Final Star Trek Beyond Trailer Released

A final trailer for Star Trek Beyond has been released by Paramount Pictures this morning.

The trailer features new dialogue and some new footage not seen in the teaser or full trailer. Additionally, the trailer is set to the backdrop of Rihanna’s “Sledgehammer,” which we reported would be included in the Beyond soundtrack.

Take a look at the trailer below:

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Pretty badass trailer!

Because Star Trek is supposed to be “badass” right.

Apparently, you plan on being the old fogie on this site today opposing anything new that you can’t get your head around. As Shat once said, “get a life.”


Re: “get a life.”

The skit and its line were written by Robert Smigel. Proper attribution is to say that Robert Smigel [the creative talent literally behind Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog puppet.], the writer, said it and not attribute it to the fictional Shatner character that he wrote or the actor that portrayed said character.


Re: “get a life.”

The skit and its line were written by Robert Smigel. Proper attribution is to say that Robert Smigel [the creative talent literally behind Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog puppet.], the writer, said it and not attribute it to the fictional Shatner character that he wrote or the actor that portrayed said character.

@ Disinvited

Gollum? From LOTR?

Ok, who was all ways the most badass captain of all Sci-fi? Now let’s see if you haw the gutsf for the right answer ;)

Captain John J. Sheridan. He faced the God and the Devil and told them both to get the hell out of our galaxy.

Lameass cap’n is more like it, Sheridan came off like Roger Moore in space to me, utterly cardboard except for maybe the AIDS metaphor show 2nd season and the interrogation ep in 4th season. Anyway, Kirk already went through all this stuff with TAS and TFF well ahead of JMS and B5.

I wish more Captains were like Jellicoe. And early Kirk.

I agree. He was the right man for the job, and totally misunderstood by Picard’s touchy-feely crew..

Sheridan did start out so-so but by Seasons 3 and 4 he was a refreshing alternative the 24th century Starfleet babblers we were used to.

Without doubt it was Picard. Out of all of science fiction captains he was the most believable as an actual captain.

actual dictator or monarch, maybe. Captain … gads, no!


Re: dictator or monarch

Or the actual Prime Minister of Canada. ;-)

Was it Margaret or Pierre who was PM up there?

… and the most likely to keep his crew alive, & everyone else for that matter. Diplomacy! And even when they do get into scraps he’s totally cool under pressure.

@ Ted C

Whatever you say, gramps.

Right because Star Trek never had badass moments before now.

Im woting Kirk for the most badass Captain :)

Looks rad! Honestly I think I pefer the Franklin for its NX-01 likeness to the jj-prise for its ridgidity…

I’m excited for this movie :D


Oh you again. Can someone translate the word “rad” to something equiwalent from the 1800’s for Ted to comperhand ;)

Hahaha @Tomi_SI

@ Tom_Si @ Bud

LOL. Ted probably lives for STC episodes.

Ain’t no shame in that. STC may not have all the steroid-induced, ADHD-pleasing wonders and ‘splosions you may need, but it more than makes up for it in creativity and attention to character-building and detail.


@ Paul Andrew: Yes your the man!

The most annoying thing in these movies is the “bad-ass” juvenile Kirk character. I loved the first two movies but of all the characters, Kirk had the most violence done to him by the writers or in-story by Nero, of course. But I thought we’d be beyond that by now. What do both longer trailers have to talk about Kirk living up to his father? Ugh. If we don’t get a fourth movie (and even if we do) we may never see the Kirk that the original series was built on. Why does there always have to be an annoying “bad-boy” seeking redemption?

because it´s an easy to understand trope. Everyone can understand “i´m going to avenge my father”.

And quite honestly, this isn’t Shatner’s Kirk. This is a new Kirk for the new timeline for a new generation. There are going to be differences so trying to compare Pine’s Kirk to Shatner’s is, in my opinion, a mistake.

While we’re on this note, STID was a rehashing of WOK. The overall reception of STID by diehards has been lukewarm. Can you imagine Chris Pine trying to act like Shatner? That would be a big mistake.

This whole concept that Pine is a new Kirk is ridiculous.
That we shouldn’t expect a Shatner immitation or impression.

The sad, brutal truth you JJ-verse fans need to understand is, these three vacous movies you’re all so attached to ARE REHASHING CHARACTERS WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN AND HAVE EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT TO. That is fact. New actors, new timeline, sure, but the majority of fans have expectations and remember William Shatner. Even your average popcorn munching every day Joe will have a memory of the original Kirk.

Going back and having new actors play Kirk and Spock was a mistake. For me, it only succeeds WHEN Pine and Quinto do a good job in recreating the familiar nuances of Shatner and Nimoy.

Otherwise I am too conscious of the fact they are just new actors, in this new, money-making greedy explotation of a franchise they should be celebrating not feeling ashamed for, and trying to ‘sex up’.

I agree. But keep in mind that the awful STID didn’t do justice to the plot threads left dangling in 09. So Pegg is trying to address things that the sequel never did. I can appreciate that.

But again, the emotional resonance in the TOS films came from knowing the character for 10-20+ years something not relevant in these films.

STID really forced that fake emotion. I’m hoping for a better approach this film

Let me pose this question.

Consider yourself today. You are the culmination of everything that has occured to you, and around you. Your environment, your relationships, Your experiences are a huge part of who you become.

Would you be the same person if you were raised by someone else? Somewhere else? Would you have followed the same exact path and behaved exactly the same way?

The idea is that certain things are destiny, like the assemblage of the crew, but events have altered peoples ideas, beliefs, and behavior.

The JJ treks are NOT supposed to redo TOS. They’re an alternate version. Thats why you’ve got some similarities and some differences. This has been pretty clear throughout these films.


@Bryan, that’s a great argument more eloquently stated that I did previously on this thread. Everything that has happened in each of our lives has shaped us to be who we are today. Redoing TOS would be a mistake, as what we are seeing with the clash of the original fans that want to see more of the same with the new age fans that are fine seeing these characters from a new perspective.

It’s difficult to let go but these are not my father’s Star Trek characters.

And at the end of the day the studio doesn’t really care. Do you die hard fans get that this is a business ??Money is to be made!! You can’t do Trek like it was. Go back and watch the original 6 big screen films and you will notice as I did ,there not that great compared to TOS TV show. Those movies were paced for running time except the TMP. TOS was born and made for TV and as many already said Star Trek always did its best work on the small screen. You can’t tell a great Star Trek story on the big screen,never did and never will.At least we have a new tv series coming and even that won’t be like the Trek of the past series because TV has changed along with its viewers. You go back and watch any tv series from any decade and most of them are horrible!! Times change and so does the small screen and big screen. That’s just the way it is. Money and ratings talk, pure and simple.At least the new Trek tv series is something we haven’t seen before, that is what the fans have wanted…isn’t it??

@thomas – you are completely off the mark. Someone will come along and school you on the finances of the films. I dont care enough to look them up. Other franchises have made more money and been critically panned and have recognized the importance of quality and changed directions or made the effort to improve. In fact, one could argue the studio here did the same by dismissing Orci and hiring Pegg.

