Official Trailer Review & Comments Thread!! [Spoilers, of course]

[superstring01]

I like that he was being chased by a floating motor cycle in his classic mustang... which he trashed.

~String

 

[MattJC]

Not bad. I look forward to seeing it in better quality on Monday.

 

[Enterpriserules]

Watching it all I could think was, "this is not ST". It just looks so over done and "all show". Star Trek was always about the characters; it just seems like this one is all about trying so hard to make Trek "cool" in the eyes of people who would normally not care at all. I am not sure that is what will make for good Trek. I know that there are plenty of people who still get drawn into each of the series and become fans. They respond to the message and hope and the characters, not the flashy affects. I want this to be good, but to quote another good sci-fi movie, "I've got a bad feeling about this".

 

[Michael]

Not bad. I look forward to seeing it in better quality on Monday.

That's something I thought I'd never read in this forum. And I mean that with all due respect, MattJC.

 

[Qonos]

Watching it all I could think was, "this is not ST". It just looks so over done and "all show". Star Trek was always about the characters; it just seems like this one is all about trying so hard to make Trek "cool" in the eyes of people who would normally not care at all. I am not sure that is what will make for good Trek. I know that there are plenty of people who still get drawn into each of the series and become fans. They respond to the message and hope and the characters, not the flashy affects. I want this to be good, but to quote another good sci-fi movie, "I've got a bad feeling about this".

Says the man with an avatar referencing the WORST Star Trek Series ever produced.....

 

[GodThingFormerly]

Stupid Roddenberry. In The Making of Star Trek, Roddenberry and Whitfield say the Enterprise was built in the "old San Francisco Navy Yard," and April says the same thing in TAS.

"The unit components were built at the Star Fleet Division of what is still called the San Francisco Navy Yards, and the vessel was assembled in space. The Enterprise is not designed to enter the atmosphere of a planet and never lands on a planet surface." - The Making of Star Trek by Stephen E. Whitfield & Gene Roddenberry.

"Our vessel was constructed in space and has never felt the solidity of the surface of a planet." - Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek Writer & Director's Guide (Bible) dated April 17, 1967.

TGT

 

[Psion]

Stupid Roddenberry. In The Making of Star Trek, Roddenberry and Whitfield say the Enterprise was built in the "old San Francisco Navy Yard," and April says the same thing in TAS.

Have you got a page number for that citation, 'Ranger? Nah ... I don't think you do. But I do. Page 171, second paragraph of the 13th printing, copyright 1974 reads:

The unit components [of the Enterprise -- Psion] were built at the Star Fleet Division of what is still called the San Francisco Navy Yards, and the vessel was assembled in space. The Enterprise is not designed to enter the atmosphere of a planet and never lands on a planetary surface....

So no, not stupid Roddenberry.

 

[Dick Whitman]

My only whine. A BRA 300-400 years from now? Well just damn. I would hope that they have designed better clothing by then. Bras suck. I hope by then, something is built directly into clothing.

Tractor beams.

I foresee a low tech solution. Male slaves will walk behind women with their hands reaching around for support. I will volunteer myself for a trial of this experiment with any woman who is interested.

 

[Psion]

(High-fives The God Thing)

 

[dougkeenan]

Dragged the family out to QoS after bragging about the new trailer and got the no-show!

Is that a call by theater management?

 

[JuanBolio]

Stupid Roddenberry. In The Making of Star Trek, Roddenberry and Whitfield say the Enterprise was built in the "old San Francisco Navy Yard," and April says the same thing in TAS.

"The unit components were built at the Star Fleet Division of what is still called the San Francisco Navy Yards, and the vessel was assembled in space. The Enterprise is not designed to enter the atmosphere of a planet and never lands on a planet surface." - The Making of Star Trek by Stephen E. Whitfield & Gene Roddenberry.

"Our vessel was constructed in space and has never felt the solidity of the surface of a planet." - Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek Writer & Director's Guide (Bible) dated April 17, 1967.

TGT

Yeah, I would've preferred to see it in pieces and not assembled, and in San Francisco as opposed to (seemingly) Iowa. Alas... *shrugs*

 

[LutherSloan]

Dragged the family out to QoS after bragging about the new trailer and got the no-show!

Is that a call by theater management?

Probably, I was in the same boat...

 

[MattJC]

Not bad. I look forward to seeing it in better quality on Monday.

That's something I thought I'd never read in this forum. And I mean that with all due respect, MattJC.

Someone must have missed this thread.
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=73423

 

[archeryguy1701]

Watching it all I could think was, "this is not ST". It just looks so over done and "all show". Star Trek was always about the characters; it just seems like this one is all about trying so hard to make Trek "cool" in the eyes of people who would normally not care at all. I am not sure that is what will make for good Trek. I know that there are plenty of people who still get drawn into each of the series and become fans. They respond to the message and hope and the characters, not the flashy affects. I want this to be good, but to quote another good sci-fi movie, "I've got a bad feeling about this".

I wouldn't worry too much yet:

"My goal was to make a movie about the emotional lives of these characters," said Abrams. "We've seen a million ships fly by the camera, but nobody is going to care about the ship if they don't care about the people inside."

Abrams talks like he has your exact concerns in mind.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Its just a trailer. Just a another teaser. Of course its going to focus on the visuals over the characters.

 

[GodThingFormerly]

Yeah, I would've preferred to see it in pieces and not assembled, and in San Francisco as opposed to (seemingly) Iowa. Alas... *shrugs*

It is conceivable that what we glimpsed in the new trailer is part of an "all-up" systems integration test before the ship is disassembled and the components shuttled/beamed to orbit for final assembly, but I somehow doubt it.

TGT

 

[Rat Boy]

NCC-1701:

Then what are we supposed to get for you on wedding anniversary? Chocolate? Flowers?

If my husband bought me a bra for a wedding anniversary, I'd wear it to his funeral which would happen soon afterwards.

Even if it was made out of diamonds?

 

[Michael]

NCC-1701:

Then what are we supposed to get for you on wedding anniversary? Chocolate? Flowers?

If my husband bought me a bra for a wedding anniversary, I'd wear it to his funeral which would happen soon afterwards.

Even if it was made out of diamonds?

Or this one?

 

[Cranston]

Re: That black uniform....[Spoilers, of course]

Obsessive freeze-framing of the shakycam trailer yielded this:

[image removed -- please read this now]

Note the OTHER guy in a black uniform, holding a phaser, behind Spock.

Could this be the security uniform? Is Kirk the Enterprise's Security Chief?

Or is this really a red uniform, but appearing black because of poor image quality?

 

[JuanBolio]

Yeah, I would've preferred to see it in pieces and not assembled, and in San Francisco as opposed to (seemingly) Iowa. Alas... *shrugs*

It is conceivable that what we glimpsed in the new trailer is part of an "all-up" systems integration test before the ship is disassembled and the components shuttled/beamed to orbit for final assembly, but I somehow doubt it.

TGT

I'll take it!