Ain't It Cool News (

UPDATED!! Titan Books & AICN Want To Give You One Of Five Copies Of STAR TREK: THE ART OF THE FILM!!

Merrick again... More images from STAR TREK: THE ART OF THE FILM can be found at TrekMovie (HERE), where you'll see pics & concepts of aliens in the movie. The Delta Vega bazaar/marketplace designs mentioned below (ultimately not utilized) can be found HERE at io9. MTV has some monster concept sketches HERE, while Wired has a look at ship developmental art (including Enterprise & Klingon battle cruisers!) HERE.

Merrick here...
Titan Books and AICN have five (5) copies of Titan's STAR TREK: THE ART OF THE FILM (hardcover).
This is a most excellent, slick, and well-presented publication chronicling the designing of J.J. Abrams' TREK film. In its 157 (ish) pages, you'll find Geek-enticing items like: ** 8 pages of U.S.S. Kelvin designs (exterior and interior concept art, photos, etc.)... ** Many pages of costume & character designs for both humans aliens appearing in the film (with several pages devoted to Romulans alone)... ** A look at Rura Penthe development art (a sequence not seen in the film, although it's on the DVD & Blu_Ray sets)...
** A clear look at the Klingon battlecruisers that were attacking the Kobayashi Maru... ** A chart reflecting the different configurations of vessels which headed out to Vulcan when Starfleet was scrambled... ** Vulcan design progressions (including a good look at Sarek's hoverbike w/ Ben Cross on it...not seen in the theatrical release of the film)... ** Developmental art reflecting exteriors and interiors of Enterprise, including a super-stylized/futuristic bridge concept which featured a position/enclave equivalent to Chekov's cubby hole in STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (it's in roughly the same place). Looks like it's either holographic, or literally suspended in space. It utilizes some sort of wraparound display showing what's outside the ship, with a HUD/targeting thingie floating on top of it... ** A look at an unused market/bazaar complex which was at one point intended to appear on Delta Vega (somewhere between Mos Eisley and BLADE RUNNER)... ** The development of promotional art for the film...
I don't know why Enterprise is flying out of a Japanese flag, but I really love that poster and I want it on my wall. **And there's much, much, much more. If you have even passing interest in Abrams' TREK - or in film design in general - I can't recommend this book highly enough. I wish we had more images to show you, 'cause what's included in this article is just the tip of a rather amazing iceberg. So, what do you gotta do to get it? It's simple.
** Sometime between the time you read this and 11:59 PM CST USA on Friday November 13, send an e-mail to me VIA THE LINK BELOW. You can enter twice a day for each of the contest's five days ( = 10 entries total). ** I've already pre-selected ONE time of day between today (Monday November 9) and Friday November 13. Five days, one copy awarded per day. The person who e-mails me at (or closest to) this time will receive a copy of the book. NOTE: I've been asked this before, so...for clarity...I'm using whatever time is stamped on the Yahoo mailing address established for this contest as the determiner. I'm in Central Time USA, so I guess that's a CST time stamp (?).
** Include your name and mailing address in this e-mail. The address is to expedite prize shipment only and will be summarily discarded once book recipients are chosen. No spam, no mailing lists, etc. ** CONTEST IS OPEN TO INTERNATIONAL READERS!!! ** Be sure to send from an ACTIVE (and frequently checked) E-MAIL ACCOUNT. If I try to reach you & my message bounces back? I'll trash your win and move on to the next closest/winning contestant I can reach. ** The five recipients will be announced early next week. ** Titan will have your addresses in hand Monday morning & they've been kind enough to handle fulfillment in this contest. Books should be shipped very early next week. Probably, but not necessarily, Monday. ** As a general FYI, you should know that...due to the number and frequency of entries...recipients in past contests were sometimes selected by matters of seconds. Literally.

So there you have it. Now, all you have to do is...


Some contestants have trouble launching these mail links. So, just in case, the actual address =

permits many money more at yahoo dot com (remove spaces, replace the "at" and the "dot" with appropriate symbols)

Here's an embiggenable version of the the spread shown above:
You can find more information about STAR TREK: THE ART OF THE FILM over at Titan's website (HERE), and it's also up for preorder HERE. By the way, Mark Cotta Vaz's "About the Author" photo is pretty cool on this book... Best of luck! And, of course, ENJOY!!!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 9, 2009, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Not entering ...

    by JohnAdcox

    ... because I've already purchased a copy and don't want to deny someone else, but this looks amazing.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Battlestar Rip Off?

    by Embeedeuce

    The Boldy Go poster reminds me of the Battlestar Galactica recruitment art; very WW2 ish.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:15 p.m. CST

    How many people will be aiming for 17:01 ?

    by V'Shael

    I wonder...

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:18 p.m. CST

    Just print the damn email address!

    by 3 Bag Enema

    "Replace the 'at' and the 'dot....'" Eat it, contest!

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:22 p.m. CST

    That mining illustration....

    by skimn

    hey Harry, you want an example of noir? There ya go...