The fact that the so called “diehards” can’t see this only proves that they are small-minded, which in essence doesn’t make them true fans. “True” fans understand the very simple psychology behind this and they realize the that the Pine Kirk is a product of different life experiences that the Shatner Kirk.

Exactly. While Shat Kirk was raised up with his father. Pine Kirk had no such parentage.

The accusation that a fan who doesn’t agree with you is not a true fan is the defends of the idiotic. Don’t be an idiot.

Just a moment, what they have done with these new characters is completely invalidate what has come before over the last 50 years.

Bryan- You nailed it on the head. There is absolutely nothing that they can say that can dispute what you have just laid out. Because what you have said has been said numerous times by the creators of this new trek. The very reason why they started with George Kirk dying and Vulcan blowing up is all to change the lives of these crew members. To make them unique to this timeline and not a complete replica of the old.

I understand your point which is why the alternate timeline was stupid in the first place. Why take a franchise rooted in 50 years and say it’s the same characters but completely different. Just create a new film series if you don’t like the original franchise.

So sorry I don’t buy the “but they are different” explanation. It was cheap and lazy and never lived up to its premise in the first place.

Because somewhere along the line the studio saw if they went with Kirk and Spock ,money would be made. And these new film did.Why is it die hard fans don’t bitch about fan made films with TOS crew ,yet they bitch and nitpick the new films,what’s the difference??

@Thomas – why are you making things up to support your opinion? Do you have that little faith in your own perspective?

Are you really espousing the idea that the names “kirk” and “spock” were fine regardless of the characterizations, actors, story etc? I like debate and discussion but dont waste your time with silly attacks on people just because you lack the intelligence to articulate your own position.

No, it is not “cheap and lazy”.
One of the themes of these movies, particularly relating to Kirk, has to do with the NUTURE (environment) versus NATURE (genetic/inherited) debate. It seems that, in this new movie, this theme may be dealt with in more depth, but the other two had hints of it. Hence the notion held by many this nuKirk is not the “real” Kirk etc.

The jury is still out on which factors influence a person’s makeup in terms of personality, psychology etc. It is easier to see what a person inherited in terms of physical characteristics, but not necessarily, in these more subtle elements of person’s makeup.

Which begs the question – will this nuKirk end up being much as prime Kirk was, because both Kirks share the same parents, or will this nuKirk be essentially different because of changed environmental factors occurring so early in his life, despite shared genetic inheritance?

No easy answer here… which is part of what makes this set of films interesting.

I disagree. I don’t think they’re ashamed of anything, Trekwise.

And these movies have been around for seven years – yet on every story we get people saying that the entire series is a bad idea. Would you rather there be nothing? We wouldn’t be getting a new Trek series if these movies hadn’t done well.

Sad thing is. It is these “DieHards” that ended Enterprise and put us in the blackhole for how many years without a star trek show to watch on tv. I even heard somewhere about a “Boycott” on this new show or something. I may be mistaken but I would not put it past some of these people who are just stuck in the past.

Ending Enterprise was a mercy killing … geezus, are you telling me you actually WATCHED that and VOYAGER? Liked it, even? Well, it you can put up with that, then I guess that explains how people can enjoy the Abrams pics. Opposite ends approach-wise, but both terrible.

Honestlly, keep TOS and DS9 and select TNG elements, then let the rest settle in the toilet bowl.

Ralph “The sad, brutal truth you JJ-verse fans need to understand is, these three vacous movies you’re all so attached to ARE REHASHING CHARACTERS WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN AND HAVE EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT TO.”

…characters YOU have an emotional attachment to. The majority of the 400 plus milion dollard ticket buyers are not hard core fans. The sooner fandom of old realizes they are not the sun and Trek doesn’t revolve around them, the better. (especially if they successfully break into the Chinese box office!)

Maybe you seen , but think about a young kid that has never seen Star Trek or maybe just heard about Trek.Now they see the new films and love them.To them it new and fresh. That is the crowd Paramount is after, not you.

Then why bother even calling it STAR TREK? If they’re not honoring what made it worth doing and redoing, then why not start something new that won’t offend or annoy? Because they won’t dare a cent on an unproved property.

Ralph Daay, and Jack,

R:e Recasting

Hmm…I don’t know why. Maybe it was my parochial school education. Or maybe it was father’s constant reminder that actors put their pants on one leg at a time just like we do…or maybe it was that SCHOLASTIC MAGAZINE had printed a partial script of THE JOURNEY TO BABEL episode for us to perform ourselves? But I’ve never had a problem with the concept that somewhere along the line the STAR TREK roles might be recast. I think the new cast are fine as actors playing those roles.

Where I have always had a bugaboo about the Treks that came after is every new production asks me to accept that they are using writing that does not exceed the best award winning script that the original was able to eventually manage to conscript somewhere along the line during its far too brief run. My feeling has always been if you aren’t at least attempting to exceed that, why bother?

There are a plethora of excuses from all sorts of circles as to why that should be so in a “new” production, but over the years it just boils down, for me, that the suits in the various Paramount incarnations’ office suites just view writers as disposable commodities and treat them disrespectfully exactly as such.

And that’s where I’m disappointed the most in these KT STAR TREKS…

How stupid would it have been to have Pine do a bad Shatner impersonation. I can’t believe I’m actually reading this. The brutal truth is that Pine is a superior actor and I’m so glad he kept the Shatner impersonations to a bare minimum. Remember, Pine isn’t playing Shatner, he’s playing Kirk. Frankly this whole post is about as dumb a post I’ve read on this site.

Pine is superior to balsa, but that’s about it.

His performance with CumberKhan was embarrassingly inadequate, and I can’t understand why Abrams didn’t have BC phone it in a little to get them playing on something closer to a level field, instead of the feeling we got in ID, which is, ‘Cumberbatch fills in at a highschool play and wipes the floor with the amateurs.’

Pine should be happy to eke out an existence on light comedy, because he just ain’t got it for the rest of this stuff …

Look guys to actors ,they get cast .It’s a job!! They are trying to make a living, why can’t you get that. And as someone said here Pine was cast to play Kirk, i’ll say it again ”to play Kirk, not Shatner”!! To expect any actor to play Kirk like Shatner is just crazy thinking. Even Shatner would agree. They got the right people for the roles…move on or as Shatner said ”get a life”!!

Exactly. Can you imagine every new bond actor doing a cheesy Sean Connery impersonation. If we wanted a bad Shatner impersonation they should have hired Kevin Pollak to play the new kirk.

Here ,Here


That’s the brutal truth?

Wow…mind blown…so you’re saying only when the crew acts as good as the original crew is it good?

Look, I am a fan of all things Trek, Ive been a fan since the original series and yes, I remember when TNG first came out…I was quite young but I was there.

That being said, I do consider myself a hardcore Star Trek fan, but yes, I like Abrams stuff as well.

Money is business. Nevertheless, it had very little if anything to do with the decision to recast these characters. Bottom line is the old actors couldn’t play their younger selves, and that’s the story they wanted to tell. That’s the Star Trek they were interested in. A lot of people liked the original series the best, and they felt that was the core of Trek.

