I winced at the Slusho reference. It's retarded to have so many of the bridge crew meet for the very first time in a bar. And Kirk can get a ship of his own in 7 or 8 years? Cadet to Captain in 7 years? Not even Geordi La Forge (who climbed rank so fast he should be God by now) rose up that quickly.

It seems as if this creator of Flying Kryptonian CIA Agent Doctor Lex Luthor is going for a mixture of both emoteens and idioteens on one spaceship. And that rarely works - last time someone tried that, this guy Eric and his pal Dylan tried to blow up the school.

And I for one expect this to do well, not great, not mind altering or earth shattering, but somewhere between $210 -$290 million- domestic, which is better than several of the last Trek pics have done combinded.

Who is this movie for, you ask? Its for people like me, those who love the movies, love a great story, and have some fond memories of Star Trek, but aren't pointy ear wearing, basement dwelling, model building, tubby stomach protruding out of a tight starfleet command shirt, nerd. Sorry, but I have a feeling there are a lot more folks like me, than the hard core nerds, who will be wooed into seeing this. Besides, despite all their crap, those hard core nerds are going to see this anyway, you know this to be true!

*crossing fingers*

I'm not really a STAR TREK fan but I am a fan of the new BSG. And I have to say that if they are trying to steal the thunder from the ADAMA ATMO-FTL JUMP MANEUVER...

...I might just have to say some nasty things about this TREK reboot.

Cinematic thieves!!!

...pause...

acting?

Nero is the "villain" in this "movie."

THE ADAMA ATMO-FTL JUMP MANEUVER.

Bottom line: those fargin' iceholes better not be stealing from Adama!

So, if you're going to try to hit warp speed while in the atmosphere, aren't you going to tear the ship apart?!

(Now watch all the Trekkers chime in with their warp shield and inertia-dampener theories...)

Heh.

What's this - a movie of fresh ideas taken from somebody else?

Trek was never consistent to its own internal chronology even within same series episodes so a rejiggery of the early years, which to be fair, have never been shown and only explored in the books, is acceptable to a hard core trek fan like me.

Every picture of the guy looks like he is sucking on a lemon.

http://tinyurl.com/3nh96v

"Now, carbon nanotubes can be manufactured in transparent sheets that are commercially-viable and stronger than steel."

Anyhow, the hardcore fans are always gonna whine - let them. They'll be proven wrong soon enough. I'm reminded of all those people who thought Daniel Craig couldn't pull off Bond, and that Casino Royale was going to suck and nobody was going to watch it because there was no built-in audience for it, being a reboot and all...

Get THE FUCK over yourselves!

People will flock to this movie in droves - because the average NON-Trekkie man on the street actually LIKES Kirk and Spock and those characters and couldn't give a damn about "canon".

Until First Contact, the WHALE movie was the biggest selling Trek ever and had the highest crossover appeal - and if you adjusted for inflation and so on, you might well find that it was actually more popular than the Borg movie, despite not making as much money.

Either way, people WILL see this film INCLUDING the "they've shit all over my beloved canon" crowd so have a Coke, smile, and STFU.

Ha ha this film is gonna be fuckin' awesome. Much better than that gay ass boring old show that didn't have pig fukin jokes. This isnt your fathers Star Trek that's for fukin sure. I tryed to watch a DVD of my dads. That shit was gay this movie haz got adventtur and jokes and shit for real. My ass is so there in teh theater next may. jj u got my ten bucks. I luv LOST!!!!

[Still, I do think that the issues surrounding censorship will become more pressing in the near future, when post-industrialism gives way to cyber-capitalism. Considering the long-term effects of socialized debt being accrued at this very moment, and the inevitable reduction in the standards of living that will follow (leaving aside the possibility of some new miracle technology à la Star Trek), there will probably be a growing willingness, if not demand, to secure the productive value of 'intellectual property' even it if leads to the centralization of a supra-national form of authority (e.g. IMF + ICANN) that can guarantee the rule of law. Taking in consideration the inherent security vulnerabilities of the internet, authority will require the capacity to control the flow of information, which may not favour privacy and free expression].

Of course, we could always try the Chinese approach. Then again, though they may still appear to be culturally conservative and patriotic, many of them are also evidently beginning to appreciate the pleasures of political dissent, even if it is now mostly directed to ‘Western’ media-bias (http://tinyurl.com/5l5vrh). In the end, we'll all realize that we’re actually caught in the same predicament anyways. (Let’s just hope it doesn’t take the form of the so-called global Proletarian revolution that Marx predicted)

That's why I think that the so-called "Star Wars" program is out-dated. Continuing the current geostrategic game is a lose-lose position: it risks misallocating the precious few resources we still have left for ineffective and dangerous military and defense programs (in large part due to self-serving private military contractors and their lobbyists siphoning tax payers money by jumping into bed with corrupt, ideological, and gullible government officials).

This defense program was based on the traditional “Us vs. Them” logic of international relations, which may have made sense in the past when survival was predicated by an awareness of geographic limitations and the need to secure the essential resources for economic production, but is now out-dated by the fact that not only does the very scarcity of resources threaten every nation on this planet, but (practically) every nation has become an essential component of a global network that is strengthened by the need for cooperation but is also vulnerable to the instability produced by countries (and financial institutions) seeking their own interests.

