Star Trek

[jaycanuck]

Anyone goin? Every review I've read said this is the salvation of the franchise. It certainly looks good.

http://echosphere.net/star_trek_insp/insp_captkirk_preview.jpg

[Gmanfromthechi]

Yep Ill be seein it in eyemax. A little skeptical since its so diff then the usual Trek we are used too, but in IMAX? hell its worth a shot :-)

[aprilian]

Absolutely!
I've been a ST nerd forever.
If they can get the stink of Rick Berman off of the franchise ,it will do well again.

[Mr_Choc69]

On My List

[southern81]

ya it looks really good

[tsntx]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

[jaycanuck]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

I have a feeling that's what they were gunning for with this. The director admitted to not being a fan...which I think served him well in this. Keep the core of Star Trek..but reinvent it. I for one was not impressed with most of the Next Generation films (First Contact was ok). The last good ST movie was VI and that was 1991.

[fab]

My IMAX tickets were booked a month ago.
Can't wait for Saturday :)

[Quiet Reflections]

i think they did a great job casting this film

[jaycanuck]

i think they did a great job casting this film

I agree. Simon Pegg as Scotty. And when McCoy speaks in the trailer it's very much DeForrest Kelly.

[Coroner]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

It only looks good for non-Trekkies. I saw the trailer and, sorry, gotta call it Star Crap.

[jaycanuck]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

It only looks good for non-Trekkies. I saw the trailer and, sorry, gotta call it Star Crap.

I dunno Coroner. I'm very trekkie and I'm excited to see it. Don't get me wrong...I've liked the last 40+ years of Trek...but the franchise needed a retelling

[Bob's Tgirls]

Anyone goin? Every review I've read said this is the salvation of the franchise. It certainly looks good.

http://echosphere.net/star_trek_insp/insp_captkirk_preview.jpg

I'll definitely be going. I've been looking forward to this.

[Richctdude]

cant wait!!!!!!

[Coroner]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

It only looks good for non-Trekkies. I saw the trailer and, sorry, gotta call it Star Crap.

I dunno Coroner. I'm very trekkie and I'm excited to see it. Don't get me wrong...I've liked the last 40+ years of Trek...but the franchise needed a retelling

I do respect that. I love Star Trek since I was 5. I remember watching the then new TNG shows (late 80ies) but it was when I grew older that I began to understand the topics. You had questions about ethics in science, the definition of being an individual, humanist messages etc. It was much more than entertainment and little children´s dreams.
What I see in this trailer are pure special effects orgies in the tradition of brainless blockbusters. If you can enjoy this, that´s fine and have fun, man.

[dbev]

There's a time travel issue in this movie and some things that will be clear only watching it, otherwise, as a long time trekker, it really looks like a big mess judging from the trailers.

[astridshayxxx]

okay this officially puts me in the dr. who scarf wearing crowd but already have my tickets to the show.

Might even see it twice wearing my Capn Kirk Uderroos!!!! or are they Capn Crunch underroos????


Hmm so yeah goin, Definitely loving Zach Quinto as Fetal Spock.

Cheers

Astrid Shay

[SXFX]

It is so cool so see girls at scifi movies like this.
Especially if they are beautiful girls.
Scifi requires a leap of faith a devine beliefe that there will be a tomarrow and if we are lucky it will be magnificant and all will be well.

[jaycanuck]

looks good to me and im not a trek fan

It only looks good for non-Trekkies. I saw the trailer and, sorry, gotta call it Star Crap.

I dunno Coroner. I'm very trekkie and I'm excited to see it. Don't get me wrong...I've liked the last 40+ years of Trek...but the franchise needed a retelling

I do respect that. I love Star Trek since I was 5. I remember watching the then new TNG shows (late 80ies) but it was when I grew older that I began to understand the topics. You had questions about ethics in science, the definition of being an individual, humanist messages etc. It was much more than entertainment and little children´s dreams.
What I see in this trailer are pure special effects orgies in the tradition of brainless blockbusters. If you can enjoy this, that´s fine and have fun, man.

haha. who knows...could suck ass. But i'll be open. Hey..Pegg as Scotty...can't go wrong with that at least.

[jaycanuck]

okay this officially puts me in the dr. who scarf wearing crowd but already have my tickets to the show.

Might even see it twice wearing my Capn Kirk Uderroos!!!! or are they Capn Crunch underroos????


Hmm so yeah goin, Definitely loving Zach Quinto as Fetal Spock.

Cheers

Astrid Shay

Where do I find a girlfriend like you?

[Alyssa87]

its JJ Abrams, its gonna b genius.