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:42 p.m. CST

    1701 was my first guess as well

    by ShiftyEyedDog2

    I hope he's more imaginative (or random) than that. It's far too obvious.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:58 p.m. CST

    Good Stuff

    by Kentucky Colonel

    reminds me of when I would eat up all those starship illustration books & blueprints from the old Star Trek role playing game (anybody remember that one?). I'll probably pick up a copy if it's not too damned expensive.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 12:58 p.m. CST

    ShakeyCam Free

    by WriteFromLeft

    Cool, I'll finally get a sense of what the movie's about. The trailer made me motion sick, so I didn't buy a ticket.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 1:08 p.m. CST


    by Powerring

    and wicked coolness.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 2:01 p.m. CST

    So what's the address?

    by SithMenace

    I can't click on the link.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 2:13 p.m. CST

    A lovely reminder...

    by BurnHollywood

    ...That the painstaking efforts of dozens of intelligent technicians and artists are no match for the shortcomings of a couple of hack screenwriters.<p> I'll have to check this book out...I'm sure it's one of the glossiest examples of turd polish on the market.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 2:24 p.m. CST

    your face


    needs a turd polish.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 2:36 p.m. CST

    I'm still amazed

    by kwisatzhaderach

    people defend the screenplay to this film. It was atrocious.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 2:38 p.m. CST


    by SithMenace

    is helping to write the script for the second film, so I expect the plot to be much tighter. <p>I really liked Star Trek, in fact it's in my top 5 for the year, but the script does feel like it was rushed. However O&K really nailed the characters, and to me that's what great Star Trek has always been about. Especially for TOS.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 3:47 p.m. CST

    It's a chase movie, chase movies don't have in depth plots

    by Tall_Boy66

    The characters, who were easily defined as the iconic characters they were from TOS, are basically just reacting and running from point A to point B as soon as the distress call from Vulcan happens. The conflict comes from the stress of the situation. Not every single fucking Star Trek story ever is some sort of tortured socio-political analogy about guys with white on one side of their face and black on the other. There are various, literally hundreds, of different types of stories that have been told in the Star Trek universe. This was the fast-paced chase one, which they have done before. Hell, "Starship Mine" from TNG is basically just "Die Hard on a Starship" but it works because you can do any genre you want in Star Trek.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Cool poster but

    by DrPain

    Star Fleet would never need to advertise itself. Geek alert!

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:12 p.m. CST

    oh yeah, STAR TREK BLU-RAY IN 8 DAYS!!!!!!

    by DrPain


  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:24 p.m. CST


    by Stunt Vocalist 709

    Great call: BSG totally ripped off World War 2!

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:28 p.m. CST

    ST wasn't Great...but it wasn't unwatchable either..

    by conspiracy

    It was a "pretty" picture thats for sure...and it was entertaining for what it was. That said..I won't buy it on DVD if for no other reason than I do not want to reward Roberto and Alex anymore then I already have for what is without a doubt the second worst script of the year.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:35 p.m. CST

    I've always wanted a book about how garbage is made

    by JT Kirk

    You know, really get into the nitty gritty of how they churn together bad ideas into a monstrosity.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:38 p.m. CST

    PS - Yahoo displays time of their processing

    by JT Kirk

    Not the time it was mailed. Yahoo mail is arbitrary about email processing so someone can be right on the money and where a normal mailserver would handle it, Yahoo will sit around processing it for a while for no reason. So this contest is really up to Yahoo, not you.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:45 p.m. CST

    Worst script of the year?

    by Tall_Boy66

    did you people fucking sit through "Obsessed" or "Year One" before deciding that? Hello? It's called a wide base of research before deciding that proclamation. Seriously, unless you sit through some fucking TERRIBLE movies (I'm looking at you, Orphan!) you really can't decide that one.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Please explain how the script for "SAW VI" is better than "STAR

    by Tall_Boy66

    Go ahead. I'll wait. I'm just looking for a logical argument how Saw VI was better written than Star Trek. I'll try not to giggle.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:53 p.m. CST

    Oh..and Bob and Alex did NOT nail the characters...

    by conspiracy

    Kirk and Spock wrote themselves...they could not have fucked them up if they tried...and they did try with Kirk.</p><p>Bones only made it on the skill of Urban's acting..., as Roberto and his buddy tried to "Clown" up the good doctor, just like they did everyone else, with that slap stick shit of the side effects on Kirk.</p><p>The also sauced up Uhura...I half expected her to break out with the "uh uh iz Gonna get my ass on the Enterprise or your little green dick ain't gettin none o dis chocolate loving". Really..I was waiting for it...she wasn't a "strong" female...this Uhura came off as a saucy self important tart.</p> And Scotty...fucks sake couldn't they have given him some fuckin dignity? He came off as some jerk off who fucked up one too many times and kept some kinda dwarf as a pet, not the best Engineer in Star Fleet. The Scotty in TOS may have been a drinker and impulsive...this stupid? Never. Only Roberto and Alex would turn Scotty into a fucking Ass CLown.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 4:53 p.m. CST

    JT Kirk

    by DrMorbius

    If you really want a book about how garbage is made...ask your parents for the scrapbook of pictures from the night you were conceived! 'HAH!'

