A new image has surfaced for the upcoming film. More after the jump.
The still, part of USA Today‘s Summer Movie Preview, features Simon Pegg as Scotty and Sofia Boutella as Jaylah, and is the first official release we’ve seen since the teaser trailer dropped in December.
In the blurb accompanying the image, director Justin Lin continues to keep most plot details under wraps, simply saying that
Kirk and Spock is the heart of the ensemble, but we all have love for everybody else. It was to be able to not only showcase these characters but also to be able to push them and interact and react to certain obstacles.
Star Trek Beyond hits the big screen on July 22nd.
Sounds positive move showcasing all cast
I wonder what they’re looking at…
Join the discussion
Lens flares overlaying numerous battle scenes then the end credits.
The remains of the Narada!
Probably in stunned shock at all the bitter and negative “fans” on Trekmovie.com
I think you’re right ;-)
The poster for Star Wars Episode VII
They are inside the remains a movie theater that was trashed after DC comic fans saw BatmanVSuperman.
Critics trash BvS. I loved the film. Needs a tighter pacing.
Probably looking at the U.S.S. Franklin hidden in a cave somewhere or something like that…
Naked pictures of Kirk and Spock
Two hours is enough time to service the main cast, including properly showcasing Kirk-Spock-McCoy. Unless, of course, you’ve wasted 1’53” of that time showcasing dirt bikes and whatever action-mess 1,000 techs can make with their laptops.
PLEASE remember to give the audience actual Star Trek and not 2016 Hollywood Everymovie crap.
Seconded, and with prayer.
I hope they’ve done this.
Since the movie is done.
It’s still Star Trek, so yeah.
They’re waiting for Picard to say, there are FOUR bulbs on this flashlight.
Totally off topic, but I found a light saber toy, then mounted it inside of a lampshade & balanced it on a table, with the ON handle below the shade, just like a regular lamp. CanNOT believe nobody ever thought to market a LAMP SABER in all these years.
Guess I need to rank this right up there with my notion for hollow chopsticks that you can use to suck up the broth after eating your soup. (sigh) I’m with butch cassidy on some things, I got vision while the rest of the world wears bifocals …
wow….this movie exists?
With her handheld projector, they’re watching a screening of the movie they just made.
shades of SPACEBALLS, maybe with that projector they are just going to fastforward up to the ‘good’ parts … or maybe they have an ancient pirate version of PRELUDE TO AXANAR to laugh at, as a trek equivalent to an Ed Wood movie.
Is that really a projector? It looks more like a flashlight.
Looks like Scotty is watching the reviews of Batman v Superman and is worried that the same thing awaits them!
Is that the same girl who was in the Kingsmen? OK, I can check IMDB…
Yes. Sofia Boutella played Samuel L. Jackson’s sidekick in “Kingsmen”, the one with the razorblades for feet.
Hey look, it’s a flashlight. But this one has THREE bulbs cause it’s the future. Oh wait, there’ll also be a motocross sequence in that movie. Hey, maybe they visit a culture that’s on a similar technological level as mankind in the 21st century. If pulled off correctly, that’d be a nice take on a classic Trek-subject (“Miri”, “Bread and Circuses”, “The Omega Glory” etc.)
But that’s speculation of the wildest kind…
Yeah, that whizbang flashlight will set you back $24.99 at Mini In The Box. I guess it’s Nu-Trek’s equivalent of the salt shaker medical devices in TOS. LOL
It’s an upgrade from the bar code readers on the helm and elsewhere that plague the abrams films with a sense of cheapness I’d associate with a 3-figure budget rather than a 9-figure one.
Yeah, those friggin barcode readers… for all its “applestoriness” the bridge set always seemed strangely nonfunctional. And despite all the cheapness and “plywoodiness”, in the original TOS bridge set (and actually every bridge set that followed, up until “Trek ’09”) it still seemed like every station fulfilled an actual purpose.
Makes you wonder where their budget went, doesnt it? Then again, wasnt their some concern on Paramount’s part, wondering the same thing?
JAGT,
Nah, they are just fascinated at seeing what the Martians found so interesting about the woman.
And you can get it on Amazon… Made by Stanley:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VOa-bRl5L.jpg
About time some more publicity came out for the film even if it is just 1 image, getting sick of hearing people speculate from 1 preview trailer. if you watch the 1st teasers for first contact and insurrection neither of them reflect the final film they were all quick excerts of space battles and phaser fights.
