New Star Trek movie trailer
polycounter lvl 17
!!!!
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/large_trailer2.html
Looks awesome, but will it still feel like star trek? Looks like he's really hollywoodifying it... cant wait to find out
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/large_trailer2.html
Looks awesome, but will it still feel like star trek? Looks like he's really hollywoodifying it... cant wait to find out
Replies
looks pretty cool, we'll see where this goes
And WHY THE FUCK is Kirk driving a 1960's convertible off of a fucking cliff!?
Oh yeah, and I think this is going to be pretty good.
Although, if JJ Abrams made Sister Act 4, I'd probably see that too.
The original teaser gave an impression that it would be a little less "lets drive cars over cliffs". I can already see that half the movie is going to be a parallel story between little kirk and little spock growing up worlds away only to team up on man's first mission into space.. The last half of the movie is going to be about the fact that space is a mean place and we need to fire some lasers.
It also seems like there's no regard for the timeline.
It's sad that the last few Trek movies were dumbed down so much that they had to "switch to manual mode" for some excitement. But this revamp doesn't seem in any way like a Trek movie.
JJ has me hooked, but I'm setting aside what little fondness I have for the Trek franchise and just going to see this movie about space people fighting space aliens instead.
Oh and also, it's incredible how typecast Sylar is after seeing this teaser. I doubt that actor will ever break out of that Sylar image.
Saidin - what about Batman Begins and Dark Knight? No regard for timeline that's already occurred. But those two movies were far superior to the previous ones (imo) and damned good regardless. With Star Trek (notice no post-title name) is like a reboot of the franchise, a passing of the torch. If this does well, JJ will likely no more Trek movies with the same cast, starting anew. While it will never replace the Wrath of Khan for example, it's a breath of fresh air that the franchise was in dire need of. With soo many versions of StarTrek (DS9, TNG, Voyager and on and on), the forumla was getting a little boring. Abrams will bring a good amount of realism and drama to the usual sappy performances.
Firstly, I liked the original Tim Burton world just as much as the "realistic" world created from the new movies. Arguably the worlds are completely different takes on what was originally a multiple version comic. Graphic Novels and hardcore comics weren't a big thing back in 89-90. So Tim Burton's world was stylistically on target with the original comics and tv show.
As far as being done well, it will be done well in so far as new technologies, production values, budget etc. A lot of remakes are 'better' simply because the explosions are visually better. People of this new generation, even intellectuals can appreciate the older movies. But some of the new remakes are simply better because of their production values. Although I expect to get a lot of backlash for saying something like that.
As far as the timeline goes. I don't necessarily have a problem if they break the format, or timeline. But Star Trek has always been about "saving whales" to use an insulting cliche. It just seems to me that the ideals behind the original series (since this is what its based on) are completely lost in expensive effects and "resetting plotlines". Roddenberry's characters were never really flawed. They were flawed against the Prime Directive (besides Kirk being the ladies man). Which is why Trek has always been "wimpy" compared to Star Wars or others. I don't have a problem with reintroducing character flaws, making these guys bad ass and blowing up some star ships. The revamp should come from the stories, not by blowing up starships and throwing cars off cliffs (can you guess I'm already hating that scene in the movie? hah).
I should also say that I'm not the biggest Trek fan. I really liked TNG but that was ages ago. I'm more against these blown up (literally) resets of movies. JJ is a great story teller and director and producer. I would rather him tell new stories (or even give us a cloverfield 2) than get paid big hollywood money to revamp old news.
I wonder if the movie has anyone over 30 in it.
Nope they pop you in a red sweater beam you on to a planet if you make it back the job is yours.
i've always had a dislike for the campfest that was star trek, but this movie may get me to see it, i'm liking the look of it, i have heard that fanboys of the series are not to happy about spock goin ape....
Note: Slight Spoilers. Less than you might read in a movie review.
Star Trek didn't get holodecks until the Nest Generation w/ Picard.
Meh, I'm holding out hope for it. We'll just have to wait and see.
Ha, QFT.
I'm not sure they'll get me out to the theater but I'll probably watch it at some point. Which hasn't happened in the last 3-4 Trek films.
All he needs to do here is lift his two fingers up and open up the brain. And When I said Sylar is typecast, I meant the actor. He's typecast because it seems no matter what Zachary Quinto does you can always see the sylar in his character.
geek mode on...
In the TNG movie generations there was a sequence cut from the shooting script where he does some sort of crazy assed orbital skydiving before going on the enterprise b. Also in ST5.. if you want to consider that pos in the timeline... he is mountain climbing without any safety gear.
/geek
I've sort of sworn off Star Trek and Star Wars.. both have been very meh in the last few years. I'm a huge star gate fan right now though
I mean the movie might put it into context, but as far as the trailer goes, that was laughable.
that's not being typecast, that's being a poor actor with only one character
sir-knight: they could never remake or improve stargate the way JJ Abrams has doen all these others - it already has the AWESOME factor the others lacked originally - MacGyver......
......he could kick kirks ass any time with only a toothpick and a paperclip
Really, I think this movie is going to hold a lot of fan service. Maybe it's not 110% canon (what is with all the time traveling anyway?) but it looks like us Trekkies/Trekkers are in for a sweet Star Trek ride.
Ah. You've got to love the chauvenistic male leads of the 60s prancing about the Enterprise bridge in tights and high heel boots. Classic stuff.
very much agree. even spock as spock has that kinda... apathetic face. showing no emotion, ever. sylar as a character is very empty in terms of emotion, all his moves are methodical and calculated. logical
the similarties are there, and when i watched the trailer i was like "ZOMG SPOCK AM BADASS!"
tbh i was always more of a star wars fan, but i'll be watching this for sure. gotta be better than the prequals, right?
I've been following the production of this flick pretty avidly since it was announced.
The visual conventions of Star Trek have, in the past, been seriously shackled by the studio. They had lists of types of shots and camera work that "wasnt allowed in the franchise" but with JJ, they just gave him the keys to the kingdom (only caveat being that he couldnt remove any significant characters, and the ship exterior had to remain fairly close to the original) So...should be fun. Should be action-y, and hopefully not too dry as ST can become.
And...Kirk is not the captain in this. He isnt even an Ensign. Pike IS captain of the Enterprise. He's the one in the voiceover.
...lets not forget Spock is 1/2 human, and has always had more trouble reigning in his emotions, especially when he was younger.
As for the car...think Ferris Buelers Day Off...red sports car...who owned it...what happend to it... and you'll understand the sequence in the ST trailer. Same thing from what Ive read.
It seemed like total crap. Just trailer fluff, like "this isnt' your fathers Star Trek" But maybe it has its place...