[Legend]

People can trash berman all they want by he made some good shows but all the star trek movies he has done were total garbage,although i'm not into old stuff getting remade i hope this movie is successful so it can give the star trek franchise a boost.

[jaycanuck]

Gotta love the Onion. So dead on with this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02LgdXVkXgM

[hal3000]

Friday evening @ 8.15 pm
Can´t wait...

[matrixdave]

OH YEAH GONG IN A COUPLE HOURS. ITS GOING TO BE AWESOME!!

[jaycanuck]

I'm waiting until Sunday. Getting some friends together..

[Quiet Reflections]

I just saw it and it was pretty good. like i said the casting was great and of course Nimoy is awesome as always. Zachary Quinto was Spock in every was. but beware if your expecting it to be an exact retelling of history because J.J. Abrams definitely put his own stamp on this one

[luv4Tgirls]

I'm going tonite at Imax can't wait

[boris58]

They wouldn't let Shatner do a cameo. I thought that was un-cool.

[Quiet Reflections]

They wouldn't let Shatner do a cameo. I thought that was un-cool.
i read hes a dick to work with

[BrendaQG]

I'm a pretty big trek fan. I am going to see it now. Trust me if it royally sucks I'll let you know. so far the reviews have me expecting the "best episode ever"... but ... my favorite reviwer Rich Roper had some knitpicks and he's no star trek fan.

[jaycanuck]

They wouldn't let Shatner do a cameo. I thought that was un-cool.

It would have been cool to have him in it..but the thing with that is Kirk is dead. He died in Generations.

[Quiet Reflections]

They wouldn't let Shatner do a cameo. I thought that was un-cool.

It would have been cool to have him in it..but the thing with that is Kirk is dead. He died in Generations.

they could have done it easy. history is different in this because its an alternate time line

[jaycanuck]

They wouldn't let Shatner do a cameo. I thought that was un-cool.

It would have been cool to have him in it..but the thing with that is Kirk is dead. He died in Generations.

they could have done it easy. history is different in this because its an alternate time line

Good point. I at least heard about that...don't know the details about the time shift...but I'll find that out Sunday. I also heard a rumor of a couple cameo's at the beginning. Fuck I can't wait until Sunday. :)

[BrendaQG]

Alternate time line or no, isn't this happening before all of that stuff anyway? The timeline hasn't branched off yet.

Or has it been altered by all of that time traveling done in ST:first contact not to mention "Enterprise". I guess I'll know soon enough.

[BrendaQG]

I have seen the movie and here is my Spoiler free verdict. 3.5/5 stars. This movie is a well thought out remianineing of star trek which is also well executed as a movie. Go see it, you won't feel like you wasted your money. I deducted points because of weak points in the plot, and as a trek fan It feels wrong that they could not make this movie just as good without doing what they did.

Spoiler space
.......
.....
.......



































.......
HUGE SPOILERS LOOK AWAY IF YOU DON't WANT TO SEE THEM

















They destroyed the planet Vulcan! Why because in the future a natural astronomical event destroyed Romulus and that made one Romulin angry.. So he came back in time, conveniently changing the past, so that JJ Abrams and company could commit heresy i mean "re imagine" star trek as a wonderful thrill ride of special effects and eyecandy! There is nothing wrong with special effects and eye candy but I just can't award points for being too intellectually lazy to watch a couple episodes of star trek and get a feel for what it was about. All that said...I can see a few movies or a TV series, being made in this alternate time line, as long as in the third movie Q snaps his fingers and set's time right it would do no harm.

[Legend]

I think i will skip this movie, i don't like it when directors rape and butcher original ip's for the sake of making them more mainstream.I wonder what franchise jj abrams will butcher next.

[dreaming in dog years]

i got to see it on 5/6 due to an employee showing....i about shit myself...it was awesome, i did think the whole time travel thing was a little weird, and could have been done better but over all, i liked it. it was cool knowing the director wasnt a star trek fan and seeing how well he did with connecting the history and the whole story line......yes im a star trek freak.but hey its better then a lot of things i could be a fan of

[BLKGSXR]

THIS IS NOT YOUR FATHERS STAR TREK!!!!! seems ok Im no trekkie either.

[BrendaQG]

I think i will skip this movie, i don't like it when directors rape and butcher original ip's for the sake of making them more mainstream.I wonder what franchise jj abrams will butcher next.

I wouldn't say butcher and rape. They did establish that time travel chagned the timeline and such. :-? But still why not do that with every "sequel" why have an overarching universe the story happens in if that's what your going to do? What's the point?