They were also filled with shots from other movies and TV series, so it was very hard to evaluate. At least that was the case with FC (and GEN), not sure about INS, they delayed that first trailer for months, was supposed to be a 4th of july teaser trailer that didn’t actually screen till fall.
http://33.media.tumblr.com/8175912dad792e882e8ac8c41e6aae1a/tumblr_inline_mkumdssNPv1qz4rgp.gif
“Kirk and Spock is the heart of the ensemble, but we all have love for everybody else.”
I disagree. Kirk, Spock AND McCoy were the heart of the ensemble. In the JJverse, they’ve tried making it the Kirk/Spock/Uhura ensemble, and to no good effect.
I think they’ve tried making it the Kirk-Spock-McCoy-Uhura ensemble, but for some reason people object to the inclusion of a woman. Modern times, man.
Yeah, it’s not that the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triangle is classic element that works well story-wise and that adding a fourth person doesn’t really add much at all (not that McCoy has been used very well in the fashion in the new movies nor does Uhura really service a similar debating role with Kirk and Spock either).
No it’s because “some [hateful awful problematic] people object to the inclusion of a woman”.
Hope you are just being sarcastic here.
Wrong Marja.
It’s not that I’m anti-Uhura. It’s the fact that the original trio of Kirk-Spock-McCoy, balanced it as such:
Spock: Highly logical, virtually emotionless
McCoy: Highly emotional, void of logic
Kirk: The balance of the two
*heavy sights*
I’m sick and tired of people bringing up the ‘original trio’ as some kind of religion and deity we all most worship. It’s a reboot, if you have nostalgia for the 60s watch tos.
I don’t remember critics having a problem with Uhura’s elevated role and different dynamics the reboot has, btw (that are quite popular among reboot fans online. Check the fanworks). I saw quite the contrary.
There are trek fanboards like trekbbs, to name a popular one, where there are tons of tos fans who like these movies and embraced the new dynamics.
There was not such a thing as a trio in tos because the star was Kirk/Shatner point period. Followed by Spock because he was popular (and it became the Kirk/Spock show). Mccoy was never at the level of Kirk and Spock, he was a supporting character who got more screentime than, say, Chekov, Uhura and the others for no other reason than the fact he was a dude and Kirk’s best friend, and he had funny banter with Kirk’s other best friend (so ppl concern trolling about Uhura because she is Spock’s loved one beyond being his friend need to take several seats: in tos your faves were ‘elevated’ through a relationship with the protagonist too. In fact, you guys WANT Mccoy to get more screentime with Kirk and Spock so he is more prominent as a character. Never read anyone saying he was ‘reduced to Kirk’s best friend’ or that he should get more screentime outside of the trio dynamic) . If NuMccoy acted that same way with this Spock I’d find it not only racist and unprofessional, but a slap in the face of the integrity of THIS version of the characters, Spock especially. The reboot is different, thankfully so. The characters can be more multidimensional than having to be so limited by ‘roles’ fans insist wanting to give to them (no doubt in large part because the original thing had those limits), story telling is not the same as it was 50 years ago. General audiences look for different things (different doesn’t mean better or worse) And Spock is not just Kirk’s sidekick nerdy friend who says ‘logical’ and ‘fascinating’ all the time, thank you very much. He’s more believable as a ‘child of two worlds’ here, frankly.
You guys keep missing the point and you are so stuck in the past that you don’t even see that Kirk himself is different to the extent that, perhaps, HE ‘replaced’ Mccoy. Uhura was simply elevated at the level tos Spock and Mccoy were as the characters who had a connection with the protagonist, just here the main dude is not just Kirk anymore so Kirk is not the only one who has different interpersonal relationships beyond his friendship with Spock. The parallel between Uhura and Mccoy in the first movie especially was quite obvious to me.
The sad thing is that the people who liked these movies and made them successful in the first place will, probably, get the short end of the stick in the end because, as usual, the team will be trying to placate a vocal minority of haters (who won’t like these movies REGARDLESS. Not even if it was a carbon copy because then you’d all say it’s not original. Cue the criticism for stid)
Jemini,
Successful? How do you explain their bottom 5 ranking mentioned here?:
https://trekmovie.com/2016/03/28/new-star-trek-beyond-image-released/#comment-5298772
I agree with you. They try to make it a foursome, an awesome one at that. It is valid and entertaining improvement. In both films, Dr McCoy, although having fewer scenes and dialogue, made some of the most significant of contributions… ie there is quality and there is quantity. With nuMcCoy, the focus was definitely on QUALITY.