“Sex up?” Okay, what do you mean? Kirk was screwing Caitians and Orion girls but how is that any different than what’s came before? In the sixth film I’ll never forget when Doctor McCoy said “what is it with you anyway?”

Or maybe you’re talking about the Spock and Uhura thing. Man, that was totally hinted in the original series. It never went there, because it just would not have worked in the 60s, since it’s an interracial relationship.

The biggest reason it’s so different is because today’s movie industry is so different. To me it’s a blessing that Star Trek has been able to adapt.

When the new series comes out, I certainly hope you won’t be complaining just because there’s only going to be 13 episodes. We don’t have much these days but I still enjoy what little we get.

I’m an old Trek fan ,but even I can agree with your post Marc. You old Trek fans need to wake up and see the tRek you grew up on is gone ..move on ,its just a movie

I agree also. This is why I can accept and enjoy most aspects of all the Star Trek iterations.They are products of their time and no apologies should be deemed necessary.

We are all products of our past and our present. As oldies (those who managed to see Star Trek TOS when it first came to TV screens), we are the ones who helped, for better and worse, in small and larger ways, to bring about what we have now. Take responsibility.

Finally, get over whatever it is and “get a life” or at least a better, more sensible outlook. It is our generation who influenced (in some degree) the JJ Abrams, Orci/Kurtzmans et al, NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND.

“this new, money-making greedy explotation of a franchise”

Description of the reboot in approx. 7 words.

Generally speaking, all movies are supposed to make money. So are TV shows. TOS wasn’t put on the air as a social experiment.

I’d submit that it was a version of Space Seed.

Victor Hugo Carballo,

Re:easy to understand trope

Wasn’t it updated to the even easier to understand/remember, “My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.” and its corollary, “Offer me money. Power, too, promise me that. Offer me anything I ask for.
I want my father back, you son of a bitch!”

The dialog in the trailer about his father is from a scene (shown at the Beyond fan event) where Kirk and McCoy, on Kirk’s birthday, are discussing that he is now older than his father and how he is now wondering if he joined Starfleet for the wrong reasons.

Nope. those of us who understood the JJverse for what it is, know that ‘Trek movies are just shallow action movies

You’ve just said nothing.

Once again you’re living in the past. I’m a Trek fan since it started.I have no problem with not only rebooting the series but the new cast. Why can’t you. You can’t compare the old cast with the new. My advice to you ( Mike) is buy all the old TV series and Movies ,sit back and enjoy.No one really cares. If you made Star Trek like you want it today, It would flop big time. Pine does a fine job. I see a lot of comments like yours all the time. Bottom line is maybe you just fear your not part of the younger crowd that likes NU-TREK. Your time has past. Why can’t you just enjoy it for what it is and what it never will be.Star Trek will go on with you or without you.

The great thing about JJ’s idea of “rebooting” and giving Kirk a different set of experiences growing up is that you don’t have to cast an imitation Shatner Kirk. It allowed JJ to cast a great actor that could bring his own creativity to the Kirk character. What actor in their right mind would want to take a role where they have to “mimic” the William Shatner’s version of Kirk? The idea of rebooting was a necessity…especially looking at the technology, story writing, and resources compared to the 1960s. The only thing I do agree about with the complainers is that some of the story could have been written better, especially for STID. I’ll give you all that one.

I can’t wait until July 22, I will be seeing Beyond multiple times.

Looking forward to this, the cinematography looks gorgeous.

The cinematography IS impressive.
Bring on the film.

Good thing Dan Mindel moved on to Star Wars with Abrams, his cinematography was inspired, but it did not really feel grand and amazing. From what we’ve seen so far from Windon (my first instinct “F&F and GI Joe – you serious?!”) it’s a lot more Trek and space adventure style.

That is a good trailer. But is this movie have enough buzz? Granted we have a few weeks to go, but it doesn’t feel like a big, anticipated movie to me. I see more buzz and discussion about Suicide Squad and that comes out after ST Beyond.

Should Paramount be doing more to promote this movie?

Have you been living under a rock the last month? There is buzz all over social media. I see something about Trek on all my news feeds… not just from Trek sites but from places like Entertainment Weekly too. And having Rihanna attached to the soundtrack – that will create more buzz to people that wouldn’t necessarily go see a Trek film.

There is an attempt to create buzz. But not an organic buzz. Not yet. I haven’t heard a single person mention this film yet amongst my friends, co workers etc

Where do you work at? The Trump campaign with all old white guys? Really, none of your friends have mentioned the movie? You need new friends?

No. I’m Canadian. The only friend that has mentioned it is a guy who is a huge Trekkie and he is morirified by what’s he’s seen and heard and only
Mentions it because I tell him things.

It’s in stark contrast to 09 which many of my non-Trekkie friends saw and enjoyed. I even enjoyed answering their questions about Trek in general. Same friends saw STID based off liking 09 and most didn’t like it or were confused.

No interest in beyond among my friends. Not yet anyway

@TUP Paramount knows what its doing relax

@Thomas – have I given you the impression I am uptight about what Paramount does or doesnt do? I dont care whatsoever. There is no questioning the promotion has been lax. The argument was, oh wait til the last month or so and it will be massive. Well, its not massive. Its fine, but its not massive.

As far as Paramount knowing what they’re doing, let’s be honest. many studios have made many errors over the years.

But again, my remark was a statement of fact as I know it. It doesnt bother me if Paramount makes a ton of money or loses a ton of money. I just want a good film. And Ill be there to watch it regardless of the promotion of the film.

Politics are forbidden… MODS….MODS…. (oh, I forgot, cheap shots against Republicans will always be approved here)

@TUP, what films have they been talking about? Deadpool, Batman v. Superman, and Captain America: Civil War were probably the biggest movies of the year in terms of “organic buzz” but those are all part of an overarching story collected into cinematic universes. The next one coming up is Suicide Squad. Organic buzz is a difficult thing to come by and, naturally, is not something that can be forced. Star Trek was expected to flop, Star Trek Into Darkness was expected to be The Dark Knight of the sequels. Let’s wait and see what Beyond does.

I have had co-workers, family and friends all discuss this film as one of the top ones they want to see this summer. All without any input from me.

“my” says it all

Uh, one of the most famous people on the face of the planet just attached her song to the movie.I’d call that buzz.

Well if the Bourne movie fails like ID2 is failing, the movie-going public may just pick this up as the movie to go this summer…by default as everything else that might be competitive seems to be disappointing.

So Trek may get a lucky break here…

I’ve seen more interest in Bourne to be sure. Although it’s not exactly “buzzing” either.

I like this trailer. It’s exciting!


Can I have a towel?

Absolutely awesome trailer

Nice. cant decide to opt for the Trek marathon for an early viewing or the Barco cinerama event…leaning towards the 3 screen Barco showing. Looking good!

Wow. The more I see, the more I am anticipating this movie! Looks like this will be the best of the reboots. Justin Lin is showing he “gets” Trek. Been a fan from way back to TOS and you can tell from the dialogue so far that there is definitely a story this time around. Can’t wait!

You can also see that Pine’s Kirk has matured since the first movie. I do like seeing the growth of his character even though I was unsure about how he was written in the first reboot. But his arc has shown his growth and maturity come into fold.
He may not be Shatner’s Kirk, but he has made the character his own and doing a fine job of it.