It wasn't a bad movie, but to call it great, to call it as good as or better than say Wrath of Kahn or First Contact...forget about it. Those movies found a way to be good without creating an alternate universe to do it in. That's my major gripe. There were times watching this movie that I was reminded of "Starship Troopers". If you liked that movie or enjoyed that movie you will like this movie.

[jordyd19]

it was the best movie i saw this year

[luv4Tgirls]

Saw it last at Imax, loved it. A fun and entertaining movie, they even stuck some old trek in it.

[matrixdave]

SAW IT LAST NIGHT KICKASS MOVIE. LIVE LONG AND PROSPER EVERYONE!!!!

[I'm Cursed, I'm Irish]

Loved it.

[NYBURBS]

I thought it started out really well and then got a little carried away as it went on. I don't mind the change in the original story, but they seemed liked they just tried to squeeze a lot of stuff in without it making much sense.

[icarus2112]

I really liked this movie, alot, I even laughed a bit at a couple things done that became a standard and almost cliched in the original series. Hell even South park spoofed about red shirts always the first to die in star trek.

[Legend]

There were times watching this movie that I was reminded of "Starship Troopers". If you liked that movie or enjoyed that movie you will like this movie.

Judging from the reviews people like it but i guess it speaks volume about what people like, you slap some cgi, big explosives and young actors into anything nowadays and people will like it, i wonder if jj abrams will remake gomer pyle usmc next and add the starship trooper formula to it.I can't wait for the day hollywood runs out of shit to remake you'll have people like jj abrams doing things they have never done before in their life and thats come up with original ideas.

[Beagle]

i really liked it. great casting. great fx. didnt break (in any major way) any of the star trek story lines or constructs.

[LuciaMiel]

I've never ever seen Star Trek but all the new actors look SO damn fine I might just go see this one.
Is this what people thought about Shatner way back when the original came out?

[SidInNy]

Haven't seen it yet, nor have I read this thread---- avoiding spoilers.. all for anything that will rejuvenate Trek... *but* theres one thing I've read in reviews that bothers me.. and I might be revealing myself as a geek here but.. apparently Leonard Nimoy is listed in the credits as Spock Prime.. didn't Spock Prime die in ST2?

[Teydyn]

didn't Spock Prime die in ST2?
He died in one and came back the next.

[TomSelis]

I heard nothing but good things about this. I'm going to see it in IMAX.

[matrixdave]

read it did 31 million i saw it twice now excellent movie!!!!!

[Paul_Ire]

just seen it myself, amazing movie, i enjoyed the whole thing.

[HeHateMe]

Amazing movie. The two hours seemed to go by in about ten minutes. I left wanting more.
BTW, Uhura (Zoe Saldana) ROCKS!

[Legend]

It's a damn shame abrams turn roddenberry's vision into such a piece of mainstream shit that no way in hell if roddenberry was living would he even let that happen.

BTW for all you people who never watched star trek in your life tomorrow is the day that roddenberry ashes were shot into space, you know the guy who created star trek not jj abrams.

[circ]

My commentary about the new Star Trek has so far gotten me banned from 2 forums, so let's not make it a third. Suffice it to say, I hated it.

As a Star Trek movie it's bad. It has nothing to do with Star Trek. I think the casting choice for the most part is brilliant, really I do. Quinto could use some work, but the characters work. Kirk is a little too annoyingly cocky, but whatever. I don't find it one bit believable that every single key crewmember meets each other withing the span of what seems like days or weeks. It's ok to cut out Chekov. You don't need to name check Nurse Chapel. Uhura+Spock, why? I mean Kirk+Uhura would have been ridiculous, but this is just, wow, who came up with this. 2 self confessed trekkies? Really?

As a general sci-fi movie, it's equally bad. If I want shaky camera action for 2 hours I'll jump up and down for 2 hours whilst watching something else. If I want a pretty lame plot with CGI for CGI's sake CGI, I'll.. whatever.

People go on, people being fans supposedly, about how this will restart the Star Trek franchise. But if I want loud, glittering rock videos, I'll watch MTV.

[southern81]

I thought it was the best one since Wrath of Kahn

[Quiet Reflections]

My commentary about the new Star Trek has so far gotten me banned from 2 forums, so let's not make it a third. Suffice it to say, I hated it.

As a Star Trek movie it's bad. It has nothing to do with Star Trek. I think the casting choice for the most part is brilliant, really I do. Quinto could use some work, but the characters work. Kirk is a little too annoyingly cocky, but whatever. I don't find it one bit believable that every single key crewmember meets each other withing the span of what seems like days or weeks. It's ok to cut out Chekov. You don't need to name check Nurse Chapel. Uhura+Spock, why? I mean Kirk+Uhura would have been ridiculous, but this is just, wow, who came up with this. 2 self confessed trekkies? Really?