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:07 p.m. CST

    all you haters are douchebags

    by DrPain

    yeah, in your bitchy opinions you didn't care for Star Trek. Great, you have no taste, good for you. All your bitching and douchebaggery will never alter reality and fix whatever stupid problems you had with it. Why don't you guys go get some talent, become a filmmaker and go make a better Star Trek film for the masses. Go see how easy it is.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:26 p.m. CST

    Wondering how many copies our friend in Porto buys.

    by Sal_Bando

    You know he'll have a few goat friends to read'em too.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:38 p.m. CST

    Popular and critically acclaimed

    by Toonol

    ...And very profitable. I like to point that out in every star trek talkback, because this movie attracts talkback mouth-frothers like no other.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:50 p.m. CST

    any excuse to mention ST

    by MacReady452

    surprised there aren't 10000000 posts on here already

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:50 p.m. CST

    AsimovLives should get a bock

    by lockesbrokenleg

    slapped across his face.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 5:56 p.m. CST


    by DrMorbius

    AssmunchLives probably prefers books on CD, cause 'driving' and turning the pages would be too distracting.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:26 p.m. CST

    This book should be rettiled "Star Trek - Unused FIlm Concepts"

    by lockesbrokenleg

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:33 p.m. CST

    Stunt Vocalist 709

    by Embeedeuce

    Settle down, Francis. BSG didn't "rip off" WW2. Someone at Battlestar had a great idea to make WW2 era recruitment and resistance art in the BG universe. Rosie the Riveter, Uncle Sam and "Loose lips sink ships," etc. Was a cool novelty and throwback art-wise. Then someone at Trek said, "Hey! We can do that too!" And as pointed out above, they f'd it up w/ a Imperial Japanese motif. That's all's I'm saying.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:36 p.m. CST

    JJ fagged out with the helmet Klingons

    by AsimovDiedOfAIDS

    Didn't want to show them one way or the other? Though I'll admit it sort of makes sense. In Enterprise, it was revealed that a genetically-engineered virus was responsible for all the human-looking Klingons. Naturally since all those bone ridges showed clan affiliations, the one who were humanized would wear fake ridges on their helmets and hide their faces. Too bad it was never shown before in any version of Trek. One Vulcan goes back in time and it changes literally everything, I guess. Eh, it was trimmed from the movie proper anyway.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:40 p.m. CST

    The movie was like the middle part...

    by MisterE

    ...of a Spock-centric Star Trek novel or fanfic. The first part was "told" via mind-meld, the second part was the film, and the third, unfilmed/untold part is old Spock flying around the Sun, going back in time, and fixing the time-line so that this shit never happened in the first place. Spock would not say "I failed, Jim", shrug his shoulders, and then put up with the destruction of his home world. That's just stupid.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:43 p.m. CST

    JJ Trek was trash, but entertaining trash

    by AsimovDiedOfAIDS

    It made no sense at all, though. Talk about plot holes, JJ Trek had plot singularities! I can't wait for JJ Trek to come out on Blu-Ray so I can watch it while baked. I'll enjoy it even more since I won't even expect it to make sense or seem coherent.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:46 p.m. CST

    I buy that the helmet Klingons are Augment-virus victims

    by Tall_Boy66

    And, even though we saw smooth-headed Klingons in TOS, there's nothing that says EVERY single Klingon was smooth headed. I totally buy that some were immune and had forehead ridges. And, if they Klingons have ridges in the sequel... it's an alternate reality with advanced technology. They cleared that Augment virus right up good.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 6:59 p.m. CST

    Yes this is true Morbious.

    by Sal_Bando

    I think the kids are getting on his nerves now.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 8:11 p.m. CST

    I love seeing

    by SithMenace

    the canon-ites getting their panties in a bunch about this movie. I'll take JJ's reboot any day over sterilized Berman Trek. At least Abrams' Trek was entertaining, something Berman and TNG forgot how to do.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 8:58 p.m. CST

    Wow, the "Micronauts" Talkback...

    by MisterE

    ...didn't fizzle out this quickly!

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 8:59 p.m. CST

    The Art of ...Questions

    by Coordinate_System

    <P>I sometimes wonder if the Ain't It Powers That Be only write up a Trek XI article to increase traffic with the inevitable exchange of fire in the Talkbacks. Perish the thought! <chuckle></P> <P>Seriously, I love these "Art of" Books; I still have my first one: The Empire Strikes Back Sketchbook, with the awesome artwork by Joe Johnston</P> <P>Looks like I'll finally get a good look at the ships. A few quick questions for Mr. Merrick: How many views of the ships from the Starfleet Taskforce are there for each of the different vessels? What information is presented in the "chart"?</P> <P>And a quick question for those of you who saw the movie multiple times (or at least have better memories): Was the Kobayashi Maru visible on screen during Kirk's test? Or just the Klingons?</P> <P>Thanks.</P>

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 9:01 p.m. CST


    by lockesbrokenleg

    Yes it was. I saw the IMAX twice, and they did show it for a few minutes. It was just a cargo style ship.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 9:08 p.m. CST


    by Coordinate_System

    <P>Thanks! Even if if its just a generic cargo hauler, I hope its shown in the book.</P> <P>What can I say, I like spacecraft.</P>

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 9:39 p.m. CST


    by lockesbrokenleg

    That was one of my favorite parts of the movie, cause we got to see Bones at the Helm. It was awesome.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 10:33 p.m. CST

    I don't want it.

    by kabong

    What else have you got?

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 10:34 p.m. CST

    Clearance Bin ...

    by Lain Of The Net

    ...where I come along and find them and buy them.

  • Nov. 9, 2009, 10:49 p.m. CST

    If you wait a week Barnes and Noble will have it marked

    by lockesbrokenleg


  • Nov. 9, 2009, 11:48 p.m. CST

    "O&K nailed the characters"

    by BurnHollywood

    Bullshit. Spock and McCoy stood out, true, but it seemed more like it was Quinto and Urban doing their job as actors and working at it. They sure didn't get any help from the script ("All she left me with was my bones." Jesus).<p> Kirk was a sassy, general purpose twentysomething protagonist boy, Uhura was a forgettable "too good for you" chick archetype, Sulu wasn't even in the ballpark of Takei, I didn't buy Greenwood as Pike for a millisecond, and Chekov was a caricature.<p> I think JJ's groupies despise us "haters" because we can actually itemize in detail what sucked about his show, while your confusing two hours of pots and pans banging together for entertainment...

