Am I the only one who didn't like the trailer?

[StarTrek1701]

How about you get off your high horse for a moment and actually try to fathom what this guy is saying??? He is not complaining about sex per se, but who the Captain is having sex with!

Pinched a nerve, did I? Years long suppression of your sexual feelings for that one hot girl that never gave you a second look coming back?

Raising the point that Kirk isn't a man-whore who sleeps around with his female crew members is a valid concern. No need to put words in the original poster's mouth.

Yes, Kirk is a manwhore. Anyone with even a lick of sense knows that.

Suspecting that every Trekkie who believes in the moral integrity of the characters is a suppressed sexual prude is just plain offensive. So take your derisive and derogatory attitude some place else.

I'll keep it wherever the frack I want, thank you. Not having sex is plain unnatural.

If you want to be constructive in your criticism, make the point like others have that this scene probably takes place before Kirk is on the Enterprise.

You are not my Captain and I am not your subordinate. Keep your commands to yourself.

 

[Captain Robert April]

It'll be a full-on war zone.

 

[mr.peany]

^Yep, but then again, when isnt this place one?

 

[StarTrek1701]

I think this is one very good example of what is wrong with this movie and it’s so called “new” Star Trek fans. They make assumptions about something they know little about and want to make everyone believe their views are factual when indeed they are misinformed.

Seems like you are that know it all 'God' from Star Trek V. 'New' fans? I have been watching Trek since the 80's, first with reruns of Star Trek and then continuously from TNG onwards. Assumptions? You think I am just assuming that Kirk was a ladies man? Let me ask you this: are you delusional? Or hurt by my comments?

By all means, be a fan of the new movie, but don’t deride or misrepresent the rest of Star Trek because of it. Thank you.

It's not the holy grail of everything we know. Go out and get some sunlight.

 

[Bad Atom]

The trailer makes it look like a very generic summer blockbuster action movie, which is exactly what I'm expecting to see in May. It won't be Star Trek like most of us remember it, but that's fine with me because we already have 700 hours of that.

 

[Mr_Splotch]

-Kirk's bike looks VERY contemporary for 2008. Is it a centuries-old antique too? It has an incandescent headlamp which is something we're already starting to phase out now. Just something else that will not age well, and date the film.

Sales of the Kawasaki Ninja soared when Tom Cruise rode one in Top Gun. Perhaps Kirk's bike is an advertisement plug (or product placement). It's hard for me to tell if it's an actual production bike since the YouTube trailer is dark and blurry. Even if it's a future bike that doesn't currently exist, it wouldn't surprise me if it were to have either the Honda or Kawasaki name stamped on it.

Let's just be happy that Kirk wasn't riding on a vehicle that was "too" advanced. It's annoying that the vehicles in the Star Wars Ep. I-III prequels are more advanced than the vehicles in Ep. IV-VI.

​

 

[Captain Robert April]

The whole point of the discrepancy between the shiny advanced tech of the prequel trilogy and the rough and dirty tech of the original trilogy is that when the Republic morphed into the Empire, things started going downhill and more than a little backward pretty damn fast.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And on a side note, I wish people would stop invoking people long dead and mention how they would be horrified by this and that in order to give extra gravity and legitimacy to their posts and opinions.

QFT.

Here's how it just about always worked according to many people who were there:

If Roddenberry oversaw or came up with an idea - or was properly compensated and genuflected to - he thought it was fine no matter how stupid it was.

If Roddenberry felt unacknowledged or underpaid, no one's idea was acceptable no matter how good it was.

And if an idea in Trek was particularly popular and enduring, GR would assume credit for it despite it having been created by another producer, writer or a visual designer.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

You are not my Captain and I am not your subordinate. Keep your commands to yourself.

Exactly so. Too many posters around here who appropriate the names and/or fictional ranks of others behave as if the disguise confers moral authority or expertise upon them that they otherwise lack.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Consider yourself on report, mister.

 

[MoonlightSinatra]

I dont understand this irrational hatred some have for this movie. It seems it may be based on some other psychological underpinning, perhaps a wistful and irrational nostalgia for something that never existed in the form you remember, but was in fact something very different.
TOS was about action, sex, violence, space battles, the occassional monster of the week. It used science fiction as a disguise for commentary on then current events, or as morality plays. In any case, it was not promoted as the latter, but the former- an action packed adventure.
That is what will attract an audience. That is what was done here. If it is devoid of the substance when it is finally seen, then judgement against it as a worthy holder of the Star Trek name would be more understandable. But after a 2 minute trailer designed as eye candy is hardly a good starting point for such a summary judgement.

Give the movie a chance to be seen first. Then judge based on that. It will be a more legitimate perspective.

And who cares about contemporary cars or headlights or sex scenes without appropriate context.