As a general sci-fi movie, it's equally bad. If I want shaky camera action for 2 hours I'll jump up and down for 2 hours whilst watching something else. If I want a pretty lame plot with CGI for CGI's sake CGI, I'll.. whatever.

People go on, people being fans supposedly, about how this will restart the Star Trek franchise. But if I want loud, glittering rock videos, I'll watch MTV.

lets hear the one that got you banned! I'm pretty sure nobody will want ban you here for your views on star trek

[rcatf]

Well to start, as a stand-alone action/sci-fi movie it was ok to good (would have been better but a lot of it required that you had some knowledge of ST to apprediate it). As a ST fan I both liked it and was hugely dissapointed.

Spoilers below:


I agree that the casting was great and I generally like the visual feel (aside from the giant-open "wearhouse" look of engineering on the ships).

My big dissapointment was using the "let's change the time-space contium" as a plot device (this is widely regarded as the weakest sort of writing in the ST 'verse; "Mirror, mirror" and "A mirror darkly" being the exceptions). Basically Abrams has layed it out so nothing "StarTrek" ever happened or mattered ("Enterprise" aside) so anything done in the future can completely disregard the series, characters, storylines. It's kind of like taking a Ford Mustang and deciding the next one will be an economy class sedan modled after the Taurus design but w/ more racing stripes and a smaller engine (the mustang model to come next could be a mini-van w/ a spoiler, whose drivers laugh at people who remember muscle-cars).

[I'm Cursed, I'm Irish]

There were times watching this movie that I was reminded of "Starship Troopers". If you liked that movie or enjoyed that movie you will like this movie.

Judging from the reviews people like it but i guess it speaks volume about what people like, you slap some cgi, big explosives and young actors into anything nowadays and people will like it, i wonder if jj abrams will remake gomer pyle usmc next and add the starship trooper formula to it.I can't wait for the day hollywood runs out of shit to remake you'll have people like jj abrams doing things they have never done before in their life and thats come up with original ideas.

I'm amused by the fact that you are AMAZED and disappointed at a science fiction film with special effects. Really?

It was a terrific picture and you are entitled to your opinion, but you are a condescending idiot in your review. Those of us who saw the movie and enjoyed it, Trek fans or not, have overwhelmingly endorsed it. I'm old enough to remember the original series - and Gomer Pyle - and I thought it was absolutely in keeping with the original spirit. I recommend it without hesitation.

[BrendaQG]

Well to start, as a stand-alone action/sci-fi movie it was ok to good (would have been better but a lot of it required that you had some knowledge of ST to apprediate it). As a ST fan I both liked it and was hugely dissapointed.

Spoilers below:


I agree that the casting was great and I generally like the visual feel (aside from the giant-open "wearhouse" look of engineering on the ships).

My big dissapointment was using the "let's change the time-space contium" as a plot device (this is widely regarded as the weakest sort of writing in the ST 'verse; "Mirror, mirror" and "A mirror darkly" being the exceptions). Basically Abrams has layed it out so nothing "StarTrek" ever happened or mattered ("Enterprise" aside) so anything done in the future can completely disregard the series, characters, storylines. It's kind of like taking a Ford Mustang and deciding the next one will be an economy class sedan modled after the Taurus design but w/ more racing stripes and a smaller engine (the mustang model to come next could be a mini-van w/ a spoiler, whose drivers laugh at people who remember muscle-cars).

Exactly. Taken by itself as a good ol sci fi flick it's a good movie. It was like a TV show having a whole season be nothing but a dream by one of the characters so they can resurect someone from the dead... Oh yeah that's been done already. (http://www.kevinmccorrytv.com/dallas.html)

Don't get me wrong it's a good movie. Not a great movie. Go expecting a good movie and you won't be disappointed.

[dbev]

Horrible movie for two reasons: non-Trek and the science underneath it is all wrong.

If everything is kept as depicted in this movie, Star Trek born in 1966 is dead, and something else, e.g. Trek Wars is born, and I don't like it all, we already have Star Wars for that kind of science fiction. And this movie really looks like a commercial product made for US adolescents.

It could have been a good piece of work only if the science at least was plausible and the time paradox was only a device used to attract new viewers. In other words, it could have been an episode of a larger project, without the Trek part, but with the next, really Trek part, ready to be drawn in. But the science part is all wrong, as explained by many people.