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 12:03 a.m. CST


    by Coordinate_System

    <P>Except for Greenwood (who I think acquitted himself well, despite his clunky dialog, although I had almost forgotten him in the intervening months!), I think your comments are spot on. Quinto, had an interesting take on Spock, and Urban, well he tried, but he's no Kelley.</P> <P>Your "pots and pans" comment was damn funny.</P>

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 12:45 a.m. CST

    No basically Burnhollywood

    by joshuavance1701

    You are a faux elitist sack of jizz , along with the mega-cunts conspirocy, and assahole sucks. <p> Star Trek kicked maximum tits and you fuckass faces know it. Suck my Kirks swollen hands dick you smarmy shitbreaths.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 12:50 a.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    Why don't you confront the points I made, instead of resorting to personal attacks, much as I'm sure you like to work your love of "jizz", "suck"ing and "dicks" into the conversation?<p> Don't think you knocked me back on my heels, either...fact is, I'm laughing in your pimply, fat face. Go eat a Twinkie if it cheers you up.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 1:07 a.m. CST

    Confront your "points?"

    by joshuavance1701

    Thats laughable, but since I relish any and every opportunity to eradicate transparent banal profusings but transparent, anal fucktards, I'll pontificate awhile for you Smeagol. <p> Faced with the unenviable task of re-introducing characters the planet is basically familiar with, as portrayed by actors that embody said characters, the producers of this film hit lightning in a bottle , as evidenced by the award the casting director for the film recently recieved. Beyond mere archetypical caricatures, the new actors simultaneously brought their own interpretations to the role, as well as honoring the fundamental spirit inherent in each character. Pine wasn't playing William Shatner, he was playing James T. Kirk, and he nailed it. On down the line of actors. Each brought a fresh approach and gravitas when necessary, and most importantly, a light-hearted enjoyment of their individual places and status. <p> In contrast to the bland, stale followup series characters, the true original Treks characters always had a theatricality and joy in their performances. That quality was translated to the new iterations. A spirit of fun and adventure. Now kindly go fuck yourself.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 1:16 a.m. CST

    That update!

    by 3 Bag Enema

    What absolute shite! Now I don't give a shit if I win or not. Thanks for that.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 1:23 a.m. CST


    by lockesbrokenleg

    All the actors in the new Trek nailed it. Pine - fucking great Kirk, Qunto - Nailed Young Spock. Pegg - Fucking awesome. Dude, the cast in the movie was perfect, even down to the elder Pike. The cast of this movie had better chemistry than the ones for the last three series!!

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:18 a.m. CST

    You gotta love the fact that...

    by Fortunesfool

    You can't even work out what's going on in the poster.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:45 a.m. CST

    O&K DID nail the characters

    by SithMenace

    Kirk eating an apple during the Kobayashi Maru, Bones fighting with the flight attendant, Spock's difficulty with his human side. They even had Sulu fencing for fuck's sake. Look, I know the haters are all upset that they didn't squeeze Shatner into a girdle to play 30 year old Kirk, but don't take it out on the writers, they really did get the characters right.<p>Oh and the comment about not buying Greenwood as Pike is idiotic. Is that based on the one episode you get to see Pike? Two if you count the beeping chair. Lol.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 4:03 a.m. CST

    Loved the film, love this book!

    by Drsambeckett1984

    Had a flick through it the other day in Forbidden Planet, looking at the amazing art work practically gave me the horn! I cannot wait to see what comes next! <P> As long as it isnt Khan.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 4:40 a.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    You actually think giving the thesaurus function of your word processor a workout impresses me? "Lightning in a bottle"...ROFLMAO!<p> Pine sucked as Kirk, case closed. Sorry to say it, because he was one of the more memorable actors in the otherwise forgettable SMOKIN' ACES. Maybe not his fault...dumbfucks O/K plainly didn't know shit about the character, how by the time he got to the Enterprise, he'd survived a genocide, been bullied in Academy, and had a distinguished career on the USS Farragut, where he EARNED the youngest captaincy in Starfleet. Too fucking quick to rip off Luke Skywalker, down to "grounding" the Enterprise so that he could wistfully stare at it, a la the twin suns of Tatooine.<p> (Oh, and SithMenace? I wanted to kick him in the motherfucking face during the Kobayashi Maru segment...having him chomp that apple like some smartass cunt was like transferring some noisy prick kicking the theater seats and blathering on his cell phone onto the big screen as a role model)<p> Aside from the aforementioned Spock and McCoy, nothing but run-of-the-mill, cookie-cutter Hollywood substitutes, down to an utterly un-Jeffrey Hunter-like Pike playing the ever-popular "I knew your father" mentor standard in every origin flick since it was first ripped off from Kenobi thirty years back.<p> Further proof of their hamfisted "creativity" is evidence by Nero, what could be the most boring Villain in SF history...a disgruntled miner. Maybe they can give us a dockworker with stomach upset next film. Jesus Christ on a pogo stick.<p> Quit giving these unimaginative douchebags a free ride by pretending there was more to this profit opportunity than just flinging CGI shit from the screen and seeing what stuck to the target you.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 4:57 a.m. CST

    I'm backing out of this discussion

    by Mr Gorilla

    I was about to post that JJ's Star Trek was an enjoyable romp, and what's so bad about that, and I'm looking forward to seeing it again at home - but then reading the detailed knowledge and passion some posters have about the characters and world I feel out of my depth... I WILL agree that Trek was always smart, and JJ's Trek wasn't necessarily that - but they DID breathe life into the characters, didn't they? And they did make it exciting too?