No issue with Uhura being elevated. The issue is the lousy characterization. She’s a whiney, needy girlfriend who acts unprofessional and emotional.
The Spock-Kirk-Bones trio was hurt by the fact Spock was too emotional and Kirk never sought counsel anyway. So Bones had little to do but be a one-line spewing comic relief, grumpy “old” man.
All the characters are parodies of their original characters. They are what SNL would portray if they did a ten minute Star Trek TOS skit.
Speak for your self.
Why thank you, I do already.
Damn it, that’s not the futuristic 23rd century flashlight I was expecting!! This single frame takes me right out of the f**king moving. Lousy talentless hacks….
Now that we have that out of the way….lets talk about starship sewage treatment and recycling systems. Does this meatloaf taste funny to you?
*rolls eyes at Phil*
Hey, check out some really GOOD futuristic art direction (even though now it counts as retro-future art direction) … this review I wrote that just went up online has just a few great pieces of art from a book about Kubrick’s 2001 that is just awesome (last pics show how modern tablets were envisioned way back when):
http://www.hdvideopro.com/film-and-tv/feature-films/the-shape-of-things-to-come
kmart – nice article. BTW, did you notice that keyboard has no “Q”? Obviously a joke from someone in the Continuum.
Never did notice the missing Q, great find given Kubrick’s attention to detail.!
Come on now….starship recycling and reclamation puts a whole new spin on telling someone to eat s**t….
There’s a new Star Trek movie?!
Re: Lin’s quote
Just as I had earlier speculated well back, this is STAR TREK’s take on THE GREAT ESCAPE which adds the twist that the escapees don’t just escape but end the war.
No am amount of new images is going to help this movie they say they leant from their mistakes of into darkness and make it more like the Star Trek of the original but from the trailer it’s the same film. They say their exploring stange new worlds in this one so I hope it’s the case but I feel that their is no soul to these movies like Gene/Rick era Star Trek shouldn’t be altered for the non fans it should stick to the foundings of the original as its the fans who pay for it all and treating them like their not importanted to the franchise it’s a smart move. Otherwise you end up with a expensive knock off what theses movies are 2009 was the best move out of these movies but even 2009 didn’t make much sense when you think of it. Nemesis was the last Star Trek film made in my eyes and it wasn’t a problem with the movie it’s self it was the time it was released and the marketing team which let it down I believe that nemesis could have been a blockbuster Star Trek film if the marketing team had Facebook Twitter and all the social media’s of today but they relied on television advertising solely and paramount didn’t really give them a good advertising budget. So many didn’t know a new Star Trek movie came out.
“They say the learned…”.
Who is “they?”
correction:
“They say they learned…”
Who is “they?”
“They” being the writers of the film who made not so subtle jabs at the film you wrote (such as not copying TOS episodes verbatim)?
I love that Bob is being a good solider right now and look forward to, should the movie flop, him retroactively claiming he knew it sucked all along. ;-)
The writers of the latest Trek did not copy anything verbatim. Gees, some of you guys still don’t get it, do you? Clue – prime/alternate universe, and where, on some occasions, things do happen and/or are said in EXACTLY the same way in both universes. For the rest of the time, there can be variations and/or even major differences.
That is why I like the STID Kirk death scene, along with the dialogue… Great homage as well!
Come on Rose. I liked the WoK “scene” but to suggest the scene and words played out almost exactly the same as being a side effect of an alternate universe is silly. But that’s really the biggest issue with the ill-advised alternate universe – it explains away every bad piece of writing, every mis-cast actor, every lousy set piece.
Every complaint can be replied with “alternate universe”. The height of laziness. “We had to do it to free us from canon”. And then rip off a far better film word for word with a miscast villain that violates their own rules of the alternate universe.
Most people have a ceiling to their talent. We’re seeing Zack Snyder’s ceiling after BvS. And we have seen Bob et al’s ceiling. Might be good idea men. But not good enough to write a complex, deep, satisfying film.
So you keep saying, TUP.
Given that we have no idea if there may be an alternative universe (or two) to our own, we have no way of knowing definitively whether there would be any side effect and what it might be. Therefore, what went down in STID may be just as valid as anything and not simply a case of bad writing, miscasting etc. It may actually be what could happen or, indeed, be happening somehow, somewhere. Isn’t this what good science-fiction (or fantasy) writing seeks to describe/query?
That you keep repeating yourself to me seems to be the height of laziness. As for a miscast villain, the only difference is that one spoke with a Latino accent and the other spoke with an English accent. It depends on how you see such variations. In the scheme of things, it is minor.