@Joe Canada,
And thank goodness, bc I’m SO tired of reading comments about how juvenile Kirk is. Yeah, in 2009 he was, but in STiD he had begun maturing.

@Marja. Agreed.


This third trailer seemed to be so action-paced and loud with a so-so song – Sledgehammer. Sabotage has more melody and cheekiness to it…:)

The bit that’s given the giggles is the scene, in the middle of all the mayhem, where Kirk says “Let’s make some noise!” LOL

No doubt, when seeing that particular scene within its full context, it won’t seem quite as funny, but right now, after just watching the trailer, I keep getting the giggles just thinking about that bit of dialogue…:)

What’s not to love?

I agree. They have made an effort to showing this Kirk growing into the job, which has been one of the better aspects of these Alt universe movies – and certainly more character development than most of the other leads got except Spock. It might have been more believable if they hadn’t made him go from cadet to Captain, but that’s behind us now.

I do agree with some of the other posters that he needs to start showing why prime universe Kirk was so revered. Up ’till now it’s mostly been implied that someday he would be a great captain, I would love for them to make good on that promise before they quit making these movies.

This moving may not make as much $$$ as the previous ones, but my gut instinct is that Lin is going to knock it out of the park and satisfy both diehard trekkers and the casual fan. My feeling is that the moving just isn’t getting the same media coverage as the previous ones. There was a huge focus on hitting a home run here domestically for ST09, and a huge emphasis on the international community for STID, which was a homerun internationally. I don’t get that feeling for Beyond, So in essence, my gut instinct is that this movie will be the best of the 3 so far but it won’t show that in box office $$$.

I liked Rihanna’s song. I will watch this movie, but in a funny way, only because I resent it less now that a new Star Trek series is in production. I assume (and pray) that the new series will be in the prime universe, post nemisis. We have 50 years of emotional attachments to those characters, stories, politics, worlds, and even actors (!)… and so the JJ-verse feels like a cruel, vacuous tangent I’ve had to humor. But now that the series is in production, and I’m optimistic it’ll honor the spirit of Trek more… I am happy to watch these actors pretending to be Kirk and Spock, etc, as motorcycles ride through hoops of fire and a million electronic cockroaches tear into an Enterprise I have no emotional attachment too. I’m looking forward to it, but not as much as I had looked forward to The Force Awakens. Isn’t that crazy? A ardent Trek fan, and yet I was more curious about Force Awakens… I think it’s because the new Star Wars was all about preserving the spirit of something we love, not being ashamed of it.

They’re not pretending. They are Kirk, Spock, etc. just under a different set of circumstances.

Shatner is Kirk. Nimoy is Spock. JJ Trek is just poor imitation.

Hmm it’s still Cannon ;) That must hurt you ;)


But seriously, as many have said many times on this site, Kirk and Spock are characters played by actors. If the casting had gone another way, a different actor would have played Kirk. Or Jeffrey Hunter might have stayed with the series and there would have been no Kirk.

Actors who are real people with real lives who age and get sick and die; and in the meantime play many other roles. It’s insulting to limit their entire career to one role… it’s also seriously career limiting to be typecast forever, even if we do love that character and the way they played it.
Would we be so upset if they announced a TJ Hooker remake starring, i dunno, some dude off NCIS:LA? A recasting of Nimoy’s character, William Bell, on a remake of Fringe?

There’ve been so many Hamlets that we’ve finally got past the constant comparisons to Olivier. And Shakespearean acting, on stage and on film, has changed over time. What we’d consider over-the-top overacting today was normal for the revivalists of the 19th century, and a Kenneth Branagh version with contemporary-sounding dialogue rhythms would be anathema to the Victorians.

Why say Pine isn’t good at playing Kirk? Remember, we haven’t seen anyone else play those roles. How can we say we’ve seen the “definitive” Kirk? Or that Kirk isn’t a character that won’t or can’t be adapted, deepened, refined over generations of performers and performances?

Star Trek is 50, but that’s a mere eyeblink when compared to nigh-on 500 years of Shakespeare. If I live long enough, I am sure I will see yet another reboot of TOS; people not yet born will take on the roles of Kirk, Spock, et al, and if we’re still arguing then about how “only Chris Pine is Kirk!!!!1one” I wouldn’t be the least surprised, but I’d be disappointed that we can’t get past this.

Fred Javelina,

Re: Cannon (sic)

Thanks Fred. Sums up exactly how I feel about recasting and mirrors many of the arguments over the decades that I’ve made in agreeing with what you laid out here.

*Or Jeffrey Hunter might have stayed with the series and there would have been no Kirk.*

Could have been even crazier. Lloyd Bridges was the guy Roddenberry wanted for April, before the first pilot was ever shot.

Guess I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.


Re: must hurt

Since cannons are munitions, most can and do. ;)

Well one of them is dead and the other one is late 80s. Would you prefer 90 year old Shatner in the Captain’s chair with a corset for his corset ?

Yeah ,I mean I’m a big Trek fan , but having Shatner back would be dumb and stupid. Maybe Sean Connery could come back as Bond lol.

It isn’t an imitation, it is an iteration.

Captain why do you waste everybody’s time with shallow commits like yours

Shatner is and actor who portrayed Kirk. Nimoy is an Actor who portrayed Spock. As long as it’s well written, I have no issue with the new cast. They’re a talented group…sadly, I felt the writing of the first two movies really let them down. Trek 2009 pretty good, despite some pretty obvious weaknesses but it had a lot of heart and that’s why I gave it a pass. Into Darkness, I can’t sit through. This movie really looks like it has a lot of heart, and the writing appears to be the strongest of the 3 too. I have faith in Simon Pegg as a writer, he puts out good material. He is a far stronger writer than the previous team.

If by preserving the spirit you mean just copying the prior moves, especially episode IV, then yeah. Personally I thought TFA was one of the most disappointing movies I’ve seen in years, but to each his own

Best trailer yet!!!! Can’t wait!

I’m excited for ALL the 5oth anniversary events, including the new series on all access, and all the new merchandising. BTW, will we be seeing you in Beyond? I would love to see you hired on for the new series. That would be awesome…

Rhianna’s song works well, and the trailer has me more interested than some of the earlier ones. But, boy, they’re really selling this based on the destruction of the Enterprise, aren’t they? Does the average movie-goer really care about that? Even as a fan, I don’t care about that. And you clearly see that the main crew survive, so there’s no suspense there. Kinda wish they were teasing something more, as I’m not seeing a lot else of interest other than the character work. The villain seems dull, and the makeup is very TNG-era movie. The whole thing feels a bit Nemesis. I wonder if this will be the first box office disappointment for the JJ-verse.

A movie about the sinking of the titanic doesn’t just show life rafts. It shows the ship sinking too. There is a point.

Pop songs don’t work with Star Trek…They are trying to hard to be hip.

