The First Trailer

[Paradise City]

Wrong.

There's a premise here that's more interesting than most of the Trek movies.

And BTW, Lin is a more talented director than any previous Trek Helmer other than Wise, whose tastes were those of a very different era.

A premise there that can only be encrypted by your keen palette I'm sure.

Lin is the Fast and Furious guy. If this film follows in that vein then I'll approach this film with extreme caution.

How many have you seen?

I did see some of the Fast & Furious films. Which ones I can't remember. I did not have a favourable impression of these films but maybe Lin's was the little gem that I missed and then cool if that is so.

But 'approach with due caution' is a modest and advisable provision and more driven by my impression of the two other Star Trek films created by JJ's coterie, than the F&F stuff truth be told. OTT FX and Scott being pulled around in a transparent tube is not my bag in terms of storytelling. It has a graphic novel vibe I guess but not something that makes for good cinema in my view.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Also, it's funny seeing people here complain about the motorbike when we have no idea whose it is, how it got there. Humans on opposite ends of vast oceans independently invented their own bow & arrow, stringed instruments, and natural medicines. A motorbike would seem like child's play compared to starships.

And never mind that Trek has seen Aliens with their own form of just about every piece of technology or mundane accouterment imaginable. But a motorized two-wheeled transportation device? That'd never happen...

 

[Makarov]

I get a star trek insurrection vibe from the trailer, which is good because I liked that movie. I think Lin directed some of True Detective season 2 which is promising, I thought it was well directed even while it's story wasn't the greatest.

And the motorbike thing is going to be the new dune buggy thing from Nemesis that people complained about

 

[M.A.C.O.]

On the other hand the trailer for Star Trek Beyond is way over the top and hints that the series is going in a "Guardians of the Galaxy" direction as the suits at the studio demanded.

Can someone help a non-Marvel movie watcher understand what the "Guardians of the Galaxy" comparison is supposed to be?

I'm starting to think some people remembered the supposed report that Paramount wanted Trek to be more like that film and then are just using it for comparison's sakes.

I think the comparison is in reference to GOTG being a a fun romp scifi adventure film, with elements of fantasy, family and friendship. Star Trek has done all of that, but never had the wildfire success or rave reviews that GOTG had on it's first try. Other scifi properties like Firefly, Farscape, the Riddick movies, Fifth Element and others have all tried to hit and occupy that rare niche that GOTG found. GOTG is like the original Star Wars and Indian Jones: ROTLA. In the sense that it became a super popular phenomenon, in a genre that existed before it's debut. Naturally, other studios want to copy GOTG's tone and replicate it's success.

Similar to how after Star Wars (1977), we had Superman TM (1978) from WB, Star Trek TPM (1979) from Paramount, James Bond Moonraker (1979) from MGM, Flash Gordon (1980) from Universal, Alien (1979) 20th Century Fox. Etc


Also look at all the attempts in recent years to adapt popular book series and replicate the success of LOTR and Harry Potter. We've had Eragon, A Series of Unfortunate Events, The Golden Compass, Ender's Game, Percy Jackson, Inkheart, etc.

The only successes have been the Twilight, Hunger Games, Maze Runner and Divergent series. The latter three all being cut from the same cloth, and the Twilight movies being universally hated, but still profitable.

 

[Corran Horn]

On the other hand the trailer for Star Trek Beyond is way over the top and hints that the series is going in a "Guardians of the Galaxy" direction as the suits at the studio demanded.

A fun movie that people enjoyed which made a lot of money and was accessible to a wide audience.

What a shame.

 

[M'Sharak]

Atrocious. No other word for it. RIP Star Trek.

Please, please tell us why.

Why? So half of you can line up to tell me what a scumbag I am for not liking what I'm seeing?

Hey, come on; if you don't want to explain, no one's going to force you to do so, but please don't go fishing for insults. It's a cheap tactic, and one I'd rather not see in use here.

You bet, like I said some pages back, given that this will be the "Skyfall" for Trek movies, it'll be that Austin Martin moment all over again.

I've seen this get a couple of mentions now, but I haven't seen Skyfall. What's the "Austin Martin moment" (or should that be Aston Martin [DB5] moment)?

 

[CorporalClegg]

I'm not really sure. People insist that the DB5's inclusion in the film was some kind of direct 50th moment. But Bonds have driven DB5s since Connery before, Craig included.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I just read 10 pages of this accursed, forsaken thread. What is my life.

