The First Trailer

[Kor]

There are so many comments in this thread that I'm not sure if someone has already posted this.

Simon Pegg's reaction to the trailer:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg[/yt]

He says the trailer is very action packed, but there is a lot more to the movie than that. He asks Trek fans to be patient.

Kor

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

There isn't much of a human 23/24th century music either. Everyone is listening to classic or 20th century stuff. It doesn't put the future in a great light. This paradise, once secured, is kinda boring and stale.

Good point, they should come up with future music, to compliment their well-thought out future sports!

They should depict future humans playing Jai Alai instead.

Kor

Why does everybody hate anbo-jyutsu and parrises squares?

God, was there anything about oldTrek's future after about 1984 that wasn't ersatz, dull and vaguely awful?

Oh.

 

[dub]

Critiquing the teaser is one thing, and constitutes legitimate discussion. But passing absolute judgment on the final product and declaring hatred for the new movie months in advance based on the studio-mandated teaser trailer (which seems to be happening a lot) is something else entitely.

Personally, I prefer to be cautiously optimistic.

Kor

^This!

The teaser is a little controversial, 29% dislike, 71% like on YT.

7 out of 10 like it and it has cut through the buzz of The Force Awakens on its opening weekend.

I'd say that this trailer is a pretty solid marketing move by Paramount.

Well...technically 7 out of 10 of the people who were passionate enough to click a "like" or "dislike" button...like it. We don't really know how many unique views are among the other 9,626,313 views, nor whether or not they had any strong feelings about it one way or the other.

Having said that...with 9,688,449 views and only 17,919 people so disgusted that they clicked "dislike," I'd say that's pretty darn good (even though I'm one of the people who didn't really care for the trailer).

 

[eyeresist]

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg[/yt]

He says the trailer is very action packed, but there is a lot more to the movie than that. He asks Trek fans to be patient.

That's a great clip, and shows Pegg is reacting to it like a lot of fans (and like Lin, who was disappointed the clip of the motorbike was included).

Pegg's most pertinent quote about the first trailer:

I didn't love it, because I know there's a lot more to the film. There's a lot more story and a lot more character stuff, and a lot more what I would call Star Trek stuff. But, you know, they've got to bring a big audience in, they've got to bang the drum.​

Still looks like crap to me, but at least there's an edit with better music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qULdofE03c4&feature=youtu.be

While I didn't object to Sabotage being used, I think this trailer works much better! It seems more like a story, rather than just a series of moments.

What I'd really like, though I don't know how likely it is, is for Lin and his editor to make future trailers themselves, rather than outsourcing to the sausage factory again.

But we are talking about 200 years here (23rd century). Tire rubber disintegrates, as do gaskets and other parts. If yoiu have ever owned a motorcycle, this question answers itself.

Right now we have functioning steam trains, vintage cars and horsedrawn carriages, so there's no problem here.

OK, go.

Everyone be civil. Everyone be decent to each other.

Damn, I missed my chance.

 

[dub]

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg[/yt]

See...how can anybody not like this guy? This clip certainly makes me more excited to see the film than that trailer did. His passion and love for Star Trek feels genuine and sincere. And he's a great Scotty!

 

[JWPlatt]

There are so many comments in this thread that I'm not sure if someone has already posted this.

Simon Pegg's reaction to the trailer:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg[/yt]

He says the trailer is very action packed, but there is a lot more to the movie than that. He asks Trek fans to be patient.

Kor

Well, that's enough to satisfy me. (That's not sarcasm).

Brilliant way to be inclusive with the fans by acknowledging the feelings of those who didn't like the trailer, yet say there's something for people who want Trek with a faster action pace. Acknowledgement, validation and candor is something that most corporations absolutely don't understand. They could learn something about customer relations from Mr. Pegg. This one clip feels like lowering the control rods into a nuclear reaction.

 

[M'Sharak]

Sabotage is a twenty-year-old song. It's not like they grabbed the latest hit single for use in the 2009 film. And it's possible, although pushing it, that there might be a thematic connection between the song and the plot of the film (is the Enterprise sabotaged?).

Plus, only Kirk seems to have an affinity for the song. In the trailer, it seems that Scotty is confused by the song ("Is that music?" - nice underhanded criticism, Scotty).

I'm not convinced that the song is actually in the film. It might've just been included for the trailer hijinks.

That's always a possibility. Music is typically one of the last things to be added to a film before it's finished -- "Sabotage" could be no more than a scratch track, used while other elements are still in the process of being nailed down -- and at this point there must still be a huge volume of stuff that's been roughed out but won't reach finished form for a while yet.

