2013

57. THX-1138 – April 5, 2013
3D is not worth the extra price, not by a long-shot.

For this movie it is worth every penny, even for a 100% 3D markup!!! In the 9 minute prologue in IMAX 3D I was at the edge of my seat to soak it all in. When Kirk and Bones are being chased, on the right side of your view you see an alien slug-like creature crawling on a branch B4 Kirk rushes into view from the left.. Man this is the most beautiful looking film you will see since Avatar. The trailers to this day cannot capture the awe of the volcano with embers swirling at you with Spock in the middle. You feel you could fall right into it. It is majestic and beautiful in 3D. And I did duck out of the way of that spear thrown at Bones.

I feel truly sorry for the folks that have various problems with 3D viewing, you guys are really missing a mind blowing experience. My words alone could not express the awesomeness of just 9 minutes of this movie. It was way better than any trailer or picture. No spoiler or plot synopsis can deminsh the sheer beauty of this film in IMAX 3D .

The Star Wars fans supported their lame as lemons prequels Episodes 1 to 3 and we should support our Star Trek. Future generations will know I was there when the amazing Star Trek Into Darkness premiered!! This will be the best for the decade so far!! LLAP.

82. Trekkiegal63 - April 5, 2013

#80 James Regulus Kirk:

I thought it clever. But then, I get geeky delight in seeing TWOK pop culture references pop up. ;)

BTW: Is your user name a nod to Gary Mitchell’s tombstone faux pas in “Where No Man has Gone Before” and a nod to HP all in the same boat?

83. Trek Fan - April 5, 2013

78. JohnRambo
“Is the Enterprise black? No? THEN SHUT UP!”

What the heck are you talking about?

84. BatlethInTheGroin - April 5, 2013

#78: Um…. what?

85. Keachick - April 5, 2013

I voted for the third option. I have never seen a 3D movie, so if I do manage to see this film in 3D, it will be my first. So JJ Abrams – better make it good!

My daughter, who has seen two movies in 3D, hates it; says “it messes up my eyes”.

86. BoltBait - April 5, 2013

2D for me. I’d prefer to see it in 2D iMax. But, I’ll probably save the hour trip to the iMax theater and just watch it at my local LieMax.

87. THX-1138 - April 5, 2013

#81-rogerachong

Abrams didn’t even shoot the film in true 3D so there is no way I’m going to spend the extra ducats. I have seen many 3D movies in this newest wave of “3D spectacle”, both filmed in 3D nd converted. I have yet to see something that has enhanced my experience enough to justify the added cost.

A friend of mine has a 3D TV. Every now and again there will be a live concert that has been filmed in 3D that gets aired. With the surround sound system blasting that is about the best 3D experience I have ever had. THAT is an immersive experience. Movies not so much.

88. Andrew - April 5, 2013

@48 I agree with you Steve. I want IMAX 2D, not IMAX 3D. I actually assumed that STID would play in IMAX 2D. Sad that isn’t the case as I love IMAX. Now I’m not sure what format to see this in. :(

89. Oliver - April 5, 2013

Is IMAX 3D the same Size as 2D IMAX?
I want to see it as big as possible :)
I heard that just 2D IMAX is 70mm.

I’m planing to visit the IMAX in Ft. Lauderdale Florida for “Into Darkness”.

90. CaptainDonovin - April 5, 2013

I have to wear safety glasses @ work everyday, don’t want to wear 3D glasses to a movie. Not really into 3D anyway.

91. Keachick - April 5, 2013

OT – I am confused. According to IMDb, these are the earliest STID release dates

“Germany 9 May 2013
Ireland 9 May 2013
Switzerland 9 May 2013 (German speaking region)
UK 9 May 2013
Mexico 10 May 2013
Sweden 10 May 2013
Norway 15 May 2013
Taiwan 15 May 2013″

I had read here? that the movie’s release date had also changed from 16 May to 9 May for Australia and NZ, however that is not what is shown on the Star Trek Into Darkness IMDb site.

Anthony Pascale/other – Have I been mistaken?

92. Tarrax - April 5, 2013

77. Get real. – Andrew and everyone else already know it’s not the Enterprise. The nacelles are way too far apart. Go look at a picture of the new Enterprise. The nacelle gap is only half the width of the saucer section.

93. Nick Tierce - April 5, 2013

The fact that this was shot in IMAX but will not be projected in TRUE, 70mm IMAX presentation is heartbreaking.

94. Trek Fan - April 5, 2013

91. Nick Tierce

I think only a few scenes were shot in IMAX, not the whole thing.

I like how JJ didn’t want to have it in 3D in the first place… it was at Paramount’s insistence that he did it as a 3D conversion.

95. Jack - April 5, 2013

“I’d need glasses for 2D, as I’m allergic to Retinax.”

Agreed. Nice.

96. Red Dead Ryan - April 5, 2013

Retinax? I guess people being allergic to Retinax is like Kirk being allergic to Retinol in TWOK, LOL!

Maybe a good omen for the sequel!

97. NCC-73515 - April 5, 2013

Gonna watch it on Federation Day (May 8) in 11D or so :p

98. Trekbilly - April 5, 2013

2D…3D conversions suck.

99. AyanEva - April 5, 2013

Finally sitting down to watch this on my computer and I could only get this to work in red/blue 3D and it wouldn’t play the whole clip. The image stopped and it switched to audio-only after about 30 seconds, if that. It sort of partially worked in greyscale with clear RealD 3D glasses but again it wouldn’t play the entire clip. Finally tried it in optimized color with RealD glasses and it showed more of the image for longer but cut out again and switched to sound-only. :( I tried it in three different browsers (Safari, Firefox, Chrome).