So your position is that even though its been established that the alt universe is the same universe up until Nero’s arrival that the creation of that alt universe might have somehow caused Khan’s appearance and ethnicity to retroactively change?
So you’re so obsessed with your unconditional love of the movie that you are now taking the position that any legitimate criticism is invalid because “alt universe”. That’s your catch all explanation for everything.
You’re increasingly ridiculous.
@boborci,
I believe that Paul was referring to this interview with Simon Pegg.
========================
Den of Geek: 50th anniversary of the franchise, following up a movie that I think it’s fair to say was divisive (Star Trek Into Darkness), new director…so no pressure doing this.
Simon Pegg: It’s terrifying. We learned a lot. It’s interesting actually, I had certain issues with Into Darkness as well. It’s interesting to be able to take those forward and be at the helm a little bit. You’re always learning when you’re working with a series of movies because you go okay, what did people like there? What did people not like? What did we like? And that’s a crazy way to work because we’re shooting in summer come hell or high water. […]
It’s more about spirit. It’s very easy these days, in the kind of post-modern era, to get bogged down in self referentiality or thinking, “Oh let’s put Harry Mudd in.” In a way I felt like if anything — and I really, really am very proud of Into Darkness — but I feel like the thing that for me was kind of jolting was that it kind of wanted to embrace itself a little too much, rather than take off and do what Star Trek did, which is to go off into the depths of the galaxy. It was about referencing not only a previous film but also kind of hanging onto the coast of Earth a little bit.
So for me it’s now about the spirit of adventure and exploration and also, in modern terms, just how would that be for people, to be away for that amount of time and that kind of stuff. We’re trying to evolve the story at the same time as not letting it go.
http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/simon-pegg/244941/simon-pegg-interview-star-trek-3-mission-impossible-kill-me-three-times
Got it, thanks. May “they” enjoy the ride as much as I did;)
boborci,
They, they, they and THEY! What is they?
It is controller?
Bob, any way we can get a look at the screenplay you wrote film?
This team is saying pretty much the same things the previous one did and, I might add, every new team says. As for Pegg. Don’t even let me start about him and his bipolar opinions. Isn’t he the same who passionately defended stid saying that the haters should f**k off? So touchy and defensive for a dude who has issues with the movie. Not to mention him saying that the fanboys who hate the reboot are just jealous because these movies are more successful. Ironically, as a star wars fanboy he is just like the reboot haters he criticized, if not worse (e.g., him saying he has no respect for people who like the prequel movies)
He also probably did to this reboot what be accuses Lucas of doing with star wars (I doubt Pegg ‘gets’ these characters )
I also love that one moment he is all praises for the Kirk/Spock dynamic in the reboot but then the next be says they need to move away from it a bit because it was forced.
Jemini,
Being more successful for Paramount than NEMESIS isn’t saying much as Sherry Lansing had in place a way to make money off of box office poison that Grey scuttled.
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/the_hollywood_economist/2005/12/meltdown.html
”Although the old regime’s [PARAMOUNT’S] movies had performed badly at the box office, in the old regime, under Dolgen’s tutelage, the executives had so perfected the art of the convoluted deal that 75 percent of Paramount’s movies, even those that appeared to be bombs to the outside world, made a profit. This happy state of affairs was due to the assiduous use of OPM, aka Other People’s Money, which includes the proceeds from “money for nothing” tax shelters, foreign-production subsidies, and foreign presales [Anyone remember the Blind Bid?]. Consider Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, the acme of such deal-pyramiding. Its budget was reported as $94 million, but, after the enterprising financial arrangements, it actually cost Paramount less than $7 million to make. While the art-of-the-deal formula didn’t always produce award-winning movies, to say the least, the studio under Dolgen and Lansing had a nearly 60 percent return on its invested capital. The disadvantage for Dolgen and Lansing is that such legerdemain works best when it’s invisible to outsiders.” — MELTDOWN, By Edward Jay Epstein, Slate.com, Dec. 19 2005 3:43 PM
“They “better not blow the 50th Anniversary
Nah, a billion dollars of PR wasn’t going to make Nemesis any better.
You guys need to stop talking about all trek fans in absolutes as if you are the spokesperson of all our fandom. News flash: you are not. There are tons of tos fans who like these movies, it’s a vocal side of haters in the fandom who give to trek fans this (bad) reputation that we hate the reboot. Also sorry to break it to you, but making these movies for the tos elitists only, who might as well believe that trek is a religion from the way they talk about it, wouldn’t make them successful.