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 5:37 a.m. CST

    Mr Gorilla, Oh don't be put off by them

    by Player_Two_has_entered_the_game

    They might know the characters and world, but know nothing of moving on and breathing new life into a mishandled franchise. JJ and crew is just what Trek needed. They should be on their knees thanking him that it will continue with brand new adventures. Because I'm sure we all agree, nobody wants to see the death of Star Trek on the big screen. Banished to some shitty tv slot and beaten to a pulp and axed because it can't complete with the likes of Battlestar these days. Who knows they might even like the second one.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Player two

    by Mr Gorilla

    Well, yes, I would look forward to a second one.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 7:02 a.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    So how is "breathing life into" a franchise mutually exclusive from staying true to the characters and their world?<p> And what you and Mr. Gorilla are doing is mistaking an assemblage of familiar Hollywood archetypes and most of the plot of STAR WARS for freshness and "life".<p> Might be okay for you, but it's not okay with a lot of us. And if Abrams and his cohorts want us back for a second dose, he'd better sit up and listen...STAR TREK didn't do too much better than the besieged TERMINATOR:SALVATION at the box office. A double-digit drop in attendance percentages would end this Enterprise voyage just as quickly as NEMESIS did.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 8:27 a.m. CST

    BurnHollywood, citation needed

    by JumpinJehosaphat

    You say "STAR TREK didn't do too much better than the besieged TERMINATOR:SALVATION at the box office." What I see from IMDB is that ST did $75,204,289 opening weekend and grossed $257,704,099 in the US overall, whereas TS did $51,943,726/$125,322,469 domestic gross. That's actually quite a large gap in favor of ST.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 8:33 a.m. CST

    Star Trek...

    by jackalcack wasn't perfect and there was some stuff that did annoy me. I agree that Pine's performance lacked a certain magic and Scotty was a slapstick joke but on the whole I felt it succeeded. I was engaged and cared about the characters but the dialogue at times was bad...the bones line makes me shudder. For me it stayed true to Trek though and didn't shame the franchise in the way Terminator Salvation or the Star Wars prequels did.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 9:22 a.m. CST

    If you google search Art Movie Books

    by Series7

    There are a fuck ton of them, even Trick R'Treat has an Art of Movie book. Pretty much any movie these days gets one.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 10:17 a.m. CST

    I'm even suprised that publishers release

    by skimn

    these types of books, since almost every DVD and BluRay has 18 hours of extra "behind-the-scenes" material, moreso for genre titles heavy with effects. Although I'm a sucker for printed material.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 12:19 p.m. CST

    yeah, BurnHollywood, Kirk wasn't sassy in TV series either

    by Tall_Boy66

    It's not as if Kirk didn't crack a joke and laugh in the face of danger EVERY SINGLE EPISODE OF THE SERIES! Did you even watch the fucking show? It's rather famous. Try watching a few. It usually happens at the end of the episode. Or throughout the episode. Or in all the movies. Aside from ST:: The Motion picture. He doesn't joke much in that one.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Lol Burnhollywood, your name says it all

    by SithMenace

    You're just one of the shrinking number as Trek fans that saw himself as some rogue non-conformist for liking Star Trek, and now that they've made it popular again you can't stand it because you feel it's not "yours" anymore. I've been seeing it ever since this movie was announced 3 1/2 years ago.<p>Answer this, if the movie was so bad and the characters were so wrong, why did it get such great reviews? Why did it make it's budget back and then some? Why does everyone I know that grew up on TOS love this movie? It's a hit, and aside from a vocal minority of Trek fans, which includes you, everyone thinks it was a successful reboot. Was it perfect? No, but at least it was funny and exciting, which is more than I can say about the TNG films, especially the last two.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:16 p.m. CST

    "Pine sucked as Kirk, case closed."

    by MattmanBegins

    I've noticed that even a lot of the haters liked Pine as Kirk. So you fail to actually close that case.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:24 p.m. CST

    The weakest of the cast was probably Sulu

    by lockesbrokenleg

    But he did get a good fight scene. Hopefully, he'll get more to do in the sequel.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:27 p.m. CST

    And Nero is far superior to those faggy villains

    by MattmanBegins

    in Nemesis and Insurrection. At least Nero looks like he could kick my ass.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:39 p.m. CST

    Any movie...

    by cineninja

    ...that takes 8 fucking comic books and an 'art of' book to explain the plot holes is NOT well written. Unfortunately a lot of you were so blinded by the lens flares that you missed the massive plot holes and ignored the fact that JJ ignored the fans when he wanted to and then pandered to them at the wrong time. This movie was a roller coaster that got your adrenaline pumping but 5 minutes after you get off of it youre saying to yourself, "Ahhhh...that wasnt shit...". It doesnt suck....the new 'good'. It was a shitty self indulgent script full of gaping holes, a retread villain, sets borrowed from the Apple store, a college campus and a brewery and all covered up by bright lights, shaky cams and artificial lens flares. At least the actors themselves turned in good performances based on the shit they were handed to read. I think Ill go base jump now off of ming platform severa miles high with no face the way Kirk and Sulu would have STILL been going 167 MPH when they hit the transporter platform. Conservation of momentum. They got it right on Fringe at least. Orci and Kurtzman are freakin HACKS.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:40 p.m. CST


    by Boborci

    just because you didn't understand the plot doesn't mean it has holes.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:45 p.m. CST

    STILL been going 167 MPH when they hit the platform

    by Boborci

    covered that -- Chekov has a line tho the effect that he is compensating for their velocity. It just went by so fast you missed it.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:50 p.m. CST

    cineninja, I didn't miss any plot holes

    by MattmanBegins

    They simply didn't ruin the movie for me. The cast and the presentation made up for it, for me. Since when have plot holes destroyed a movie experience? A lot of great movies have plot holes. And since when has Star Trek been devoid of plot holes?