They need to. Star Trek is alive only because they are trying to be hip and attract new audiences. If they don’t, there just aren’t enough core fans to keep it alive. I like what they are doing- its new and fresh, not the same old same old. That is what is so great about having so much Trek— you have so many series and movies that you can enjoy them all, but still go back and watch your favorites. Trek can’t be rigid if it wants to survive. Star Wars must be rigid if it wants to survive because they don’t have to worry about attracting new fans, they can pander the fans because of that.

Sorry, but Trek needs to be hip – as long as the target audience continues to skew towards Medicare as opposed to Millennial’s, the franchise is going to have problems regaining it’s footing in a market awash in pop culture superhero movies. If you believe that the message of Trek is still relevant, then it needs to respect it’s roots while speaking to a younger generation. It sounds like Pegg understands this, we just now need to see if they can pull it off.

Actually it’s more important for the film to be good then to be “hip”.

Disagree, Superhero movies are getting old .

Superhero movies are not getting old. They are topping the box office of all other films.

I don’t agree at all. It all depends on what kind of pop song this is. And this one works, very well with picture. It’s epic and dramatic, and not like the misguided elevator music that was the theme of Enterprise. Also, it’s not the theme. It’s not like this opens the movie or anything, nor likely played during the movie.

Oh, and it’s canon — it draws from Uhura’s soulful character singing throughout the series, which very much reminds me of the Rhianna song …

Maybe played in the closing credits, but if anyone thinks this song will show up during the movie is just plain nuts.

And Yet Magic Carpet Ride played during First Contact, one of the best Trek films ever.

When done well it can work, and that was done very well and tasteful. The Beastie Boys song was trying too hard, this was actually subtle. I think the song works on many levels, perhaps even the writing team saying…’we’re letting go’ and just waiting to see what happens.

Actually, this song fits the plot quite well, so far as we have seen of it so far. Not to mention Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana said on Instagram that the song helped them cope with Anton Yelchin’s death. It has many other meanings too, Trek and non-Trek alike, but I offer the following:

As Chris Pine had previously stated in an article, these days you cannot do cerebral Star Trek like before. Any lessons, moral messages/themes etc., must be subtle, almost subliminal, and pop/rock songs in films and their soundtracks can help further convey those themes IF the songs in question are lyrically deep and applicable to the themes the film is evoking. Such is true with Rihanna’s Sledgehammer.

I elaborate on this further in my latest vid on YouTube , which is a review/analysis of the song as it applies to Star Trek, as well as an explanation of why such songs are needed in Star Trek films today. Not to replace film scores, but to accompany them.

I invite you and everyone else here to check it out.

I still have yet to see the second trailer in theaters, and I go to movies more than regularly. Never played it.

I’ve seen the trailers every time I go to the movies up here in Canada.I guess it depends on what movie it is attached to. I have recently seen it at X-Men and Independence Day.

@Sam, Same here, and we’ve seen movies at which “Suicide Squad,” an action/violence movie is advertised.

Saw Trailer 2 with Independence Day: Resurgence on Saturday.

How did you like Resurgence?

@Sam. I haven’t seen it either – and I’ve seen pretty much everything that’s been in the multiplex.

So it sounds like it is getting limited exposure then. Could be they’ve waited too late.

Yeah I also saw the second trailer with Independence Day 2. It was great to see it in 3D as well. ID however sucked harder than a vacuum cleaner. Man was it terrible.

Is it just me or does that song have a certain 007 vibe to it? The beginning sounds a lot like Alicia Keys’ Quantum song (just better) and the rest of it even echoes the 007 tune to some degree. The way she sings it is also very Bondesque / Bondish / Bondian…

Anyway, it’s really cool. I’m very much into fake 007 songs and having one on Star Trek is even better…

I immediately thought the same thing :-)

This looks really exciting, and I am looking forward to it. but….

I have been rematching some of the classic Trek movies and shows, and finding it interesting how much the underlying messages resonate with what is going on in the world today. Voyage Home and the warning about caring for our environment and all the fellow species on our planet – Undiscovered Country and the fear of change and the “other” which seems to be underlying much of our current political landscape. The Motion Picture, and the human tendency to fear what we do not understand. What I have always liked most about TOS era Trek (which I readily admit is *my* favorite Trek series) is the combination of good old fashioned action along with deeper insights into human nature and the “big questions” we all grapple with in our lives. From the new trailer, I would posit that Beyond has the action part down—- but for me, there needs to be more than just kick-butt action for Beyond to truly earn the moniker “Star Trek”. I really want this film to be more than just a summer blockbuster… I want it to leave me thinking, to have some “meaning” that will last “beyond” the two hours I spend in the theater. It doesn’t have to hit me over the head… it doesn’t have to be preachy… but Trek differs from other franchises in that it has never been afraid to ask the big questions – even if there are no clear answers. That is what sets it apart from many other similar genres. For me, that will make the difference as to whether this one is a “keeper” or not.

The first film was an intro to the new crew, so I wasn’t necessarily expecting it to be particularly deep. For the second film, I had hoped that there would be some ramifications to the destruction of Vulcan. To me, that offered numerous opportunities to explore “big ideas” both political and social, but the whole loss of Vulcan was basically ignored. And even though the second film dealt superficially with some deeper ideas, this was mainly an echo similar themes of “fear of the other” that classic Trek has touched upon. Again, there was an opportunity here, but there was little actual depth to those themes. There was no real discussion or contemplation about what it meant to lock Khan and his people away in cold storage – or what it meant that members of Star Fleet were so fearful of the Klingons that there were willing to make a deal with the devil. Again, I would not want to be preached to – but even a simple conversation among characters that demonstrated that someone, ANYONE got it, would have been helpful.

And here we are at the third (and possibly final) film. This time, I am really hoping for something more… something with a little more meat to it. The world today if one of chaos and conflict in many regions, and there is certainly no lack of “big themes” to explore – so maybe, just maybe the writers will give me something that will stimulate my mind as well as my senses.

Here’s hoping.

And Star Trek Into Darkness is about losing our principals after an attack, which seems to be happening again now.

I agree, but the characters never really gave any indication that they were aware of the underlying themes of the movie at all… and if the characters don’t get it, they don’t grow.

@Jack, Agreed; I immediately drew a parallel to the US invasion of Iraq after 9/11 and all the horrid noise in politics that plays on Fear of the Other to keep the military-industrial complex alive.

@ Trek Lady, I sure would like to see a Trek movie which addresses the loss of Vulcan, even if it’s not the main subject. In the movie, I felt like it was sort of a cheap way to get theatre-goers to a deeply emotional place — and then, on to more ACTION! Admittedly, it worked on me …. I turned to writing fanfiction to address the effect of the loss and so did many other fanfic writers.

Anyone else catch the Shatnerian delivery of “this is…MY last report as the Captain…of the Starship Enterprise” by Pine? Subtle, but nice.

Yeah, absolutely…he seems to emulate the Shat nicely in this movie, getting closer to the character we love and know…

Yeah, I also noticed that his delivery seems to be maturing a bit. At least what we’ve seen so far

Why is this particular style of delivery deemed more mature than any other kind? Is the only way to assess this Kirk’s apparent maturing is how much his speech patterns manage to imitate Shatner/Kirk’s delivery? Surely signs signifying genuine maturing has to be more than that.