“You guys need to stop talking about all trek fans in absolutes as if you are the spokesperson of all our fandom.” — Jemini
And you guys need to quit absolutely dismissing all Trek fans that have a bone to pick with Paramount’s decades long stewardship of the “franchise” with the label haters. Your believed “justified” extremism contributes to an equally bad reputation for Trek fandom in general, as well as perpetuating its bad reputation for worshipping by being just as fervent as the worship you fear may be more potent than you imagine in opposition to your new religion.
Oh Disinvited ‘the police’. It’s YEARS the same people are here making the same arguments over and over. I’m not here to judge other people’s obsessions but there must be a better hobby for sure.
Agree. I love the new movies. A very loud minority do not.
Can we please stop with the negative comments!?!
No.
I appreciate your honesty.
No. Could you stop reading them perhaps?
You’re right. I’ll just read the articles and forgo the comments.
justforthefunofit,
Why don’t you start by stopping the negative comments on negative comments?
I didn’t realize encouraging positive comments about a forum that I love was making negative comments. Go figure.
justforthefunofit,
But that’s just it. You didn’t decided to adjust your perceived imbalance by contributing a positive comment yourself, which would have encourage same. Instead, you chose to add to the negativity by attacking, an extremely negative thing itself, others’ commenting styles as not stimulating enough happiness in yourself.
justforthefunofit,
You want the Temple of Star Trek which is around the corner and down the block. This is TrekMovie.com were they are open to any civil comment about Trek.
No, I’m on the right site. I can’t understand why someone would make negative comments about Star Trek perhaps increasing the possibility that it may be removed from the screen. Other franchises’ fans are more supportive. But to each his own. God speed.
justforthefunofit,
Your reply right there, exemplifies why I told you this is not the Temple of Star Trek. You haven’t come here to fertilize positive comments on STAR TREK by contributing the most positive comment ever made about it to show them the way, but to unquestionably worship it. And you don’t like having your religious precepts, “No, I’m on the right site.”, challenged or give you cause for reflection.
“I can’t understand why someone would make negative comments about Star Trek perhaps increasing the possibility that it may be removed from the screen.” — justforthefunofit
What a load of absolute hooey. I’ve been with STAR TREK since its first nascent stirrings on NBC. There were negative comments even back then. The whole reason for Bjo’s Don’t Bee/Do Bee (sic) screed on Trekkies/Trekkers.
And you know what? In spite of that divisiveness and your absurd conclusion, they ALL got together and managed to keep a STAR TREK market viable for the next 50 years for you to falsely accuse them of scuttling it now.
“Other franchises’ fans are more supportive.” — justforthefunofit
This is just an out and out absolute falsehood that I have documented as such here, before, with excerpts from the letters to the editor pages of STARLOG magazine archived at archive.org
This is not something you know to be true, but rather something for some twisted reasoning you need to be so. Possibly the new acolyte syndrome that was explained to me decades ago — where the new converts are so enraptured by heir new religion that they want everyone to see how wonderful it is and fear any comment on its flaws might prevent others from discovering its wonderfulness too.
STAR WARS fans are just as negative and even more so given their larger numbers increase the number of opportunities for such to be expressed. And the comments that bother you so here have yet to match the negative ones in the letters to the editors pages of the comics that I have read in the span from the Silver Age to now.
Food for thought:
The most acerbic challenging abrasive and rated “negative” commentators on STAR TREK, Harlan Ellison, wrote its most celebrated episode.
If “negative” thoughts about STAR TREK threatened it as much as you fear, the eloquent Harlan, alone, would have succeeded in killing it decades ago. And I think even Harlan, himself, would admit, he tried. Lord knows he tried.
LLAP
Thanks Disinvited. You made me pull out the Merriam-Webster (i.e. acolyte, acerbic & LLAP). May you live long and prosper as well. :)
It looks like simon pegs reaction to the trailer :)
Nice to see a new image.
Looking forward to the movie.
Actually it’s not a new image, we have seen it in the trailer but from a different angle.
http://cdn.collider.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/star-trek-3-beyond-image-23.png
Good eye.
Nice catch.
Agreed. Many fans are looking forward to Beyond, not that anyone would believe it based on many of these posts.
I concur. Good post. :)
Isn’t this “new” image just a high-quality still from the trailer?
More or less.
Cool. A 3D flashlight …
Regards.
When you reveal almost nothing about the movie, this is what passes for news (?)