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:51 p.m. CST

    Give 'em whut for, Bob!<P>

    by DrMorbius

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST

    Why the bungee jump drop though?

    by lockesbrokenleg

    Couldn't Chekov just beam them onto the drill?

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3 p.m. CST


    by Boborci

    if you recall, drill's plasma laser itself was jamming transporters. Pike tells them they will not be able to use the transporter until they shut the drill down. That's the whole reason they're shutting it down. I agree it goes by fast!

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:03 p.m. CST


    by MisterE

    Locke, that actually was covered. The drill was creating some sort of interference that disabled the transporters.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:03 p.m. CST

    Yep, you're right!

    by lockesbrokenleg

    I remembered that line as soon as I hit the enter button. It was an awesome sequence.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:07 p.m. CST

    Good movie, can't wait for more

    by rogueleader66

    I have said from day one I liked this movie. Not perfect, but let's face it, Trek has sucked for so long it had to be re-invented somehow. I do expect the next one to have a more solid story, but apart from that, I, and many of my fellow long time Trekkies, enjoyed the film very much.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Bob, I loved the movie...

    by DrMorbius

    Will there be a lot of deleted scenes on the DVD?

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:09 p.m. CST


    by Boborci

    There's a few

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:09 p.m. CST

    What rogueleader66 said.....ditto!

    by DrMorbius

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Looking forward to the Ben Cross/Winona scenes

    by MattmanBegins

    that are on the DVD.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Well,l you know someone is going to ask you..

    by DrMorbius

    if there is any truth to the Kahn rumor posted a week or so ago? So...?

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:19 p.m. CST

    DrMorbius -- nothing's ben ruled in or out

    by Boborci

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:28 p.m. CST

    Fair enough, and Thanks for dropping by...

    by DrMorbius

    every now and then. Looking forward to your next installment.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 3:38 p.m. CST

    I don't care if it has Kahn... I just want more lens flare

    by MattmanBegins

    That's my only request. It's fun watching people complain about it (you know you have a good movie on your hands when lens flare is the only thing most people can think to whine about).

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 5:40 p.m. CST

    SithMenace - Insurrection is kinda funny

    by Tall_Boy66

    I get a kick out of Picard and Data singing Gilbert and Sullivan, sue me. The movie is a bit of a retread of Star Trek III, but you can also say that First Contact and Star Trek are retreads of Wrath of Khan, but I prefer to think of it as a thematic thing. Anyone ever see the episode of Enterprise when the Augment guy was staggering around the bridge of the bird of prey ala Khan? that was pretty sweet, I like those little subtle nods that aren't too overt but you see certain things, moments, and lines, repeat over and over in the series.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 5:55 p.m. CST

    The Augments Enterprise episode

    by lockesbrokenleg

    even mentions the Briar Patch from Insurrection. Soong suggests to go there to hide out.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 8:11 p.m. CST

    Trailer 2 Question

    by Coordinate_System

    <P>Since we have once again gone off mission (remember the Art book?), I don't suppose anybody would mind a quick question about Trailer 2 (as enumerated at what is the music that plays during the latter portion of the trailer (it starts about :43 around the time neo-Kirk cycles to the shipyards). Its quite good, its not on the CD, and don't recall hearing it in the film.</P> <P>Also, where was the academy shuttle hanger sequence filmed? It looks like a real hanger (or at least a large factory space).</P> <P>Thanks.</P>

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 10:05 p.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    Citation needed? Citation provided:<p> STAR TREK Total Lifetime Gross<br><br> Domestic - 257,730,019<br> Foreign - 127,223,652<br> Worldwide - 384,953,671<p> TERMINATOR SALVATION Total Lifetime Gross<br><br> Domestic - 125,322,469<br> Foreign - 246,030,441<br> Worldwide - 371,352,910<p> Truth hurts, doesn't it? You were perhaps confused by the fact that the domestic/foreign grosses for each movie are almost exactly the inverse of each other...TREK was a success Stateside, while TERMINATOR scored overseas. However, the overall grosses are within single digit percentage points of one another.<p> All the same, I'm hearing TERMINATOR is a threatened franchise...if that's the case, things can't be sitting too pretty for TREK, once you factor in the inevitable depreciating returns on further installments that all but a few genre flicks have managed to buck...usually horror movies like NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET or SAW.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 10:38 p.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    I really don't give a flying fuck about being a "non-conformist". All the same, when someone plops a turd on a bun, I'm not going to pretend it's a sloppy joe, regardless of all the other idiots chowing down.<p> The critics are easily explained: they typically fucking HATE SF...too complicated and "sciencey" for them, so if you spoonfeed them, they'll love you for it. They also loathe genre flicks, because it requires some prior knowledge of an SF/Fantasy/comic scenario they find beneath their "superior" tastes anyway, so if you strip the overall plot down to the basics, that also scores points. A lot of the positive press the movie got was in the "I'm surprised I liked it!" vein. 'Nuff said.<p> ...And for what it's worth, NEMESIS made it's "budget back and then some", even if it was only $7 million of "then some". Not that I consider that turd or INSURRECTION to be the standard I'd go by. And not that overall gross is a sound measure of quality unless (again) you think that FPOS TRANSFORMERS 2 really WAS the best movie of the year...<p> To quote a guy name Scotty from TOS: "Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me." The stars came together in their favor this time...will they be so fortunate the next time around?<p> Not unless they heed the warning signs. You learn way more from your critics than you'll ever learn from your admirers.