Not enough time to see how it really looked besides blurry because my eyes didn’t have time to adjust.

Ah well, I’ll have to wait until May 15th to be properly surprised!

100. RBanks - April 5, 2013

@#81 rogerachong-

Are you a salesman? If not, you may have missed your true calling, as I am sold after reading your thoughts on the 3D 9min preview.

Waiting for the 17th…

101. Dee - lvs moon surface - April 5, 2013

#91. Keachick

London premiere with Trek guys in May 2, in Germany April 29 and Bob Orci and actors will going to Mexico soon, he said on twitter!

102. James Regulus Kirk - April 5, 2013

@82 Trekkiegal63

That’s check, and mate. Remind me to never play 3D chess with you! ;)

103. Spock - April 5, 2013

I saw the trailer in 3d when i saw GI JOE, the action sequences look like crap , they make the effects shots look really bad and cheap. I am going to see the movie in 2d

The 3d looks like those old 3d books they used to make when i was a kid

104. Disinvited - April 5, 2013

I’d have to double check to be absolutely certain, but I’m pretty sure that is not an IMAX or 3D camera being used here:

http://i.imgur.com/KwQLIQq.jpg

Its too vertical and small. I think I can make out Panavision.

105. Sunfell - April 6, 2013

I can’t see 3D, unfortunately, so it’s a waste of time for me. And it gives me a massive migraine. I wish people would instead concentrate on 3D audio, like that new Dolby Atmos system. I got to hear it demonstrated while in Hollywood last summer, and it is stunning.

106. Marja - April 6, 2013

Oops I clicked the poll too soon – I’ll prob see it in both “dimensions”

Two-“dimensional” thinking

I do wish they were releasing a 2D Imax though. I regret that Paramount made JJ do a 3D conversion. I feel the director’s wishes should be honored, b/c the director shoots a movie in accordance with his vision not the demands of the suits. Plus some of the “novelty” effects of 3D are distracting and silly to me.

I’m not all that crazy about 3D, will see it once in that format at my local “LieMax” [great term]; a month or two after I can prob see it on a true IMAX screen at my local science museum, bless them. I truly lucked out there for Star Trek 2009 and saw it three times in IMAX. I was glad I’d seen ST2009 in 2D several times so I could catch all the nuances brought forth by IMAX, and especially enjoyed hearing the full range of Giacchino’s score and the sound effects.

Must admit that so far, my favorite Star Trek score ever was James Horner’s WOK score; I’ve listened to it I think hundreds of times. But Giacchino does capture some of the “age of sail”/”Seahawk” sort of musical magic, too. Just not as much [so far] as Horner. I look forward to STID for so many reasons, including hearing variations on MG’s themes from the first movie.

107. Aix - April 6, 2013

I trust JJ and Bryan Burke when they said that they’re really pushing the boundaries of 3D with this one. I didn’t see the 9min footage but heard great things so… Yeah. IMAX 3D for me. I’m hoping they have special 3D glasses.

108. Jonboc - April 6, 2013

I haven’t seen 3 D done well since I saw Hugo. No way am I going to let a bad, double imaged, low light, out of focus 3D hatchet job taint my first viewing of Star Trek. I’ll see the movie 3 or 4 times I’m sure, if the reviews on the 3D are positive I’m sure I’ll watch it in 3D at some point.

109. Cinema Geekly - April 6, 2013

2D only forever……

I honestly don’t care how good the conversion is and so forth. I saw Avatar in 3D (the way it was supposedly meant to be seen) and while I thought the 3D good it in no way made the movie any better.

To me it’s a gimmick until a movie comes along that makes you say “The movie just isn’t any good unless you see it in 3D”.

If STiD is JUST as good in 2D as it is in 3D then the 3D does nothing for the story and only serves as a gimmick to get more money out of your pockets.

110. Iva - April 6, 2013

I will be downloading it. By the looks of the trailers the majority of mess from the 2009 movie has not been cleaned away at all. Lazy writing = no money.

111. Winkie - April 6, 2013

@108 Jonboc

Did you see Life of Pi? The 3D in that is as good as Hugo, well worth a look.
I have no issue with 3D at all (inasmuch as it doesn’t make me sick or appear to dark to me), but I struggle to see how it improves the story for the most part. Certainly I slept through most of The Hobbit.

The 3D conversion of Titanic worked well, but was it necessary…?

Will try STID in 3D out of curiosity. If only to have Chris Pine popping out at me….

112. Star Trekker - April 6, 2013

I haven’t seen a 3D movie since the 80s version of 3D with the cardboard read and blue glasses! LOL.

But I think I will go and check out STID in 3D. But first I will see the normal version. And I would like to see the IMAX version too eventually.

113. JRT! - April 6, 2013

3D and 2D. Wanna see both just for fun

Release date for Crapland….Norway…..is wrong in post 91. It’s not May 15th,it’s earlier.

Have fun!

J-R!

114. JohnRambo - April 6, 2013

@41. wild m

“by the way the music in the new movie was awful..”

OMG

115. TrekMadeMeFat - April 6, 2013

Both.

116. Allen Williams - April 6, 2013

Hell no. Unless its glasses free, forget it.

117. Ryan - April 7, 2013

Real-D 3D glasses ONLY work in the theater people, not on YouTube

118. Fortyseven - April 7, 2013

I’ll 2D it first, and then the week after hit a 3D matinee by myself, I think. But that’ll be optional. :P

119. Yanks - April 8, 2013

I personally see no reason to spend the extra cash to watch anything in 3D.

It wont change the story or the production, etc.

120. JohnRambo - April 9, 2013

@119. Yanks
“It wont change the story or the production, etc.”

no, but it will change the way you see the movie….

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