As far as I can tell, this screencap only exists so that USA Today would have a picture for their “SUMMER BLOCKBUSTERS” summary.
The lack of press makes me think this should be called STAR TREK CLOVERFIELD
@kmart,
Well, it’s a blood relative of previous Trek after all!
Apparently you missed the GOP debates.
Oh, I caught all of the GOP debates. What’s going on in that party, now that’s news.
The party, I agree, is news. Unfortunately the dick pics and who has the hotter wife is the revelation of nothing that’s getting the news. And as this is veering close to political, amigo, I’ll stop now.
BREAKING NEWS
Star Trek Beyond is moving pictures and a sound track
Any movie could be described that way.
That’s the point!!! It’s not news!!!
The bar still remains very low. How does it go beyond Into Disappointment?
They’re in Harry Plinket’s basement.
That looks like Star Trek to me.
Keenzer? I know they told me never to let ye eat after midnight, but I had no idea! Why doesn’t the rest of your body grow, too?
Nice but….how about a higher resolution image for those of us with larger monitors? If it is high res, I already tried to click it and got….well….nothing.
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/bonus_beyond/publicity/jaylah-scotty-flashlight.jpg
The nacelles are all wrong.
I’m not complaining, however, I am far less interested in this than anything Trek in the past. It just doesn’t seem like part of the world I used to crave every single tid-bit of info for. Either I grew up or it did but something has changed…
Now we just need that moron on Youtube to make a caption out of this, and for Trekmovie to promote it.
Boy someone making a funny video sure has you in a multiple day outrage. Might be time to up the dosage.
Seeing the obvious long-term effects of meds on you, I think I will just stick with being clear-minded and angry.
If humor makes you angry, you should reconsider. I also dont take meds of any kind as best I can. Occasional pain med but you definitely seem off your rocker a lot. So I assumed you were medicated. My mistake. You’re just an angry person. Weird that things offend you so much though.
Try being cheerful and enjoying life. You’ll be happier.
So now the most mean-spirited person towards many here lectures me like he is some Tim Robbins wannabe? LOL
Whatever, clown. Continue to pretend.
correction: “Tony Robbins”
Ummmm you’re VERY rude and mean spirited most of the time. Also, I assume you’re about 13-15 years old. Which is not an insult just an conversation about your maturity and lame insults. I make that observation to explain why I generally shrug off your nonsense, since you’re just a kid. In time you’ll mature and hopefully your sense of Star Trek knowledge will too.
Tim Robbins. lol
I’ll say it again, TUP,
You already said the same basic thing yesterday. I heard it yesterday and it unintentionally made me laugh to think of you as and adult voice of reason — that cracked me up and made me smile.
So thanks for getting me to take this less seriously in an indirect way. :-))
And also — I find this just so precious — your fake-ass deliberate ignoring of my Tony Robbins correction had me laughing so hard I nearly spit up. Thanks again for you adding unintentional levity through was was I think suppose to insult me….ha! ha! ha!.
Awesomely unintentionally funny, and I am relaxed and smiling now. I needed that!
@Prodigal Son,
“I think I will just stick with being clear-minded and angry.”
http://www.rtba.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Spock-Illogical.jpg
@ Ahmed
@ Prodigal Son
Take a deep breath. Debating Star Trek (as much as we all love it) is not worth losing your temper or letting it wreck your day. It’s all fiction and all of us here are just text on a webpage – who cares how smart or stupid any of us are.
None of this crap matters in any meaningful way – no lives were saved or lost in this mundane exchange of data. Don’t let it bait you into acting as if it were somehow something more than that.
That’s my opinion, anyway. Your mileage may vary.
Regards~
@nscates
LOL. Thanks man,, but I am not losing my temper. In fact, I am laughing at loud at TUP’s facade about acting like and adult here. TUP has unintentionally made me laugh now, so I am relaxed again. But I appreciate your post.
Hey, no problem. Love the Spock Amok photo
You’re protesting too much. You know what that means. We’ve all seen you fly off the handle towards various posters. The “im laughing” is a nice cover story but pretty transparent. Take a deep breath kid.
@ TUP
You already said the same basic thing yesterday. I heard it yesterday and it unintentionally made me laugh to think of you as and adult voice of reason — that cracked me up and made me smile.
So thanks for getting me to take this less seriously in an inidrerect way. LOL
Well you generally say the same basic thing to me that I say to you so i figured I needed to dumb down my responses so you understood them. Perhaps have a parent or trusted guardian explain them to you.