  • Nov. 10, 2009, 11:31 p.m. CST

    Terminator is a threatened franchise cuz of the investors

    by Tall_Boy66

    They're all bankrupt-y and putting the franchise up for sale. That's why it's in trouble, who is holding the keys to the series. Paramount CLEARLY is not in financial trouble and they're a studio, not a conglomerate that owns a particular franchise ala Terminator. Even though they made about the same amount of cash, they were profitable because they made back their budget.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 12:10 a.m. CST

    Terminator was threatened when T3 came out.

    by lockesbrokenleg

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 1:14 a.m. CST

    Who here

    by Internet_Chat_Helper

    has an amusing or memorable story from the early days of the internet chats that they would like to share with the group, online?

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 3:17 a.m. CST


    by SithMenace

    I can't handle Insurrection. I'm not insulting you or your taste in Star Trek films, just for me it doesn't do it. I have a serious distaste for the Star Trek spin-offs because for me Trek is about the Kirk/Spock McCoy dynamic. As far as I'm concerned if they're not in it's just run of the mill sci-fi.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 3:27 a.m. CST


    by SithMenace

    So the sequel will suck now? You sound exactly like the haters that said this film was going to be in the bargain bins in October (Yeah, there were dumbasses that actually said that). So, after the second film comes out and pulls a "Dark Knight", are you going to bitch that the third film will suck instead? Face it, Abrams is 2 for 2 for major studio releases, and it kills you.<p>So let me ask, you hated Star Trek '09 so much, what would be your perfect "Star Trek 11"? I love to know what the haters think this film SHOULD have been, because 99.99% of the ideas suck. So, humor me. What is it? What's the great idea?

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 7:12 a.m. CST

    can someone please put the yahoo address here

    by marv42134213

    For some reason, I suspect is vista related, I can't get my cursor on the main body to highlite hidden text. (ugh) could someone please put the yahoo address on the talkback. I don't have messenger set up and only use yahoo. Thanks

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 10:13 a.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    If it has the same quality of plot, than yes, it will not only suck but take a hit at the box office...the novelty that served it so well will be gone along with all the good will that accompanied it. Almost guaranteed...Orci/Kurtzman simply don't have a DARK KNIGHT in them. They write bubblegum space opera plots that were old hat in the literary world by the 1950s.<p> Abrams is a gifted director, but his writing staff leaves much to be desired, and Paramount likely won't change direction at this point.<p> I went into my idea about a "new" TREK in some detail on another TB...years after the VOYAGER era, in the aftermath of a pan-galactic war between the Romulans and Cardassians on one side, and the Federation and Klingons on the other, the Federation has prevailed but is in sad shape, with human warlords (and their Romulan/Cardassian "advisors") controlling large swaths of their territory. The newest Enterprise is thus a heavily armed warship designed to quickly seize control of rebel worlds in order to rebuild the Federation. The captain's a ruthless war vet (I proposed it be Ro, because Michelle Forbes does "bitch" so well) whose conscientious "better half" second-in-command is Ezri Dax.<p> Their disagreement over how to carry out the ship's mission is the plot's "engine"...a world rich in desperately needed dilithium is controlled by a charismatic warlord, and while Ro is positive only an act of outright genocide will suppress his forces, Dax is seeking a less deadly approach.<p> Same universe, but with a darker flavor, a relevant political situation and even more opportunities for shoot-em-ups between entire fleets of starships...something none of the movies have attempted to date.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 12:53 p.m. CST

    The Next Next Generation would be a bad idea

    by Tall_Boy66

    Basically, as successful as the TNG-onwards were (with diminishing returns in popularity, obviously) they led to franchise fatigue which put it into hypersleep for a few years. Star Trek is at it's most iconic when it's Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the funny looking blue red and gold uniforms. A TNNG movie series would go over like a lead balloon because you'd have nothing to base it on. As much as Star Trek was new user friendly to the audience, they still had the iconic touchstones of the TOS characters so they knew what was up. Going back to the original series was the only way to keep the franchise alive.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 1:14 p.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    Then I guess you'd better get on the phone to James Cameron, because he's about to do a massive genre flick that goes a step further and has absolutely NO existing franchise associated with it.<p> What had grown old and tiresome about TREK was its wearying moral certitude and toothpaste-ad cleanliness...that's where the first three seasons of GALACTICA completely dusted it. It wasn't the universe it occupied that was at fault, it was the TONE. Abrams injected some much needed adrenaline in his approach, but that squeaky-clean smugness is still present, and I'm wagering that the novelty will have worn off by the next installment...

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 1:28 p.m. CST


    by BurnHollywood

    Then I guess you'd better get on the phone to James Cameron, because he's about to do a massive genre flick that goes a step further and has absolutely NO existing franchise associated with it.<p> What had grown old and tiresome about TREK was its wearying moral certitude and toothpaste-ad cleanliness...that's where the first three seasons of GALACTICA completely dusted it. It wasn't the universe it occupied that was at fault, it was the TONE. Abrams injected some much needed adrenaline in his approach, but that squeaky-clean smugness is still present, and I'm wagering that the novelty will have worn off by the next installment...