CBS/Paramount has only one choice: to fix everything in the next movie - maybe using William Shatner.

And I really hope that CBS/Paramount will hire people like Manny Coto and the Reeves-Stevens' to write the next one - people who really know what Star Trek is all about, the values, the standpoint, the utopia, the inspiration to be better humans; and know how to write plausible things also interesting for newcomers - and a real director able to keep the camera still and the lenses free of glares.

Otherwise, it will be Star Trek 1966-2009 RIP -- Beloved series and great inspiration -- You will be missed

Gene, forgive them, because they did not know what they were doing.

[jaycanuck]

Horrible movie for two reasons: non-Trek and the science underneath it is all wrong.

If everything is kept as depicted in this movie, Star Trek born in 1966 is dead, and something else, e.g. Trek Wars is born, and I don't like it all, we already have Star Wars for that kind of science fiction. And this movie really looks like a commercial product made for US adolescents.

It could have been a good piece of work only if the science at least was plausible and the time paradox was only a device used to attract new viewers. In other words, it could have been an episode of a larger project, without the Trek part, but with the next, really Trek part, ready to be drawn in. But the science part is all wrong, as explained by many people.

CBS/Paramount has only one choice: to fix everything in the next movie - maybe using William Shatner.

And I really hope that CBS/Paramount will hire people like Manny Coto and the Reeves-Stevens' to write the next one - people who really know what Star Trek is all about, the values, the standpoint, the utopia, the inspiration to be better humans; and know how to write plausible things also interesting for newcomers - and a real director able to keep the camera still and the lenses free of glares.

Otherwise, it will be Star Trek 1966-2009 RIP -- Beloved series and great inspiration -- You will be missed

Gene, forgive them, because they did not know what they were doing.

I'm a Trek fan...been watching it since the original series. Loved everything that came after that (yes, even Enterprise). But even I was seeing that product become stale. The "what-ifs" weren't there anymore and it was all just more diplomacy, focus on another ship, add "x" alien to the crew to mix it up.

The franchise needed this. What Roddenberry did in the 60s was commendable and isn't forgotten. But this allows whole new storylines to be told. You can still go back and watch the original stuff. It still exists.

Stories are retold again and again. Would you go see a Robin Hood movie if it was done in the style of Errol Flynn? Probably not.

[skidog1]

Horrible movie for two reasons: non-Trek and the science underneath it is all wrong.

If everything is kept as depicted in this movie, Star Trek born in 1966 is dead, and something else, e.g. Trek Wars is born, and I don't like it all, we already have Star Wars for that kind of science fiction. And this movie really looks like a commercial product made for US adolescents.

It could have been a good piece of work only if the science at least was plausible and the time paradox was only a device used to attract new viewers. In other words, it could have been an episode of a larger project, without the Trek part, but with the next, really Trek part, ready to be drawn in. But the science part is all wrong, as explained by many people.

CBS/Paramount has only one choice: to fix everything in the next movie - maybe using William Shatner.

And I really hope that CBS/Paramount will hire people like Manny Coto and the Reeves-Stevens' to write the next one - people who really know what Star Trek is all about, the values, the standpoint, the utopia, the inspiration to be better humans; and know how to write plausible things also interesting for newcomers - and a real director able to keep the camera still and the lenses free of glares.

Otherwise, it will be Star Trek 1966-2009 RIP -- Beloved series and great inspiration -- You will be missed

Gene, forgive them, because they did not know what they were doing.

I'm a Trek fan...been watching it since the original series. Loved everything that came after that (yes, even Enterprise). But even I was seeing that product become stale. The "what-ifs" weren't there anymore and it was all just more diplomacy, focus on another ship, add "x" alien to the crew to mix it up.

The franchise needed this. What Roddenberry did in the 60s was commendable and isn't forgotten. But this allows whole new storylines to be told. You can still go back and watch the original stuff. It still exists.

Stories are retold again and again. Would you go see a Robin Hood movie if it was done in the style of Errol Flynn? Probably not.I too am part of this "club", loving every iteration of the Star Trek franchise, from the original series thru Enterprise, and the novels, and comics, and so forth. And I couldn't agree with you more, Jaycanuck...I am more excited by the possibility of what this movie means to Star Trek than I have been about anything in a LONG time (except for the Destiny novel series). This movie was fantastic from the opening scenes, to Spock taking his customary place on the bridge. And the fact that I constantly hear former "non-fans" gushing about this movie, all the time in fact, and seeing it multiple times, should mean more than anything else...Trek needed this movie, at this time, more than anything.