Now you have gone full personal insult trooll mode, thus valudating to our entire community here my earlier point about how you are the king of mean-spirited negative posts on this site.
Thanks for, once again, unintentionnaly proving a point of mine. Having you around when I post is like having an automatic pitching machine that serves me softball after softball right over the plate every time.
THANKS, TUP!
4 months from release and still no new trailer. We get a photo ?
Alec Grimes,
Abram’s released a new trailer, but you know JJ and his insistence on the mystery box secrecy: he’s doing it one frame at a time.
What’s Pegg looking at? Another story idea to further sink the series on the 50th…
This is this timeline’s last chance. The last movie was a bad as Star Trek V!
Skunk lady!
THIS MOVIE IS D.O.A.
You’ve seen no more then the rest of us, and yet you seem to have some special insight??
Yeah, I second that… how can you tell?
Love it…a sense of awe and dusty dirty uniforms..nice. Would have preferred different markings on the alien though, too similar to the romulans tattoos in the first film. But that’s neither here nor there…this movie will, no doubt, pull in another half a billion bucks even with the handful of doomsday predictors stuck in the 1993 time loop staying at home! (which they wont lol)
“…this movie will, no doubt, pull in another half a billion bucks…” — jonboc
And still fail to deliver the biggest box office bang of all the Trek films made to date:
http://1701news.com/node/1102/star-trek-films-biggest-box-office-bang.html
Most Profitable Star Trek Films, Worldwide – Adjusted For Inflation (revenue, profit margin)
1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) $240.3m 88.4%
2. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986) $282.2m 80.8%
3. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) $191.0m 79.2%
4. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) $485.6m 74.8%
5. Star Trek Generations (1994) $194.3m 70.8%
6. Star Trek: First Contact (1996) $231.0m 70.0%
7. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
(1991) $171.3m 69.1%
8. Star Trek (2009) $433.9 m 63.7%
9. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) $134.5 m 59.4%
10.Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013) $481.1 m 59.3%
11.Star Trek: Insurrection (1998) $172.7 m 50.8%
12.Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) $90.0 m 10.8%
But will it be the final nail in the coffin of Grey’s career?:
http://nypost.com/2016/03/19/paramounts-brad-grey-needs-big-success-to-save-his-job/
”The Hollywood veteran [Brad Grey] fielded successes such as “The Big Short,” but the [Paramount] division [of Viacom] is currently in a slump. Operating profit was $111 million in its last fiscal year, down from $205 million the prior year. The studio is aiming for more releases this year, including the much-anticipated JJ Abrams-directed “Star Trek Beyond,” out in July.
Viacom is hearing proposals from partners who want to acquire a piece of Paramount, which it values at $5 billion, but sources tell On the Money that the new money will want a say in who runs the studio.” — ‘Paramount’s Brad Grey needs big success to save his job’; By Claire Atkinson; NY Post; March 19, 2016 | 9:00pm
Like on this comment. On my computer, I have to click “read more” in order to see the whole comment. And when it’s in the collapsed form, the letters are all smushed together.
THIS one was worth the click.
None of that can be true. Bob Orci clearly said that he is really really talented because STID made the most money. And who are we to doubt him? ;-)
Not impressed with this. I apologize for the negative response. I want to be excited for this movie right now, but find myself actually forgetting about it. We literally have no more information…at all? There’s a slew movies coming out this year and I’ve even seen multiple trailers for some of them now. ST really needs to step it up.
I wonder if its that the studio doesnt like the film, lack of confidence. Or if its a desire to spend less marketing (shorter marketing window). Maybe one day we turn a corner and Paramount unleashes a massive marketing campaign…who knows
@ BRIAN DREW
It’s annoying having to click “read more” in order to read every comment that is more than a few sentences long. It’s even more annoying when you click “read more” and the comment turns out not to have been worth the effort……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..:-)…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..See what I mean? It dissuades people reading longer comments, which tend to be the more interesting ones.
Well, that didn’t post like I thought it would.
Now I’m confused………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..:-)…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Let’s see if it does it now
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
OK, I have no idea why sometimes you have to click “read more” and sometimes you don’t. But, it’s annoying when you do have to click it.
This one was worth the effort, btw.
Oops, wrong sub-thread. Above comment was meant in reference Disinvitted’s comment.
I agree Cyg. Its sort of funny that they suddenly changed things out of the blue but seem reluctant to make any really positive change. Its a fun place but the posting style is not very good. I think we all agree on that.
Cygnus, this is your substantive and meaningful long-winded post here ever.