Pine/Kirk’s delivery in the other movies often showed him to be clear and resolute, in accordance with his station as captain.

I love much of Shatner/Kirk’s delivery but I do not think that such necessarily signifies more or less maturity.

I thought it sounded forced and cheesy.

I may be seeing things but was that the “first” Enterprise (from Jonathan Archer’s time) that was seen in “Star Trek – Enterprise” flying into those flames in the latest trailer?? If so, that would be cool..

It’s the USS Franklin, a direct predecessor to the NX01. The Franklin is said to be the first warp 4 capable ship.

@Matt, but I thought NX01 was the first warp 4 capable ship? Or was Enterprise able to go faster? Hmm, like Warp 6? Distant memory is distant


You are in the ballpark. Besides, one imagines in getting the Franklin fight ready Scotty likely upgrades it.

Archer’s Enterprise was the first Warp FIVE starship…

But I didn’t know the Franklin was older than NX-01. Cool. Nice extension to the universe / multiverse…

Was under the impression that the NX-01 was the first Warp 5 ship, though I’ll defer to those with more knowledge…

I love the fact that the Franklin came BEFORE the NX-01. It really ties Enterprise into canon and respects what came before. Enterprise has always been referenced in these films and I hope they throw out a few references of it in the film.

Love this trailer! Looks like Star Trek at its finest.

This may or may not end up being a good film, but the cinematography is gorgeous.

A pop-song by a famous (often female) artist associated with the movie – that gives off kind of a James Bond vibe to me. (Not that this is a bad thing, This marketing strategy has worked well for the Bond movies so far.)

Yeah it does sound very Bondish which is cool. I’m not a HUGE fan of having it but yes I never had any issues with Trek being more modernized either, just as long as it fits and I think this will get people interested.

Uh, why is Anton Yelchin not to be found in this latest trailer?

Uh, why must people read to much into everything?

Ted C, you’re reading into Harry’s comment, aintcha?

He’s there, with Pine, on the planet, need to go frame by frame advance to see it.

Possibly because people might accuse them of trying to exploit his death. And, for a more practical reason, because Chekov’s a minor character who may not have much to do in the movie.

This was probably done before he passed.

Generic space adventure with hipster cool music and neat-o special effects! Yea! Awesome sauce! *rolls eyes*


You really don’t know what a “hipster” is, do you? Just some cool word you read on the internet and like to try it out?

An actual “hipster” attitude toward the film would be yours, being too cool to like it because it’s new.

“An actual “hipster” attitude toward the film would be yours, being too cool to like it because it’s new.”

Yep. One of the defining traits of the hipster is “I liked (fill in the blank) before it was cool”.

Rihanna is hipster music?

Apparently so. I should read Pitchfork more carefully while sipping my overpriced coffee.

Demonstrating pretty much exactly the attitude your’e trying to explain here…

They actually regressed with this trailer.

They went for a bit more content and substance with the last one, and then back to nothing but action in this one.

80% of this trailer is the song. And the other 20% looks like pandering to the emotions of the audience.


Plenty of substance if you care to look, plus the song itself sets a tone to the trailer that has plenty of emotion to it.

Who am I going to believe, you or my lying eyes?

You may want to look up what the purpose of an advertisement is. While I could have written your response to this three years ago, and hit it spot on, for most people, if it creates a reason for someone to actually go see the movie then its served its purpose. In the meantime you can console yourself and get weepy with Neil deGrasse Tyson lectures that pander to your emotional response level. Pass the tissues, please.

Phil June 27, 2016 12:35 pm

I respond emotionally to movies, but I also have the awareness to know when it’s because the filmmaker is pandering to me. The old cliche is that if you want to cultivate tension and anxiety in the audience, simply have a scene where a child is in danger. If the child is in danger for no reason relating to the substance of the story—if it’s not for thematic or character development purposes—then it’s regarded as a cheap, hackneyed ploy. By people who are able to discern, and who care about, the difference, that is.

Jesus. It’s a trailer. Enough with the fan inferiority complex tripe already.

For those who were hoping for Pine to get a little Shatner-y, it looks like you got it.
I’m hoping they have a winner on their hands here….

P.S. And why would an artist title a song “Sledgehammer” unless it’s meant to be a cover of the Peter Gabriel classic, one of the most popular songs of all time (and worlds better than this new one)? It’s like some new artist with no knowledge of music history coming along and naming their new song, “Strawberry Fields Forever.” Get a clue and have some respect, you self-absorbed hack.

Lol. Whatever you say, Camille Paglia.

Why don’t you call her and ask?

Phil June 27, 2016 12:29 pm

Why don’t you call her and ask?

Maybe I will!

The real question is, why would Peter Gabriel name a song Sledgehammer? Sledgehammers have been around for thousands of years. It’s like some artist with no knowledge of hand tools coming along and naming their song after one, completely disrespecting construction workers everywhere. What a hack! >.>

albatrosity June 27, 2016 9:38 pm

Obviously your comment is ridiculous, as it ignores the creative use of metaphor by Peter Gabriel.

Yeah, why would another artist use the exact same title for their song?

What if every artist did that….?

Says you. I have never heard of a song called “Sledgehammer” until now. I have heard Peter Gabriel and Genesis, but Jeez – that’s going back a while. However, I have heard of “Strawberry Fields Forever” and darn it – I can’t get part of that tune out of my mind now.

I wonder if I am alone in this?

OMG July 22nd can’t come fast enough for me. I can’t wait to see this movie!!!

They really jump through the viewscreen? a) Khan did that in the last movie; 2) even glass used in office buildings is stronger than that, let alone material that can withstand ftl pressures.

It’s a good trailer. It does its job. It sells Kirk better than the stupid motorcycle jump does.

I still hate seeing the E get trashed. It’s been done twice. And it’s so much cooler to see her do her job and succeed.

@CmdrR, Maybe it only withstands FTL pressures if the shields are up? In any case it seems stupid to me too. Agree about Enterprise-destroying.

The concepts are reversed. The ship would be subject to typical fight pressures at sublight because the ship is expending fuel to move through space. At FTL, the ship isn’t moving, space is being compressed around it. So if they rode the saucer section down, it’s possible that it has been so structurally compromised that the weakened material let them jump through it. In my opinion, of course…. :-)

Phil, sure OK, you get a free pass at warp. But, near-light speed is a bitch. Space is NOT a perfect vacuum. Though it sounds rare, there are hydrogen atoms out there. You are constantly hitting them. It’s one reason why it gets harder and harder to reach velocity near the speed of light, because tiny parcels of mass keep stealing your energy. ANYHOO — try it with conventional materials and you’ll be walking home.

That’s why they have the navigational deflector (the dish)… To protect against those particles and whatnot…

Not wanting to correct you CmdrR, but it gets harder and harder to reach light speed because mass increases as speed increases and becomes theoretically infinite at light speed… So says Einstein…

No, feel free to correct me. You are right, but I think hitting zillions of hydrogen atoms also has an effect. In any case, I would still really, really, really hope that Starfleet builds ships tough enough that the windows can’t be kicked out. The shields are necessary, but the ship itself had better be tough.

