We were discussing the Alan Moore and Kevin O'Neill comic not the film which butchered the original concept, see my highlight above.
Official Trailer Review & Comments Thread!! [Spoilers, of course]
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
We were discussing the Alan Moore and Kevin O'Neill comic not the film which butchered the original concept, see my highlight above.
nobody is discussing the film (which did suck).
I still get the shivers when Urban says "Space is disease and danger wraped in darkness and silence"
Yes, that line gives me a good feeling about the writing for this movie.
Just saw the new trailors...
and Kirk is unabashedly sexy.
Oh. My. Ganymede.
I don't know about all those folks who oppose the new movie and its reinventiveness, but I am very excited about it.
Why?
1. The interior of the ship = amazing. It's futuristic, it's clean, and it doesn't look like another Cold War Era office building. It looks more like a bluish Apple Macintosh desktop- you know, with those pretty see-through plastic mouses. It's perfect. Sure, the feel of the design is comepletely incongruous with the timeline, but it's beautiful- it's our idea of the future, just as the origional Enterprise interior was the 60's idea of the future.
2. Captain Kirk. Like I already said, he's hot. If I were an alien, I'd do the new Kirk. (sorry if that isn't PG) I can't say much about his character since none of us have seen the movie yet, but from the trailers, he seems more urban, more ambitious, more Indiana-Jones like. More inspired. It'll be interesting to see how they explore his past.
3. Spock. We get to see more Vulcan stuff, apparently. Spock is an amazing character and always has been, and it will also be interesting to see how they explore his past.
and, what is the most revolutionary for me:
4. The idea of Space in relation to the ST universe. It seems from the trailers that in this movie, space isn't just the final frontier- it's what was subtly suggested throughout every series from TOS to Enterprise: New, harsh, rugged, and more than just a scientific analysis. It's like a macro version of a juxtapostion of New York City and Anarctica.
Ofcourse, this is all conjecture derived from the trailers. It might end up comepletely opposite and meaningless, like another action flick. A trailer is, after all, just a paraphrasing that is meant to be purposely attractive. Sometimes the movie itself is complete opposite of what can be concluded from trailers.
Or, I might be right, and it might be a fun and interesting perspective of the Trek we're used to.
And, I hate to admit it, but I would really like a Star Trek movie that I could watch with my friends and they won't fall asleep or laugh at it.
My attempt here is to throw some hope into the discussion. I'm looking forward to it.
And, gawd is the new Kirk sexy. *drool*
and Kirk is unabashedly sexy.
Oh. My. Ganymede.
I don't know about all those folks who oppose the new movie and its reinventiveness, but I am very excited about it.
Why?
1. The interior of the ship = amazing. It's futuristic, it's clean, and it doesn't look like another Cold War Era office building. It looks more like a bluish Apple Macintosh desktop- you know, with those pretty see-through plastic mouses. It's perfect. Sure, the feel of the design is comepletely incongruous with the timeline, but it's beautiful- it's our idea of the future, just as the origional Enterprise interior was the 60's idea of the future.
2. Captain Kirk. Like I already said, he's hot. If I were an alien, I'd do the new Kirk. (sorry if that isn't PG) I can't say much about his character since none of us have seen the movie yet, but from the trailers, he seems more urban, more ambitious, more Indiana-Jones like. More inspired. It'll be interesting to see how they explore his past.
3. Spock. We get to see more Vulcan stuff, apparently. Spock is an amazing character and always has been, and it will also be interesting to see how they explore his past.
and, what is the most revolutionary for me:
4. The idea of Space in relation to the ST universe. It seems from the trailers that in this movie, space isn't just the final frontier- it's what was subtly suggested throughout every series from TOS to Enterprise: New, harsh, rugged, and more than just a scientific analysis. It's like a macro version of a juxtapostion of New York City and Anarctica.
Ofcourse, this is all conjecture derived from the trailers. It might end up comepletely opposite and meaningless, like another action flick. A trailer is, after all, just a paraphrasing that is meant to be purposely attractive. Sometimes the movie itself is complete opposite of what can be concluded from trailers.