So, instead of building a missile shield I propose a “Star Trek” program: a multi-national endeavour ‘to explore strange new worlds’ … to ‘boldly go where no one has gone before’… Not, however, to ‘seek new life and new civilizations’, but in order to colonize planets and moons, knowing full well that mankind, in order to survive (not so much the scarcity of resources, or ecological disasters, but its innate drive to fight for survival, and to protect those closest to us, but which in this case may end up with few, if any, survivors), needs to channel its energy, whether its fuelled by hope or fear, into a collective endeavour that is as inspiring as it is necessary.

I’m not a die-hard Star Trek fan, but what I now appreciate is how this desire to explore and discover, which I feel embodies a fundamental aspect of the human predicament, not only justified the Enterprise mission, it sometimes lay at odds with the principles that established of the Federation (peace and cooperation), none more so than the prime directive. I therefore think the self-awareness and importance of this ethos, and its eventual institutionalization, to be important elements in any story meant to establish the origins of the Star Trek ‘universe,’ though there are plenty of ways in which this can be done. Focusing on the characters and their actions, considering their iconic role in popular culture, makes perfect sense, so I’m going to reserve my opinions about the movie until I have actually seen it.

By the way, I actually really dig the designs of the ship, the bridge, the custumes, and even the three leads. So far, everything looks pretty nifty.

You've got to be fucking kidding me!

It's going to be worse than Knight Rider.

...from the old syndicated Back2Back Action Hour. Accidental tit grabbing, horny guys fumbling around, stupid humor, extravagant mechanical traps, lots of free falling, time traveler setting things right in a world going wrong...

This really is sounding more like STAR TREK XI: THE NAIL IN THE COFFIN.

Trek ain't your property, it belongs to us all, who gives a fuck if the Enterprise was built in Iowa and assembled in SF?

You apparently but the rest of us are not mongoloids and can differentiate between reality, it's a movie, and mental instability, Trek's dead, anyone supporting it is a plant. Maybe new posters appear when a property the like is coming due to interest?

I know you paranoid android fantasy version seems more likely to you but to those of us with sex lives we can see the reality, this film is gonna do huge box office and some bitter old fanboys wont stop that.

You claim to love Trek yet piss all over the first real cinematic vision its offered since the 80's, grow up.

In all honesty, one of the best episodes of Star Trek I ever saw was the DS9 episode where an entire fleet of Klingon ships attacks the station. The amount of firepower and destruction unleashed in that episode had me tightening my fists and hissing "Fuck yeah!" at the television.

I'm not a fan of everything JJ's done, but I still enjoy a lot of his work. "Mission Impossible III" was a cringeworthy misfire, mostly due to Cruise not blending in as special agents are supposed to do, but seasons one and two of "Alias" were fabulous.

I'm hoping this films kicks some ass.

Btw, I think you have a point about the action Excalibur, though I still think that TMP wasn't very good in the story department, nor in its execution, not that it didn't have it's moments. I might consider giving it another shot; I've only seen it once after all.

That said, wouldn't it be great if someone approached the relation between the Star Trek crew and their ship in the same way that Peter Weir approached Master and Commander? Or the military, political and covert maneuverings in the style of Syriana and Patlabor 2? And lets not forget the sort of story that both overwhelms and alters our conception of what is possible, and makes us question fundamental questions about who we are, and where we want to go. You know, the kind of stuff that the best sci-fi has to offer... distilled from where and who we are right now.

<

p

>

on the same line.

Yes, you are quite right that it would be great if they took story approaches like the ones you mentioned. My biggest single complaint about the past twenty-five or so years of the Star Trek franchise is how it too willingly abandoned trying to be big, interesting, and thought provoking while settling for being small, mediocore, and dull.

1. The classic car/space cop sequence looks pretty goofy and ultimately useless. The kid's delivery on the "James Tiberus Kirk" line seemed weak.

2. The trailer doesn't seem to infer that construction of the Enterprise is happening in Iowa. If the 20 minute recaps said that, I must have missed it. I noticed that some talkbackers seemed to think that but I wasn't sure of the source. From what I saw, there is no reason it couldn't be San Francisco.

3. Simon Pegg seems to be doing his typical goofy Simon Pegg thing...which I normally love. As Scotty, I'm not too keen on it. However, I think there was only one line so maybe dissing him is premature.

4. The interior of the iEnterprise looked very white and very bland. Like TMP bland. I seem to recall that was a criticism of the original motion picture...not sure what they went back to that kind of design.

5. I think Urban has a line in the trailer but by the time it comes, I was in the midst of the Bucha effect of having so many images flash by so rapidly so I can't tell you how his "Bones" came off.

6. Zoe Saldana seems to be yet another rail-thin semi-sexless actress. If you're going to have the gratuitous bra shot in the trailer, you might want to put something in the bra first. Uhura had curves.

7. Bana's Nero? Meh.

This may make some new fans but will likely alienate the older fans to such a degree, they'll be lucky if it evens out in the end. I'm less excited than I was initially but I'll be the first one to admit it if the movie rocks.

I will definitely be giving the film a chance but I can't say I've seen or heard anything yet that has changed my misgivings. I can also say that I haven't seen or heard anything so bad that I'll swear off the film. I'm just not excited...and this is the first time I haven't been excited to see a Star Trek film. They could delay it another five years and I wouldn't feel like I was missing anything.

My "meh" towards Bana was more about his character's look. I guess his line was menacing enough but I'm just not thrilled with the Nero production design.

Again, they could all tie this up in a cool time-traveling storyline that explains the changes in continuity but I'm just not confident in Abrams' ability to do that. I will be glad if I am wrong.