Earlier in this thread, I think, there were a couple of comments about the CGI in the bit with Scotty hanging/almost falling off the cliff, and it was acknowledged in one of the Justin Lin interviews that, while they have the general shape of the movie pretty well worked out, much tweaking and refining work remains to be done. (As I'd expect we'll see the Scotty-on-a-cliff scene evolve and grow more polished in subsequent trailers, I'm thinking back to the bit in STID with Spock leaping off the space barge/garbage truck above San Francisco's Financial District - those buildings and other background details were noticeably different in each succeeding trailer for a while, until the CG/visual effects people got it all balanced and fine-tuned.)

 

[eyeresist]

Music is typically one of the last things to be added to a film before it's finished -- "Sabotage" could be no more than a scratch track, used while other elements are still in the process of being nailed down -- and at this point there must still be a huge volume of stuff that's been roughed out but won't reach finished form for a while yet.

In his recent interview, Lin said Sabotage is definitely used in the actual movie. But you are right - this movie must be a long way from being finished in the edit room.

 

[fireproof78]

My reaction, ''This is Star Trek?''

I think I am seeing what Paramount believes is the course the franchise will be pursuing in the future - a frenetic, moment-to-moment action film. Will CBS follow in its footsteps? We shall see.

A question - if there were not elements of Star Trek in the film, is there anything in the trailer that would differentiate this film from the average action film?

Isn't that kind of the point, though? The key demographic, for better or worse, *has* to be the 'Joe Public' figures who are looking for something to satiate their blockbuster lust between sequels of superhero franchises. That's the business their in. To that regard, ST:B may not look like old-school philosophizing Star Trek, but it DOES look like a movie that people will actually pay money to see.

If they can then carry them over into becoming fans of the wider franchise then that's great. But all three of the Abrams-verse movies are deliberately made to appeal to as a wide a demographic as possible. And in my view, they've succeeded admirably in that aim. I know lots of people who are not 'Trekkies' as such, but who love the recent movies.

That's one of the sad things about the more modern movies. People are seeing Star Trek, which is a good thing, but they expect the new films when they're exposed to older episodes and movies. Case in point my wife (whom I was dating at the time) and I went to see Into Darkness in the theatre. She loved it and I talked her into watching Wrath of Khan. She hated Wrath of Khan and could barely make it through it. I got her to watch 09 and she loved it, so I thought lets give First Contact a chance. Same deal: she hated First Contact. Same with my niece and nephew who are both teens. They love the Abrams movies, can't make it through any of the classics. This is also why I'm nervous for the new series. I can see them going this route with it.

This seems to be a matter of "it depends."

My wife did not enjoy TWOK, even before she saw ST 09 (she hasn't seen ID). The style just isn't for her. However, she did enjoy 09 and found it very fun, and identified with the characters more so. It prompted her to watch DS9 and she found that more enjoyable as well. Again, for character reasons.

I have learned, over the years, that films and TV shows are as much about the individual frame of mind and expectation as they are about the final product.

Personally, I think everyone can grow to appreciate different styles of films if they are willing to adjust expectations. Abrams Trek films are no different, in my experience. No, that isn't a "turn your brain off and watch it" dig. That is a, "It's trying to be Star Trek but with a different tone."

Again, personal experience here. My dad has never watched any Trek post TOS, besides the Abrams films. He has no interest in TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT. The Abrams films, however, he thoroughly enjoyed, with a similar interest as he had to TOS when I was younger.

 

[Amaris]

Maybe that's part of the appeal for me? I don't know. I found both DS9 and TOS to be colorful, kinetic TV shows, with lots of complex characterizations and interactions that looked deceptively simple on the surface (and sometimes were simple and superficial).

I'm a Niner and a classic Trek fan all the way to the bone, and when I saw these movies, both of those styles (TOS and DS9) leapt out at me, and I cottoned onto it. I don't think something like that could be quantified, though.

 

[WoTe]

Hell, who doesn't love a good action film like Terminator 2?

Me. I prefer the first, gritty, take no prisoners first film. The 2nd is a bit too pretentious and overblown.

Just rewatched it on netflix a couple months back. With my niece, who seen my 10 year old 1st gen iPod earlier and asked "What's that?" I spot the casette tapes in the movie and felt old.

I wish Skynet destroyed all the sequels after #2 though.

 

[Amaris]

Yeah, the first Terminator was great. The second one was pretty good. I haven't seen any of them after that.

 

[drt]

There isn't much of a human 23/24th century music either. Everyone is listening to classic or 20th century stuff. It doesn't put the future in a great light. This paradise, once secured, is kinda boring and stale.

This was more of a problem with the 24th Century shows, because there was more of an effort to show the crew during leisure hours (I guess part of the idea was that 100 years after Kirk, the ship ran itself a bit more so the crew had more free time). Combine that with the "evolved humanity" aspects, and you get the production using what is essentially a modern idea of how erudite folks supposedly while away the hours as a shorthand way of showing the audience that the crew spends it's free time in more "intellectual" pursuits.