Or, I might be right, and it might be a fun and interesting perspective of the Trek we're used to.
And, I hate to admit it, but I would really like a Star Trek movie that I could watch with my friends and they won't fall asleep or laugh at it.
My attempt here is to throw some hope into the discussion. I'm looking forward to it.
And, gawd is the new Kirk sexy. *drool*
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
Chris Pine is definitely sexy. And I agree about the bridge as well. I don't care in the least that it doesn't look straight out of the 60s.
Chris Pine is definitely sexy. And I agree about the bridge as well. I don't care in the least that it doesn't look straight out of the 60s.
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
3... 2... 1...
Glad to hear it. However, rather than having each person start their own thread about their reaction to the trailer, we have pinned at the top of the forum a thread where everyone can post their impressions and discuss what they see (or don't see, perhaps) and what they think it all means. If you'll hold on for just a second, I will move this over to that thread.
3... 2... 1...
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
There are definitely elements of this movie that look interesting, if not downright exciting. But ... I can't let the above go without comment. More than anything else, the interiors I've seen so far are disappointing. They aren't clean ... they're cluttered with useless design elements. Those bar-code scanners, for example, reek of 23rd Century kitsch! Why are they there? Probably because they look cool! Why do they look like the two most popular bar code scanners on the market? Probably because the set designer thought we don't pay attention to stuff like that when we go shopping!
Or how about those panel indents in the corridors? Indents ... why? The walls of a starship should conceal things. There should be pipes and circuits and hidden pressure suits and emergency first-aid kits and damage control supplies. We shouldn't actually see these things, but they can be suggested by the presence of raised panels and curious boxes. Maybe, now and then, a pipe should come out of the wall and disappear down into the deck. The first Star Trek movie did a fine job of demonstrating this with long horizontal sections that looked like lockers that lined the corridors. Here, were' stuck with something that just doesn't make any design sense ... those insets decrease the usable volume behind the walls.
And then there's the lights. Lots and lots of brilliant lights. This 23rd Century is sponsored by ... ASPIRIN! The bridge has hundreds of those little spotlights shining directly into the eyes of anyone unfortunate enough to have to work at any of the workstations. THAT'S why there's a main viewscreen on the Bridge ... so everyone can have something dark to fix their red-rimmed, puffy and abused eyes on.
I sure hope the writing is better than the art direction!
Spock looks cool, though.
There are definitely elements of this movie that look interesting, if not downright exciting. But ... I can't let the above go without comment. More than anything else, the interiors I've seen so far are disappointing. They aren't clean ... they're cluttered with useless design elements. Those bar-code scanners, for example, reek of 23rd Century kitsch! Why are they there? Probably because they look cool! Why do they look like the two most popular bar code scanners on the market? Probably because the set designer thought we don't pay attention to stuff like that when we go shopping!
Or how about those panel indents in the corridors? Indents ... why? The walls of a starship should conceal things. There should be pipes and circuits and hidden pressure suits and emergency first-aid kits and damage control supplies. We shouldn't actually see these things, but they can be suggested by the presence of raised panels and curious boxes. Maybe, now and then, a pipe should come out of the wall and disappear down into the deck. The first Star Trek movie did a fine job of demonstrating this with long horizontal sections that looked like lockers that lined the corridors. Here, were' stuck with something that just doesn't make any design sense ... those insets decrease the usable volume behind the walls.
And then there's the lights. Lots and lots of brilliant lights. This 23rd Century is sponsored by ... ASPIRIN! The bridge has hundreds of those little spotlights shining directly into the eyes of anyone unfortunate enough to have to work at any of the workstations. THAT'S why there's a main viewscreen on the Bridge ... so everyone can have something dark to fix their red-rimmed, puffy and abused eyes on.
I sure hope the writing is better than the art direction!
Spock looks cool, though.
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
It's insulting on two levels, in other words. The guy should never be allowed to work on this sort of thing again.
C'mon... you wanna use commercially-available details as "found items?" AT LEAST REPAINT THE DAMNED THINGS... or turn 'em upside down... or SOMETHING. SHEESH!