Well done!
Well, if you’re looking to take up space to make your point, it’s a smashing success. At this point, fussing about the format is like complaining about the weather. Won’t change anything, but hopefully it’ll make you feel better.
I just wish I knew why sometimes the post collapses into “read more” and sometimes it doesn’t. Anybody have the answer to why my long post didn’t collapse while Disinvited’s did?
Cygnus-X1,
My observational hypothesis is that it is triggered by word count. When you stream a whole bunch of characters with no spaces interspersed you in effect only create one long word which doesn’t increment the word count enough to hit the threshold.
I think you’re right.
I have the distinct feeling that Paramount is extremely worried about the quality of this film. I hope I’m wrong, because I would hate for the general public to be dissuaded from checking out the new TV series on account of how terrible the latest movie was. Again, I hope I’m wrong. Side note: Between the Ghostbusters “remake” and Star Trek Into Darkness, I really wish Hollywood would stop pissing all over my childhood. And, yes, I know Ghostbusters hasn’t been released yet, but the trailer speaks for itself; neither original or nostalgic.
I expect Beyond to be better than The Force Awakens which was average
“I expect Beyond to be better than The Force Awakens which was average”
Maybe in an alternate universe. But not in this one.
@ TUP
I actually agree with you on this one. I do think Beyond will be better than STID, but I doubt it will approach The Force Awakens.
Peace in the valley! Even with the TFA detractors, there isnt really a reasonable chance STB will be as good. It certainly wont be as popular. But BvS is showing us that popularity and quality are two very different things. STID showed us the same thing really.
I expect BEYOND to be better than ST09 and STID, which would be incredibly easy, under any circumstances.
Like the song says: Starships were meant to fly.
Now they ought to feature THAT in the next teaser trailer.
the scene with scotty grabbing the cliff as his pod falls really bugs me… scotty DOES NOT have the strength required to pull that off. Why is this movie so action oriented? It will make a ton of money at the box office and be just as worse as the last one
“… scotty DOES NOT have the strength required to pull that off.” — TrekFan
Well, let’s examine that closer. First, I will agree that Simon Pegg, the actor, does not evoke on screen a physique that can do that. However, that’s not necessarily the same as that the character Scotty should not be able to pull it off.
First, in the prior movie, Kirk kick-starting the Warp Drive sets up a notion that that “engine’s” chief engineer should have decent upper-body strength and that it is a likely possibility.
FWIW, my father was an automobile mechanic, and this was the case with him.
No factory in that tthe Pegg Scotty’s engine room is HUGE and filled with ladders and catwalks. Unless his character is transwarp beaming all over it, he’s getting a descent workout as testified by his Vengeance jog.
So I think their films give every written reason to imagine that Scotty could pull it off, and I hope they’d have Pegg workout to make it more plausible
Hey Bruce Willis wouldn’t be able to do that falling through the elevator/airshaft thing in DIEHARD and then do a fingertip grab and make it work – it is probably the single thing in the first movie that most makes me eye-roll. Basically I only buy this stuff if it takes place in a MATRIX type verse, not the real one — something they should tell Tom Cruise, because his movies are full of this blatant disregard for ‘rules like gravity’ – look at the ‘spring loaded sand’ at the end of MI-2, where he kicks some beach sideways causing a gun to miraculously fly straight up so he can grab&shoot.
kmart,
But are you properly compensating for the Superman factor when Earthers, like Scotty, are on planets that aren’t Earth?
I intend to gauge how much less the gravity is on their prison world by how much MORE higher and farther Kirk’s rinky-dink stunt cycle goes than Cruise’s slicker earthbound ones.
If the gravity on that planet is slight lower, then that is eminently doable.
LOL. Of course Scotty can do that. Give me a break.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqgAT34ZekY
TrekFan,
Keenser is a member of Engineering. Dp you at least accept the notion that HE could pull it off?
Scotty injected himself with a few drops of Khan’s super-blood before he abandoned ship.
Not sure if I dig the new uniforms.
kmart March 31, 2016 5:05 am
Hey Bruce Willis wouldn’t be able to do that falling through the elevator/airshaft thing in DIEHARD and then do a fingertip grab and make it work…
You say that without the benefit of a little-known deleted scene at the beginning of the movie that has John McClane obsessively doing finger curls with weights—foreshadowing. And that’s why he takes so naturally to making fists with his toes in the carpet after he arrives in LA. It’s all related.
When are we going to get a new trailer for this?
They are looking for any new trailers for this movie….