Agreed, however Enterprise’s destruction will (should) bring about the birth of the new Enterprise… Hopefully without those obnoxious nacelles… And this would be a great opportunity for a memorable scene. Do we dare hope to have something as good as the introduction of the Enterprise to Kirk in TMP?

Fast and Furious in Space. Whoopie…

Joe do yourself a favor ,don’t see the movie if you think its going to be Fast and Furious Gezz, get a life

Thomas Vinelli,

Re: get a life

Get a life? I thought you said you were opposed to self-righteousness?


. Rihannas’ all over it. Great song and fantastic trailer. Hope the film pulls off what is implied in the trailer.

The negative comments from the usual suspects, in a historical context, are hilarious. Throughout TNG’s run, the same kind of comments in the same “you kids get off my lawn” tone where found all over Trek fan sites. It’s ironic that fans of a fiction about the future can themselves be so close-minded and regressive. There is such a profound lack of self-reflection.

Beyond looks great.

The commercial ban on the internet wasn’t lifted until 1991. TNG came out in 1987. There weren’t a hell of a lot of people online anywhere until 1995 or so.

But I get where you’re coming from. There’s nothing Trekkies hate more than Star Trek.

There’s nothing Trekkies hate more than Star Trek.

I think that sums up the attitude of the whiners nicely.

Pretty much the only Star Trek that “counts” is their own pet series/movie/book. Everything else isn’t “real” Star Trek and its very existence is somehow offensive to them. Original TOS fans hated TNG. TNG fans hated DS9. DS9 fans hated Enterprise. Etc, etc.

My solution is to watch and talk about what I like, and just ignore what I don’t. Not everything is going to please everyone. That’s why I can never call myself a “fan” of anything. I refuse to be so fanatical about something that I’m compelled to hate everything about it except the narrow part I approve of, and condemn everyone who does. I have better things to do with my time and my life than go around the internet complaining about movies I hate or don’t have an interest in.

I’m thinking today about why I come here at all. I think it started, 7 or 8 years ago, as a place to talk about Trek and have discussions and debates about the films. There were dissgreements and there were rants against Abrams and Paramount, but it wasn’t just thst. But it’s now just the same few folks bashing everything willy nilly. It’s like they want Trek to fail entirely.

It will be funny in another decade when Trek moved on to something else where the JJ reboot people will be moaning how thats not ‘real’ Star Trek either. Yeah folks, its all Trek, just different versions of it. You can certainly like one more than the other but stop saying who are ‘real fans’ because they like one you don’t.


Re:nothing Trekkies hate more than Star Trek.

Oh, I don’t know about that. There seems to be a rather sizable faction from all sides of the aisles that hates others not enjoying it exactly the way they do more.

We had BBSes, CompuServe and AOL, thankyouverymuch, and there were many active Trek communities there. And lest I forget, Usenet predated the WWW by about 15 years, launched in 1980. net.startrek was the first Trek newsgroup, founded in 1982, and renamed to rec.arts.startrek in 1986. The long, ignoble history of flamewars and trolling in the Trek online community predates some posters on this site…

AOL, Compuserve, Q-Link, and the Usenet were never “sites,” so there were not Star Trek websites, per se, when Next Generation was in its original run. Some of the older sites might date back to the early 90s, but I’m wondering how many of them are still around.

I was also on all those old dialups back in the 80s. They weren’t the internet and didn’t have “websites.” They were direct-dial servers and small private networks with some similar features to the Internet (chat rooms, message boards, email), but not the same thing.

As an aside, I’ve always wanted to find time to sit down and write some “honest reviews” of the Original Series as they might have appeared on the Usenet back when they originally aired… in the voice of all these miserable latter day haters. Just so many inconsistencies from episode to episode. It would be glorious to nitpick them to death.


There weren’t URLs that you could use a MOSAIC browser to get to, but there were addresses that you could sift through on the backbone upon which the www was built, and they could be found via Gopher and some of those were written in Apple’s….how did they explain it?.. card language? Hypertext Markup.

To a limited degree, starting in the 70s there were….
BBS’s (Bulletin Board Systems)… accessed through primitive dial-up modems over phone lines.
True, it wasn’t anywhere near being internet, but it was a way — using computers — of typing and sharing messages, containing opinions, long distance to others with common interests.

In the 70s and 80s most people using computers were geeks, and they were definitely into Star Trek.

Mid-70s: our high school’s Computer Lab had a single terminal connected by phone line to the local community college’s mainframe. It had an enormous giant tractor-feed printer, and with the equally humungous keyboard, what did we use it for?

We played Star Trek.

Anyways, 10 years later, when TNG debuted, there were definitely opinions flying back and forth on BBS’s. I was stoked, I loved it — even in the first two seasons.

But other TOS fans weren’t so forgiving (‘Trek Fundamentalists’!). I was an obsessed TOS fan from the start, and I was shocked that so many were being so harsh Anti-New about the show. “It’s only Star Trek when it has Kirk and Spock!”… “…’The Next Generation’ — sounds like a Pepsi commercial!” [<– actual quotes!!].

Me: I've always loved when they try New things! Bold New directions!

Agreed. You’re a little older than I am (actually sounds like you’re closer to my parents’ age), but TOS is all there was when I was younger. I was in 7th or 8th grade when TNG came on the air and was definitely on the BBSs and Q-link on my Commodore. We used to more or less LARP with computer keyboards and television sets and all the furniture in the living room arranged like a starship bridge. It was pretty geeky. Had homemade uniforms and insignias, phasers and communicators.

Was in the audience opening weekend when the Enterprise was destroyed at Genesis, sitting a few rows back, long before the days of stadium seating in theaters (or even cupholders, for that matter). But there’s no way anyone could get me to trade the present for the past. I remember very little of the 70s, but the 80s were positively medieval. No thanks on going back there :)

Prodigy Bulletin Boards, and the Trekweb. Bashing TNG happened constantly. Everything that was old is new again. :)

Yep. round and round it goes. Everyone thinks they’re thinking of things for the first time. Lest we all forget that in 1966 “true” scifi fans thought the original series was dumbed down for the masses, and scifi “in name only.”

Every generation thinks the new generation are shallow, lazy idiots with no attention span. Even Ben Franklin wrote pamphlets in the 1700s regarding what we now call classical music, and how it was a sign of the dumbing down of society and the younger generation being morons.

You’re actually, seriously, comparing this vapid, steaming load (referring to ’09, Into Darkness and what Beyond seems to be shaping up into) to TNG? Ha!

Go away, the grownups are talking right now.


Re:Go away

Nice attempt at Fields. But you forgot the honest self-reflecting, bordering on self-deprecating, rejoinder that sells it:

You bother me.


You said it well VoR

Blast from the past:

”Ah, but it was a different cyberworld 20 years ago.

The Internet was so crude that Al Gore hadn’t felt an urge to brag about creating it.

Computer geeks like Gallagher chatted with other users via electronic bulletin board systems that relied on temperamental phone lines.

Just a high school kid, Gallagher had a natural knack for understanding computer code and customizing graphics.

He was a member of the Macintosh Apple Club of Spokane, even editing the club newsletter for a time, he said.

“It was my sport. Technical things were never an issue.”

