Sorry for ranting...but them going on and on about the "great budweiser" really pissed me off.
Haven't gotten my copy yet, but I wouldn't blame you for getting annoyed. While I understand they had to save money, I don't think it's anything to brag about.
Oh, come on! Get real! You KNOW the way this world works. Hence, you know the reason.
Clearly, the Anheuser-Busch corporation gave Paramount a wad of cash, provided they'd drop a verbal reference to their main product line in the movie (the bar scene), film in one of their breweries and barely dress it up (the engineering scenes), and then praise Anheuser-Busch up to high heaven in behind-the-scenes puff pieces (the Blu-ray features). The idea that the filmmakers ran out of time/money to "do what they really wanted" is the biggest load of BS I've ever heard. It was done the way they did it on purpose, and everyone pretends it wasn't just so that the illusion of art can be maintained, and so the avaricious forces that dominate this world can seem slightly less transparent than they really are.
Isn't it obvious? Seriously, how can this be anything but WILLFUL ignorance if one thinks otherwise? Paramount has never had huge faith in Star Trek, and given the way Nemesis crashed and burned, the idea they would happily front up $150 million without certain deals being struck to soften the investment is ludicrous. Plainly and simply: in order for this film to get made with the kind of budget and marketing costs involved, Star Trek was pimped to outsiders and had to bend over and take one for the team. And Anheuser-Busch wasn't the only one filling that hole. You've also got Jack Daniel's, Nokia and Apple, all of which are bound to have made certain transactions in return for certain guarantees. Hell, just click on to the Apple website right now:
http://www.apple.com/
See? I rest my case.
P.S. In a talk given a few years ago at "TED" (YouTube it), J.J. Abrams gave a brief presentation about filmmaking in which he worked in a blatant plug for Apple. Notice those smooth white stations on the new Enterprise bridge? Still don't think there's something fishy at work? Consider this: Steve Jobs owns Apple *and* Pixar. In Pixar's movie starring robots (i.e. "WALL-E"), the hi-tech one has the design aesthetics of an iPod. Steve Jobs has since given corporate presentations in which images from "WALL-E" are used multiple times when discussing Apple products.
P.P.S. George Lucas originally owned Pixar. He sold it to Jobs in the 80s. Watch "Attack Of The CLONES" and watch it carefully. Notice anything about the look of Kamino and the clone troopers in training? Pay attention to the dialogue from Lama Su as it's all happening. I think it's pretty obvious that Lucas has a certain disdain for Mr Jobs and his memetic advertising, and the clueless drones that fall under its programming. In a very clear sense, Lucas' 2002 movie anticipated the hegemonic dominance of Apple through the relationship between mass media and cultural conformity. It's happening. It HAS happened. And it'll go on happening.