More likely, it's that the set-dresser would never be caught dead in such a "low-brow" establishment that something like that would be used... and he thinks anyone who would is so far beneath him that we're all incapable of recognizing it anyway... durrrrrrrrr.....
It's insulting on two levels, in other words. The guy should never be allowed to work on this sort of thing again.
C'mon... you wanna use commercially-available details as "found items?" AT LEAST REPAINT THE DAMNED THINGS... or turn 'em upside down... or SOMETHING. SHEESH!
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
TOS used salt shakers for medical equipment, TWOK used tape-cassette trays for wall paneling, I'm sure the list of found-objects goes on and on. I don't get why some are bent out of shape about this.
More likely, it's that the set-dresser would never be caught dead in such a "low-brow" establishment that something like that would be used... and he thinks anyone who would is so far beneath him that we're all incapable of recognizing it anyway... durrrrrrrrr.....
It's insulting on two levels, in other words. The guy should never be allowed to work on this sort of thing again.
C'mon... you wanna use commercially-available details as "found items?" AT LEAST REPAINT THE DAMNED THINGS... or turn 'em upside down... or SOMETHING. SHEESH!
TOS used salt shakers for medical equipment, TWOK used tape-cassette trays for wall paneling, I'm sure the list of found-objects goes on and on. I don't get why some are bent out of shape about this.
Re: Just saw the new trailors...
Glad to hear. Now cue the "drooling masses" comments o' snobbery...
Glad to hear. Now cue the "drooling masses" comments o' snobbery...
They didn't repaint the trombone mutes seen in McCoy's sickbay cabinet, either. Most people never noticed.More likely, it's that the set-dresser would never be caught dead in such a "low-brow" establishment that something like that would be used... and he thinks anyone who would is so far beneath him that we're all incapable of recognizing it anyway... durrrrrrrrr.....
It's insulting on two levels, in other words. The guy should never be allowed to work on this sort of thing again.
C'mon... you wanna use commercially-available details as "found items?" AT LEAST REPAINT THE DAMNED THINGS... or turn 'em upside down... or SOMETHING. SHEESH!
TOS used salt shakers for medical equipment, TWOK used tape-cassette trays for wall paneling, I'm sure the list of found-objects goes on and on. I don't get why some are bent out of shape about this.
Eh, let's not. I'm tired of that one already.
Since I had never had the opportunity to read the comic beforehand...
I rather liked the LOEG Movie.
Having read the comics now.... didn't really change my opinion.
I still like the movie for what it is and feel that the comics just enhance it.
Oh Lordy... guess that makes me one of the "spoon-fed-masses".....
Oh well...
As for the Pearlman & the Zipper thing...
ouchI'm late to the party, but thought I'd post my opinion anyway. I'm excited about the trailer. I haven't been this interested in new Star Trek since the end of Deep Space Nine nearly a decade ago (and I was 11 then).
To me, "Star Trek" has never been one single entity. As I'm sure a lot of fans do, I tend to treat every piece of it separately. I love both TOS and DS9, but they really couldn't be much more different from one another. Hell, even the TOS movies are vastly different from the series that spawned them. This new film does look very different, but really no more so than any other of the post-TOS projects released under the name Star Trek. And this one looks more promising than most, certainly more than what I'm used to seeing come from the franchise at this point. I'm definitely looking forward to it.
The only bit I'm not especially excited about is the use of time travel. Again. As if Star Trek hasn't run that plot device into the ground already. Oh well, as long as it's handled right it could be enjoyable.
To me, "Star Trek" has never been one single entity. As I'm sure a lot of fans do, I tend to treat every piece of it separately. I love both TOS and DS9, but they really couldn't be much more different from one another. Hell, even the TOS movies are vastly different from the series that spawned them. This new film does look very different, but really no more so than any other of the post-TOS projects released under the name Star Trek. And this one looks more promising than most, certainly more than what I'm used to seeing come from the franchise at this point. I'm definitely looking forward to it.
The only bit I'm not especially excited about is the use of time travel. Again. As if Star Trek hasn't run that plot device into the ground already. Oh well, as long as it's handled right it could be enjoyable.