Anyways, trailer looks good.

 

[Xaios]

The way the tiny ships tear up the Enterprise reminds me of the Lantean drones from Stargate: Atlantis. Also, the appearance of the tiny ships remind me of the berserker drones from Season 2 of Stargate: Universe (a season which was fantastic, in stark contrast to season 1 of SGU, which was awful until the last couple episodes).

 

[OpenMaw]

I've seen this get a couple of mentions now, but I haven't seen Skyfall. What's the "Austin Martin moment" (or should that be Aston Martin [DB5] moment)?

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

Bond trades in the fancy new model car for a another because the car he was driving has a tracker. He opens the door revealing the classic Bond car, and immediately a very classic version of Bond's theme starts.

This is absolutely the writers playing up the anniversary aspect of the film.

I'm not really sure. People insist that the DB5's inclusion in the film was some kind of direct 50th moment. But Bonds have driven DB5s since Connery before, Craig included.

Yeah, but the way it's handled in the film, it's definitely the film celebrating the series as a whole.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

I'm not really sure. People insist that the DB5's inclusion in the film was some kind of direct 50th moment. But Bonds have driven DB5s since Connery before, Craig included.

I don't get all this DB5 moment talk. If anything it's the end of the movie where M and Bond are in the old office that is the nostalgia part. But that isn't why Skyfall worked. It worked because it had the right mix of the two types of Bond movie. The more serious Connery version and the tongue in cheek Moore version. In contrast, Die Another Day, for the Bond 40th, was littered with winks and nods, but it failed because the overall story was silly.

At the end of the day the thing that would honour Trek for it's 50th would be a movie that pays homage to the ideas and values that Roddenberry, Coon & co infused the original series with and were carried on through the TOS movies and TNG & DS9. To be thought provoking as well as fun. There is a section of the fandom that insist Trek isn't intelligent and none of that matters. There's a video out there called "Star Trek 50 years of humanism" which summarises well what Trek means to me and what I like about it as a kid and young adult. It's the sort of concepts raised in that video that I think are missing in these Bad Robot Trek movies. So, top of my list would be some sort of thought provoking theme. That's what would really honour Trek's legacy for the 50th. Not whether or not Shatner shows up or there are loads of nods and winks.

Alas, that this trailer is not selling that to me at all. I just hope it's bad marketing and I get what I wish for. But I can't help feeling the near almost euphoria among Star Wars fans for the Force Awakens trailer is an example of fans feeling they're getting what they want and that isn't reflected by the Trek fan reaction to this, which is unquestionably divided however the pro-reboot want to spin it. I was ready the reaction on the Dark Horizons website earlier and I was taken aback by just how negative the reaction is. The Reddit link earlier in the thread showed a mixed reaction. There's mixed opinions at Trekmovie. Most of the opinions in the Trek thread at Gallifrey Base are negative and we're even getting blogs like this. So, however one looks at it, this marketing hasn't had the reaction it should have for a major celebration of Trek's half centenary...and I find that very frustrating. I remember the 25th when Trek VI came out, everyone was so excited. Same for Star Trek Generations. That's just not matched this time around. I've never seen the level of bitching among fans that the Bad Robot series has given rise to, and I've been a fan for 40 years and seen all the good and bad reactions to every new iteration since TMP. I think TNG is the only thing that even comes close.

So, yeah. What a present that would be for the 50th. Something thought provoking that appealed to old school fans like me. Something actiony to appeal to fans of these movies and/or the newer generation....all rolled into one (and the two aren't mutually exclusive concepts)....all to unify the fan base again. That would be a true celebration, as bringing people together is half of what Star Trek was about.

 

[eyeresist]

Note the hexagonal pattern behind the city in the first pic, and what looks like a giant nacelle in the background of the second.

I've been nervous about this movie since I read a quote by Simon Pegg: They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little too Star Trek-y. [The studio said] make a Western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent.'

Yep, they cheaped out with another starship-crew-stranded-on-a-spaceship-graveyard-planet-unite-with-aliens-to-beat-baddies-resisting-Starfleet-hegemony movie. We are so sick of that!




This trailer is a mess, a noisy mash-up of fragments that gives you no sense of the movie unless you rewatch and freeze-frame (as we all have done).

BUT.

A trailer is not a movie.