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 3:51 p.m. CST

    Avatar and Trek are apples to N'avi

    by Tall_Boy66

    Star Trek is an associated brand name. As new as it is, there is an iconic familiarity to the TOS characters and just the shape of the Enterprise (which, let's be honest, neither the Ent D or Ent E achieved that simple instantly recognizable shape, they were a bit too busy). So, if you're selling an associated brand name like Star Trek, you toss in Kirk, Spock, et. all. As for Avatar, what it's being sold as is not a brand name in the slightest. It's a totally new experience so people are expecting and looking forward to that. You call something Avatar, you give them something new. You call something Star Trek, you give them Kirk.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 3:52 p.m. CST

    I agree to an extent BurnHollywood

    by SithMenace

    that O&K don't have a Dark Knight in them, because they don't seem to go that dark, but what I mean by the next film pulling a Dark Knight is that people will catch the new one on dvd and be ready for the sequel in theaters. If it has an iconic villain it has even more of a chance to gross 300-400 million. Also I have high hopes for the next film because from what I understand Lindelof is heavily involved in writing the script.<p>As far as the dark idea that you mentioned, while I think it could be well done with the right director, it just wouldn't be Star Trek. Trek to me is not about dark times, wars and human conflict on a large scale, it's about exploration, going where no man has gone before, and a bright hopeful future. It's funny and entertaining while at the same time delivering some sort of commentary. <p>I don't want to see a dark Star Trek because most sci-fi these days is dark. IMO TOS Trek was the perfect choice for the current times, because I think people wanted to see a bright future with a planet of Humans united against an external threat, not fighting each other. Could the script have been better? Sure, but it also could have been much, much worse.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 8:29 p.m. CST

    BurnHollywood, I like your script ideas

    by hulkiest

    Though we Trekkies are still at war. Used to be the debate over whether it was the bold, hambone, shirt-ripping TOS characters or the overly serious transatlantic accents of Captain Baldy and his stable of uninteresting LA community players that defined Trek. Now there's this new faction: the youth obsessed, explosion-minded popcorn munchers who don't care what happens in a movie logically, as long as its shiny and loud. I say, TNG, TOS, JJ Trek, it really doesn't matter who you use to tell the story as long as you invest in your characters and think your plot through. Most of the Star Trek movies are kind of crappy in their way. And conversely, there are things to enjoy in each film. (Generations had the best opening title sequence, Insurrection had the cool cloaked suits before it went to hell.) The frustrating thing about JJ Trek was that they had a real budget for once and plenty of time where they could've started from scratch and worked to make a really strong, original sci-fi movie but didn't. Seems like they just wanted to be popular. Look, it's tough to make a film, lotta pressure to make money, let alone make a film with all this rabid fan scrutiny, and now there's that added pressure of appealing to the teens, but come on! This is all they came up with?! If I was BobOrci, I'd just settle for being a producer and getting a 'story by' credit (though that credit should've gone to DC Fontana and Nicholas Meyer) then finding a more science-minded action writer who actually has something to say about our current place in history. If you're monitoring Bob, I think you fell for the trap of simply re-working what we've already seen with recycled lines and a plot that was barely passable as a 70's Buck Rogers episode. Wasn't the point to show things we HAVEN'T seen? It's like The Star Wars Prequels. What's the point of spending six hours belaboring what Obi Wan basically summed up in Return of The Jedi? Surprise us a little! Anyway, yes, Kirk and Spock were better more cinematic heroes than Picard and co. So sure, why not go back to what made ST great? But still, there were times on TNG where they were telling real sci fi stories. If somebody made a Star Trek movie that could combine all the elements, maybe we could have some peace. A smart script about young cadets Kirk and Spock that has the discipline to deliver thrills without eschewing logic. No one in Hollywood is capable of this? ON a different note, that "recruiting" poster of the Enterprise. That said everything about what the new Star Trek should be in tone and execution.

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 9:38 p.m. CST

    You gents hit the nail on the head

    by Coordinate_System

  • Nov. 11, 2009, 9:58 p.m. CST

    You gents hit the nail on the head part II

    by Coordinate_System

    <P>BurnHollywood, and hulkiest, that is.</P>

  • Nov. 12, 2009, 2:38 a.m. CST

    It was still better than another TNG shitfest

    by SithMenace

    I don't think Trek can ever reach the heights of "the trilogy" again, but maybe we'll get lucky.

  • Nov. 12, 2009, 4:23 p.m. CST

    Tall_Boy66 and SithMenace

    by BurnHollywood

    Thanks for the polite appraisals, we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd love to be proven wrong on Abrams' second try, but the writing staff gives me pause. Maybe if they hired a science advisor (like BSG) my misgivings would be appeased.<p> As for the romance of exploring brave new worlds...even when I was a kid, I couldn't help but notice: man, these guys almost NEVER explored anything! Almost every episode is ferrying some ambassador, answering a distress call, taking a break for shore leave, delivering supplies to some colony, etc. They should have called it STAR TRUCK.<p> I recommend pulling the Klingon card and going long...maybe have Kirk and Co. bump up against a young Kor, Koloth or Kang (best Klingons ever). I want to see D-7s pummeling Constitution-class vessels and vice versa.<p> And no fucking nonsense like "red matter". Cripes.