Last edited:
After Forty Years...
I'm beginning to believe that TIME TRAVEL is the ONLY WAY to be able to explain all the differences and intricacies of Trek.
Thanks to "FIRST CONTACT" & "ENTERPRISE" (among other's), we have a lot of wiggle-room.
It's also my reasoning/opinion as to why all of the Official (as in, SEEN ON SCREEN) Star Trek Incarnation's should be part of the Mytho's...
To Me, that include's:
ENTERPRISE - TOS - TAS - TMP - TWOK - TSFS - TVH - TFF - TUC - TNG - GENERATION'S - ST:FC - INSERECTION - NEMESIS - & NOW JJ's STAR TREK.
Which, depending on how the story turns out, could be either listed between ENTERPRISE & TOS or here at the end.
Only after May 8th, 2009 will WE be able to tell (I hope).
BTW: This list by no means indicates that I am particularly pleased with each incarnation, it just shows how I feel about what fit's into the LORE.
(I've come to hate that word 'canon'. To paraphrase a large, singing, man-eating green plant: "...It don't mean shit!")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QmD0UBFoeo&feature=related
I'm beginning to believe that TIME TRAVEL is the ONLY WAY to be able to explain all the differences and intricacies of Trek.
Thanks to "FIRST CONTACT" & "ENTERPRISE" (among other's), we have a lot of wiggle-room.
It's also my reasoning/opinion as to why all of the Official (as in, SEEN ON SCREEN) Star Trek Incarnation's should be part of the Mytho's...
To Me, that include's:
ENTERPRISE - TOS - TAS - TMP - TWOK - TSFS - TVH - TFF - TUC - TNG - GENERATION'S - ST:FC - INSERECTION - NEMESIS - & NOW JJ's STAR TREK.
Which, depending on how the story turns out, could be either listed between ENTERPRISE & TOS or here at the end.
Only after May 8th, 2009 will WE be able to tell (I hope).
BTW: This list by no means indicates that I am particularly pleased with each incarnation, it just shows how I feel about what fit's into the LORE.
(I've come to hate that word 'canon'. To paraphrase a large, singing, man-eating green plant: "...It don't mean shit!")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QmD0UBFoeo&feature=related
Last edited:
No. Thanks to writers who want to tell a specific story we have "wiggle room." A great deal of continuity has been sacrificed in all series to accommodate the needs of the story. Look at how many times writers ignore rules about using transporters with shields up, firing phasers at warp, food slots in the transporter room, Spock's actual rank, Vulcan/Vulcanian, the gender of Data's cat, etc.
This is a new creative team. What they choose to do with the franchise is entirely up to them, as long as people go to see it. There are only so many ways of "keeping it fresh" that will satisfy the needs of newer (and younger) audiences without pissing off older fans. The producers have said that there will be plenty of things for "us," while reintroducing a whole new generation to Star Trek. For that to happen, it makes sense to go back to Kirk and Spock. The way I see it, only a vocal few will be pissed of no matter what, especially those who would be upset by things like the colour of Kirk's eyes or whether or not the bridge is rotated off axis to conform to the model of the ship. Those people will never be persuaded to see anything that isn't a strict carbon copy of their personal concept of what Star Trek is or should be. There are far fewer people that care about such trivialities than those who just want to see a great film.
Do I wish that they had kept all the TOS cardboard and blinking lights?? To be sure!! But how many 15-25 year olds are going to find that believable or entertaining?
We can love a classic design, but we aren't in the market group that spends the most money on movies, t-shirts, toys, posters. From what I've seen of most sci-fi fans, most of these people will download the film and never spend a dime on the other stuff (except the toys--damn straight I am buying a phase and a communicator!!). That's not just the few disgruntled fans here, but for the "tech" community at large.
The design of the film certainly hints to something familiar to all Trek fans, but to expect it to be exactly the same as a TV show in the 60s is wholly unrealistic.
If this film tells a great, compelling story, these minor detail discrepancies are certainly more than forgivable. If the movie sucks, if won't be because of the little arrowheads sewn into the uniforms or the design of the ship.