 

[OpenMaw]

This was more of a problem with the 24th Century shows, because there was more of an effort to show the crew during leisure hours (I guess part of the idea was that 100 years after Kirk, the ship ran itself a bit more so the crew had more free time). Combine that with the "evolved humanity" aspects, and you get the production using what is essentially a modern idea of how erudite folks supposedly while away the hours as a shorthand way of showing the audience that the crew spends it's free time in more "intellectual" pursuits.

It was actually something they initially were planning for Phase II, there was going to be more emphasis on ships crew in their off hours. Things like the rec room/crew lounge getting more focus, more casual dress, etc... Were things they were talking about.

i don't think it's a problem per se, but I do think you have to be willing to take some risks.

 

[drt]

Sorry, "problem" was probably not the best choice of word.

I guess maybe "effect" would work better. The idea being that they used classical music, etc. as story-telling shorthand for a modern audience. But if you try and view such short-hand as something that's really happening "in universe" said universe gets a little unrealistic and stale as Paradise City pointed out.

 

[Overgeeked]

There are so many comments in this thread that I'm not sure if someone has already posted this.

Simon Pegg's reaction to the trailer:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f4aAwa5wdg[/yt]

He says the trailer is very action packed, but there is a lot more to the movie than that. He asks Trek fans to be patient.

Kor

Honestly, that gives me a bit of hope. Because he acknowledges that the trailer is action-packed and that there's a lot more actual Star Trek in the movie, ie at least Pegg recognizes that Trek isn't all about action and 'splosions. Here's to hoping.

 

[Trekkin]

Critiquing the teaser is one thing, and constitutes legitimate discussion. But passing absolute judgment on the final product and declaring hatred for the new movie months in advance based on the studio-mandated teaser trailer (which seems to be happening a lot) is something else entitely.

Personally, I prefer to be cautiously optimistic.

Kor

^This!

The teaser is a little controversial, 29% dislike, 71% like on YT.

7 out of 10 like it and it has cut through the buzz of The Force Awakens on its opening weekend.

I'd say that this trailer is a pretty solid marketing move by Paramount.

Well...technically 7 out of 10 of the people who were passionate enough to click a "like" or "dislike" button...like it. We don't really know how many unique views are among the other 9,626,313 views, nor whether or not they had any strong feelings about it one way or the other.

Having said that...with 9,688,449 views and only 17,919 people so disgusted that they clicked "dislike," I'd say that's pretty darn good (even though I'm one of the people who didn't really care for the trailer).

I was passionate enough about it to click 'like'. Howver, I wasn't passionate enough to give Google even more of my personal details just so I could do so.

Sorry Paramount.

 

[Amaris]

There are so many comments in this thread that I'm not sure if someone has already posted this.

Simon Pegg's reaction to the trailer:



He says the trailer is very action packed, but there is a lot more to the movie than that. He asks Trek fans to be patient.

Kor

Honestly, that gives me a bit of hope. Because he acknowledges that the trailer is action-packed and that there's a lot more actual Star Trek in the movie, ie at least Pegg recognizes that Trek isn't all about action and 'splosions. Here's to hoping.

Granted, I'm biased because I love Pegg anyway, but I had no doubts about what he could do, and what I think he has done, so this clip feels more like "don't worry, that trailer was just to get everyone on board," which is what teaser trailers do. Now, if the much longer in-depth trailer was all action and no story details, then I'd be a little more concerned (though I'd still see the film because of course I'd still see the film!), but I have faith in Simon Pegg's ability to reach people.

So have a little faith that the movie's in good hands.

 

[eyeresist]

I was passionate enough about it to click 'like'. Howver, I wasn't passionate enough to give Google even more of my personal details just so I could do so.

Sorry Paramount.

I find liking actual videos on yt works fine. It's only if I try to like a comment that I get a "join up" pop-up.

 

[Overgeeked]

Granted, I'm biased because I love Pegg anyway, but I had no doubts about what he could do, and what I think he has done, so this clip feels more like "don't worry, that trailer was just to get everyone on board," which is what teaser trailers do. Now, if the much longer in-depth trailer was all action and no story details, then I'd be a little more concerned (though I'd still see the film because of course I'd still see the film!), but I have faith in Simon Pegg's ability to reach people.

So have a little faith that the movie's in good hands.

The first two were so disastrously bad that despite my having a bit of faith in Simon Pegg, there's also momentum to consider. And generally speaking, the more writers credited on a film, the worse they tend to be. So yeah, Pegg might be great, but he's one of five writers listed. Then there's all the stories of the studio thinking the original script was too Star Treky, and Pegg being brought in to fix that. To somehow make the next Star Trek film less like Star Trek (when the first two were already Trek in name only). And all the times he quit then was talked into coming back... my faith in the film is at a 1 out of 100. And that 1 is only because of Pegg's comments in that clip.