What sense I get of the story suggests this might be a good Star Trek movie. And we know the people making the movie are competent and invested in the project. So I confidently predict that this movie might be good

 

[Smoked Salmon]

The way the tiny ships tear up the Enterprise reminds me of the Lantean drones from Stargate: Atlantis. Also, the appearance of the tiny ships remind me of the berserker drones from Season 2 of Stargate: Universe (a season which was fantastic, in stark contrast to season 1 of SGU, which was awful until the last couple episodes).

It reminded me more obviously of Nero's torpedos hitting the Kelvin.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Note the hexagonal pattern behind the city in the first pic, and what looks like a giant nacelle in the background of the second.

Interesting spot. As something of a frequent visitor to Dubai though the top image looks depressingly obvious as to what's been used to simulate the future.

I really hope this isn't yet another threat to Earth. That this is a colony or maybe even part of the planet the crew is stranded on.

 

[BillJ]

A trailer is not a movie.

You're exactly right. Based on the trailer we have, I am optimistic.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Saw this on tumblr. In the trailer there is a line "this is where the Frontier pushes back". Could this be a new alien race, or an old one. Jem'Hadar anyone?

 

[JWPlatt]

Please, please tell us why.

Why? So half of you can line up to tell me what a scumbag I am for not liking what I'm seeing?

Hey, come on; if you don't want to explain, no one's going to force you to do so, but please don't go fishing for insults. It's a cheap tactic, and one I'd rather not see in use here.

Hmmm, I thought it was done to preempt the insults, and seems to have worked for the most part. Still, perhaps too clever a tactic anyway. Smoked Salmon did respond with an explanation, which satisfied my challenge to support the drive-by statement with something more substantial and then quite a bit more, above on this page, about the 50th anniversary expectations. Kudos to Smoked Salmon for joining the conversation in greater depth with more reasonable language.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Why? So half of you can line up to tell me what a scumbag I am for not liking what I'm seeing?

Hey, come on; if you don't want to explain, no one's going to force you to do so, but please don't go fishing for insults. It's a cheap tactic, and one I'd rather not see in use here.

Hmmm, I thought it was done to preempt the insults, and seems to have worked for the most part. Still, perhaps too clever a tactic anyway. The poster did respond with an explanation, which satisfied my challenge to support the drive-by statement with something more substantial and then some.

Yes it was done to preempt the insults. Not to ask to be insulted.

I know from experience and years of fandom that there will always be one or two out there who won't allow you just to have a different view and will go out of their way to try and convince you that you're wrong, or worse still basically full of shit. I'm tired, it's been a long day, and I just wasn't in the mood for that kind of thing. I was worried I might have snapped at someone had I gotten it.

 

[SheliakBob]

Well. My RageHate(tm) of JJTrek not withstanding, at least this one promises to give us something actually NEW instead of trashing existing Trek elements. I've always said that if I HAVE to put up with JJTrek (AKA: The Abomination, & The Abomination 2), I would rather be getting new aliens and new situations as part of the mix. Based on that, I will remain guardedly neutral regarding BEYOND, until I learn more.
Meanwhile, it looks very much like they blow up that abominable JJprise in this one, which would be a BIG step toward warming my miserable Canonista heart. Big step.
In the words of one of my favorite non-Trek films: "Show me."

 

[fireproof78]

Not the best trailer, by a long shot, but I appreciated a few things. First, the context of the Yorkdown uniforms, a little bit, as well as Kirk and Chekov's uniforms. Obviously not fully explained, but getting a better sense of their placement. Also, the new duty tunics look better in action than I expected.

Secondly, left a lot of mystery to the overall plot (for the most part). Really hungering to see more of Elba's character and get a better sense of the new additions.

Finally, I love the sense of humor. There are tiny bits of comedy that I think should be a part of Star Trek. For all the insistence on Trek being serious (even by some of the actors) TOS still had those light hearted quips. Product of the times? Sure, but its needed. It doesn't need to be so serious.

Spoiler: My favorite scene from the trailer

I understand that many want this to be an "event" for the 50th, but I honestly think that Paramount and CBS are well aware of that moment, and will capitalize more on it as the "event" approaches. They certainly don't want to pull the trigger too early.

This early marketing is nothing more than that-marketing. Getting awareness out there. Effective? Eh, it's got people talking, good, bad, or indifferent.