I think people are overreacting to change and should see it in perspective and context before dismissing it completely.
Nowhere Man
Commodore
It's been one week since I looked at you
Wow!, it's been one week since the trailer came out and i've been out of town since last Saturday when the trailer was still bootleged and I didn't come back until last night. I haven't been able to see anything on my computer and only was able to view the real trailer from my iphone. When I got home my internet wasen't working , so it is just now I have been able to see the trailer in full.Here now is my belated opinion. I was iffy on the Enterprise pics when they first came out, it did look bad, but like it has been said before , I think that was a bad picture or distoted by the camera somehow.The Enterprise does look different , but simular.They could have made more effort to make it closer to TOS design. The bridge is cool looking and I do like it, but once agian they could have made more effort to make it closer to TOS . I believe you can still have a pre-TOS look without it looking 60's tech and it doesen't look like they even tried, they just straight up went for a complete futuristic look.The trailer as a whole looks awsome and I do believe it is a prequil and not a reboot or reimagining.Old Spock is proof enough for me. I also don't believe it's an alternate timeline either.I also don't believe cannon will be broken or will anything that has came before will be erased. Yes there may be small things like Chekov being there, but who's to say that he wasent there the whole time.I do think that the Klingons guarding Nero are post TOS Klingons(Forehead ridges) and one possiblity for the helmets is they are about to execute Nero and he escapes, but really who knows? I think Old Spock follows Nero much like FC into the past or just has a feeling like " yesterday's Enterprise" that something isn't right and travels through time somehow. My strong belief is that Old Spock is aware of Nero and his plan and follows him or stows away on his ship.The Cop in the trailer is most likely a robot.All in all I think it will be a good movie, and I think it will be successfull finacially too. I just hope it dosen't end up like Indy 4 or the Star Wars prequils, which were suposed to be "for the fans" , but also for general audiance . The only thing we can really do is just wait til may to see what really hapens.Oh yeah, one more thing. The disruptor in Kirk's hand is probably Klingon or Romulan , not Federation.
Wow!, it's been one week since the trailer came out and i've been out of town since last Saturday when the trailer was still bootleged and I didn't come back until last night. I haven't been able to see anything on my computer and only was able to view the real trailer from my iphone. When I got home my internet wasen't working , so it is just now I have been able to see the trailer in full.Here now is my belated opinion. I was iffy on the Enterprise pics when they first came out, it did look bad, but like it has been said before , I think that was a bad picture or distoted by the camera somehow.The Enterprise does look different , but simular.They could have made more effort to make it closer to TOS design. The bridge is cool looking and I do like it, but once agian they could have made more effort to make it closer to TOS . I believe you can still have a pre-TOS look without it looking 60's tech and it doesen't look like they even tried, they just straight up went for a complete futuristic look.The trailer as a whole looks awsome and I do believe it is a prequil and not a reboot or reimagining.Old Spock is proof enough for me. I also don't believe it's an alternate timeline either.I also don't believe cannon will be broken or will anything that has came before will be erased. Yes there may be small things like Chekov being there, but who's to say that he wasent there the whole time.I do think that the Klingons guarding Nero are post TOS Klingons(Forehead ridges) and one possiblity for the helmets is they are about to execute Nero and he escapes, but really who knows? I think Old Spock follows Nero much like FC into the past or just has a feeling like " yesterday's Enterprise" that something isn't right and travels through time somehow. My strong belief is that Old Spock is aware of Nero and his plan and follows him or stows away on his ship.The Cop in the trailer is most likely a robot.All in all I think it will be a good movie, and I think it will be successfull finacially too. I just hope it dosen't end up like Indy 4 or the Star Wars prequils, which were suposed to be "for the fans" , but also for general audiance . The only thing we can really do is just wait til may to see what really hapens.Oh yeah, one more thing. The disruptor in Kirk's hand is probably Klingon or Romulan , not Federation.
Last edited:
They'll probably use my Blish paperbacks as kindling, the bastards,
Actually, since you won't be needing those any longer ... do you mind if I take them?
Yes.
Similar threads
- Poll