 

[Zachary Smith]

I am NOT optomistic and the trailer didn't help. Why is young Kirk driving an atique automobile? Maybe there's a good reason for it in the movie. Could be young Jimmy just watched "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" and is having a "Cameron" moment--which would provide a nice bookend to him turning the Enterprise "B" over to Cameron himself just before he leaves for the Nexus. However, the moment as it stands in the trailer looks PANDERING. Supposed to be an exciting--a "kewl" moment. Come off just like that--cheap and manipulative.

I've lost hope for Scotty already. The quick glimpse of him here makes him seems like a bufoon. Scotty was originally one of the grtittiest characters in Star Trek. Almost grim--which is what made his moments of levity and comedy shine. As time passed Scotty became more and more just comic-relief--his worst moment coming when he said, "I know this ship like the back of my hand" *WHANG!* I liked the Scotty who said, "The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank". You knew when THAT man took the con, there wa gonna be NO shit allowed.

I don't care much for the look of the bridge and I don't like the "heavy pipes" on the Enterprise's nacelles. I prefer the starship to look elegant. Not as though the original was tricked out and modded up like some heavy-chained Biker's fantasy.

I'll see the film. I'll keep as open a mind about it as I can. But every little glimpse more I get, the more I dread because the less I like what I see. The "new" Trek doesn't have to look the same. It's just the changes I've seen sofar strike me more as obviously manipulative and pandering rather than inspired.

 

[Zachary Smith]

But after a 2 minute trailer designed as eye candy is hardly a good starting point for such a summary judgement.

A trailer is supposed to make you want to see a movie MORE. This one made me want to see it less.

= "fail".

 

[StarTrek1701]

I've lost hope for Scotty already. The quick glimpse of him here makes him seems like a bufoon. Scotty was originally one of the grtittiest characters in Star Trek. Almost grim--which is what made his moments of levity and comedy shine. As time passed Scotty became more and more just comic-relief--his worst moment coming when he said, "I know this ship like the back of my hand" *WHANG!* I liked the Scotty who said, "The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank". You knew when THAT man took the con, there wa gonna be NO shit allowed.

The Scotty we know so far has had years of experience as a Chief Engineer aboard the Enterprise and has seen, heard, experienced more than the Scotty in the new movie.

A trailer is supposed to make you want to see a movie MORE. This one made me want to see it less.

= "fail".

And it made ME want to see it NOW. I can't wait till May.

= "Success!".

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And it made ME want to see it NOW. I can't wait till May.

= "Success!".

Absolutely Right(TM)!

 

[trevanian]

I don't mind messing with the canon a little bit if you intend to reboot a franchise. Worked well for Bond and Batman. What I found distasteful about this trailer was the fact that absolutely nothing felt like Star Trek.

I think they friggin' ruined Bond with CASINO ROYALE (though QOS is so good it ALMOST makes me forgive them for casting Jack Palance II as ImpostorBond), but I love BATMAN BEGINS. I agree with a lot of your points (esp about TFF), and don't see anything about the trailer (which I caught today) that said STAR TREK to me ... it was just too generic and, to be honest, mindless.

Rather than getting me angrier, the trailer just sort of quelled my whole feeling about the thing, which is the real surprise. Instead of being furious, I was just ... shit? really? (esp when you see that starship being built on Earth.) Anything more stupid they can trot out?

I talked it over with my wife afterward and we realized we had nearly the same reaction to the TREK trailer we had to the PINK PANTHER 2 trailer ... it was like, 'why bother?' And coming from me, somebody who pisses and moans about this kind of stuff and has a memory like the vatican used to, that is a pretty huge accomplishment.

By way of comparison, I though the Craig casting in CR and writing Bond as a reckless overaged adolescent was like kicking dogshit in the face of Richard Maibaum, Sean Connery, Ian Fleming, Ken Adam and Timothy Dalton, I was (and REMAIN) superpissed over that, but for some reason, this trek trailer was enough to make me stop getting upset. It just ain't for me.

 

[Plum]

Could be young Jimmy just watched "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" and is having a "Cameron" moment--which would provide a nice bookend to him turning the Enterprise "B" over to Cameron himself just before he leaves for the Nexus..

That is too funny. For so many reasons. Heck, it's the same make of corvette isn't it?

 

[T'Bonz]

A trailer is supposed to make you want to see a movie MORE. /quote]

And it made ME want to see it NOW. I can't wait till May.

= "Success!".

Me too. I was a bit lukewarm and wary but I saw the teaser and said, "Damn, I want to see it NOW."

I still have some reservations, but I really want to see it. So the teaser, from where I'm sitting, did its job.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Could be young Jimmy just watched "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" and is having a "Cameron" moment--which would provide a nice bookend to him turning the Enterprise "B" over to Cameron himself just before he leaves for the Nexus..

That is too funny. For so many reasons. Heck, it's the same make of corvette isn't it?

It was a Ferrari in Ferris Bueller.

 

[Ptrope]

Anticitizen, well said, and I agree 100%. Nice to see I'm not the only one tilting at windmills .