Gallagher also possessed the burning curiosity of an explorer.

Nowadays, terms like “hacking” and “leaking” carry sinister Edward Snowden baggage.

Back then, however, young hackers like Gallagher were motivated not by vandalism, but by wanting to test their skills and see what they could do.

Which is how he wound up with that Star Trek script.” — ‘Set phasers to stun: STAR TREK hacker fesses up’; By Doug Clark; The Spokesman-Review; SUNDAY, JUNE 1, 2014

Now THAT’S a trailer. Also, that last ship near the end of it almost (–ALMOST–) looks like an older NX-class vessel, perhaps after some sort of refit…. (?)

Brilliant trailer, excellent music. Pretty stoked to go see this, cinematography looks amazing and the whole saucer falling away reminds me of some concept art for TMP.


This will be the first Trek movie of my adult life I won’t be seeing on opening night or in theaters.

Thanks for sharing.

Your loss.

And yet I think everybody saying that will still be here on July 23 with their opinions.

@Jack Not everybody, that is a gross overstatement. There will be many, certainly, but not everyone.

@James, so because you disagree with my opinion you feel I deserve to die? That is not very rational or understanding. It’s certainly not one of the values the stories of Star Trek tried to convey. Also, try not to make too many assumptions. First Contact was the first Star Trek Movie I was old enough to go see by myself. I watched reruns of TOS and I watched TNG+ when they were new. I only made it into the second season of Enterprise before I gave up, to this day there are still episodes of Enterprise I have not seen.

Why must I adapt and accept something that I do not believe represents the Star Trek I love? The world would be a rather boring place if we all had the same opinions.

Come on Navy cut the bull ..really stop it!!

Hurry up and croak. You old diehards need to pass the torch already. Even I who grew up on Star Trek I-VI can adapt and grow with the franchise. Why the heck can’t you guys?

Because James they realize there time has past.These guys live in a bubble. They want time to stop and things be as they were when they were young and into the Star Trek of the times. I’m old but realize time to move on and enjoy the Trek of this time. But yeah they can’t let the past go and anything that doesn’t meet their standard of Trek is crap. It doesn’t matter if they don’t see the movie and surely the studio doesn’t care. In the end this movie will make a ton of money. Then the blu-ray and 4k blu-ray will come out ,and many will buy them , the toys etc. Yep this movie will make a ton and people like Navy can boo hoo all they want , nobody really cares.

Thomas Vinelli,

Re: People that don’t really care

People that don’t really care don’t bother to compose a single note about that which they don’t really care. But not ONE, not TWO, but THREE? What was it The Bard said? “Me thinkest thou doth protesteth too much?

@ Navy ,um no one really cares.

@Thomas Vinelli

You cared about my opinion enough to post a reply. So your logic is flawed.

I have my opinion about new Star Trek and as long as I’m permitted to express it I will. Those of you who want to shut me up or try to force your opinions on me are part of the problem.

I don’t care that you like the new movies, I care that I don’t like them. I do get a kick out of the assumptions some of you make about me based solely off my opinion. Very entertaining, very telling.

Looks better & better I love the Kirk\Spock\Bones banter here. Only thing I am concerned about is the Enterprise obviously is missing most of the movie so I hope when the crew gets a new ship at the end we see the most incredible leaving Yorktown blasting into Warp Speed VFX shot ever created!!

Lovin it!! Counting the days!!

This is exactly what I had called for oh so many moons ago. Tie Star Trek into a piece of music that would propagate online, over the radio, and in videos — following the much smaller example of Renegades with “Captain of My Soul.”

Scoring Rihanna to do this — JACKPOT.

STAR TREK just warped BEYOND the banality of its ancient history.

I was super dubious going into the trailer but, I have to admit, I actually kind of liked it.

Could it be at the end of the film… Enterprise NCC-1701-A? I believe so!!

It’s the Franklin.

Impressive trailer – might even go as far as admitting that I am looking forward to seeing what this movie brings. While those of us in the UK face the prospect of leaving our own little Federation, a bit of light relief is just what we need.

Still have the United Nations mate.

Ohhh… I have to say that I’m quite excited to see the movie, albeit not in a 100% positive sense. There are some shots in this trailer that make me say “WOW!”, but there are others that make me say “meh…” and still others that left me saying “no way, dude!”
Can’t say that I’m a fan of Krall’s character design, for example. Sure, he looks like a “Trek-Alien”… but unfortunately the wrong type of Trek-Alien. One part “Nemesis” Reman, one part Jem-Hadar.
But hey, Rihanna’s song sounds pretty neat. I wonder whether the lyrics contain anything besides ruminations about hitting walls, though.
Oh, I also like the slight redesign of the Enterprise bridge. The blinkenlights-wall behind Kirk finally looks like it served some kind of purpose.

Looks like fun!

Trailer looked very good. The song didn’t bother me and it fit in much better than the Beastie Boys trailer. It had a good emotional impact that helped. I have high hopes for the film. The actors are doing a great job IMO and these films are helping to ensure that Trek will continue both in movie form and tv form. Whether you personally like these iterations or not, they are helping the future of Trek, something the last two TNG movies and last two series weren’t doing.

This looks so damn cool, the snippets of Pine in the trailer are completely what one should look for in Captain Kirk.

Looks great. The song sounds like Trek. It also sounds like Bond, but it works here very well.


I’m a little surprised that we haven’t seen the Ewok/troll creatures yet. Nor have they given any indication about the quest to recover the device Elba takes. Or did I just miss it?

Curious Cadet,

You mean something like Keenser’s home posse?

For some time now you’ve been dropping subtle clues. Has someone gotten a peak at the rough cut?

I don’t believe it’s Keenser’s home planet. I thought perhaps at first, but the cute little guys scampering around the Enterprise are very different than the way Keenser goes about it. Stranger things are possible though. Should be good for toy sales whatever they are.

I have to say I like it. I think its cool they are doing something different and Rhianna is a bit Trek fan so you can’t go wrong with that. ;)

I know not all Trek fans like it (how many hated the original theme song to Enterprise as well) but there is nothing wrong to break out of the mold once awhile and yes these films been doing that once it played the first Beastie Boys song in the original film, so its been part of these movies from the beginning. I think they made a mistake having Beastie Boys in the first trailer though only because it was JUST focused on action and one liners. This is a bit different and after the second more traditional trailer.

Anyway a pop song isn’t going to make or break this film, the movie itself will so let’s hope its good regardless.

I am no longer supporting any Paramount/CBS Star Trek productions, nor will I buy any merchandise because of their poor handling of the franchise and its fans.

I urge everyone to sign this petition…

…and join this group!


whaddya know, unity here over something!



Take your Petition and well put it where the sun is not shining.

Non, nein, nee, nie, nihil, nyet, no.


I’ll pass…

Never fear, though, the sites malcontents will be all over it for you.

Groan …. Let us have our new Star Trek… You want the old stuff, there is already plenty of it. Heck, I enjoy rewatching TNG and Tos but I want new and different too so I get that with nutrek. Never been this excited about a trek movie b4!

No way in heck.


Please go away with your self righteous attitudes,please and thank you Sci-fi junkie

Not only no but Hell no.