Nov 17 2008UPDATED! Someone Who Pays to See Movies Recorded This 'Star Trek' Trailer for You

It's only as good as it gets, like the trailer.

I saw the tralier this weekend - it was downright embarrassing. Death to JJ Abrams.

why is it, that geekology, the superficial, and iwatchstuff are never updagted over the weekend. cinematical.com is updated over the weekend. and they have tons of shit updated multiple times a day. this website is funny, but there are like 5 posts a day. i found out about the booleg star trek trailer friday night, or saturday morning from cinematical. way to go in speedy and efficient updates. suckass.

is that harold from harold and kuumar @1:27

It was like everything that sucked about ST: Enterprise, ST: Nemesis, and the Transformers movie all rolled into one.

Thanks for choosing to post a picture of the normally very hot Karl Urban, looking positively bat-shit insane as Bones.

I just watched that enormous piece of crap called "Cloverfield" last night, and my enthusiasm for this Trek movie has considerably dimmed.

@3
I think it's because they're corporate humps just like most of the rest of us.

@4
Yes. They've got him playing Sulu.

Looks surprisingly good all you assholes born after 1985.

Hi!

Just FYI - although the official website delayed showing this trailer for an extra 24 hours, it *is* available on Apple's movie trailer site here:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/

Keep up the good work! :-)

// Fox K.

I thought i was watching some shitty advertisment at first...is it just me or does the scene on 0:57 vaguely resemble another movie beginning with "Star" :-/

Looks like it will be good, maybe bring some life back into Star Trek franchise.

@ #10 B
Hmm I hope your not reffering to Star Wars. Since both of the franchises take place in outer space, have crazy spaceships, aiens, and battles in space - I would expect certain scenes to look similar...

"Did everyone see that giant space ship - what a rip off since there's another movie that has spaceships! Dammn Hollywood! :\"

WTF why does Trekkie-land have Earth cars and motercycles?!

Looks just as shitty as 'Transformers'

Wow. I was really expecting this to be awesome and that I would feel at least half as excited as I did watching the second Dark Knight trailer. I can't stand JJ Abrams, so I don't know why I was expecting something good... maybe because I have a special nerd love for Star Trek TOS and I was letting that cloud my judgment.
...I'm still going to see it, though.

According to the picture, it looks like Kirk and Spock work at a JC Penny's. In the perfume department.

Is this canon?

Spock shows way too much emotion, even for half human. Nimoy did much better.

i simply dont get why they completely ripped off star wars in such an obvious way. i mean flying fucking speedsters, just like SW? and then that trademark shot of the speeder driving from the left to the right end of the screen. thats almost plagarism! if i was G. Lucas i d seriously have a closer look @ this.

sucks for abrams, he really lost it here. but who cares? we all know there will be enough assholes who run into the cinemas just to see this piece of crap.

You know it's just a trailer right? Let's not get to huffy, and puffy over it.

FAKE!!!!

This is an obvious photoshop job. You can tell its fake because the shadows are all wrong.

This looks like the Star Wars DVD that Max got in that scene in the movie Never Back Down.

so freakin melo-dramatic....why are they ruining classics with all this dramatic crap

Then...WhyDont...you...STOP...ME

Let's look up "suspension of disbelief", then just tell yourselves that this movie & the t.v. show Enterprise occurs in a parallel universe, timeline, WHATEVER make you happy... sit back, just relax, and enjoy the movie. Yeah, yeah every director, actor, and every movie sucks uh, huh we all could do sooo much better if we had the chance. I have to admit at least #14 is honest with themselves. In a world where "High School Musical 3: Senior Year" has made millions (again), movies about Chihuahuas are made, and the Wayans are (sigh) allowed to make another parody movie this Star Trek movie... and Watchmen are both a godsend for me.

@ 15 Mr. Jones- Ok that was funny and looks spot on.

I think it looks pretty good.

Much better than the old versions.

I don't understand what all the hate is about. This looks great! It like Abrams said, "Hey, you know all that boring sh*t from the old Star Trek movies and shows? Let's get rid of that and put in interesting things that people would actually enjoy instead of things that put people to sleep! Oh, and Simon Pegg!" Seriously, I've never understood Star Trek fans, but I think this looks good. Not that you care about my opinion, seeing as you don't know me. I could be a interweb phantasm for all you know!

@22

Well put my friend. Lighten up guys.

I think the douchey comment is right on. The actors in this film aren't old enough to convincingly portray head waiters, much less military commanders. Gimme a break: at least Alias and Lost had the good sense to focus on characters that were old enough to actually be running shit. This is like those shitty Acura ads about the new generation having arrived. The new generation looks soft to me.

I do not understand why it's alright for people to be all gung-ho and "purist" about things like The Watchmen, but Star Trek people need to 'get over themselves.' Look, Star Trek means something to some of us and to have that casually disregarded by an opportunist is upsetting.
Not to pick on rob, but he's nailed it with, "I don't understand what all the hate is about." Exactly. He *doesn't* understand, but I don't mind that in the slightest - everybody's got their own bag. What *I* don't understand is why some of you are so bothered by the dissatisfaction expressed by myself and others. I have yet to hear of or from a single hard core Trekkie who's excited about this film.
I truly hope this doesn't come off too confrontational, but I *could* do better than JJ Abrams.

(Cowering in fear from the Trekkies...)

Well...I would consider myself a Trekkie...I loved TOS...absolutely LOVED and grew up with TNG...DS9 was alright....everything else after sucked. To be honest with you I think this movie looks pretty fucking awesome. If seen people say "this isnt Star Trek...nudity, too much action, zomg!"...you are right...this isnt the Star Trek....That you grew up with...its new, reimagined and fresh. The Enterprise looks great, the action looks awesome and Im sure the story will be decent. People hating on this need to get their heads out of their asses and you all know that you will be in line the day it comes out. So dont kid youselves...its gonna rule.

Everything after DS9 sucked. I can't wait to see this movie!

I'm a total trek fan from TOS right through Enterpirse (to a lesser extent). Although I agree JJ Abrams makes some pretty shitty movies which are way over the top (like ignoring gravity most of the time), I'm still excited about this movie. Since the last batch of Next Gen movies have pretty much sucked ass you cant' really get too much worse. Space battles I'm ready for, if they don't want to get on making a modern trek movie from a time period after Voyager I'll deal with this prequel stuff.

@27

I wholeheartedly agree with you, you echoed my sentiments exactly. That's one of the main reasons I'm pissed the Dragonball movie is looking more and more like an epic fail of an attempt to squeeze money out of an well-established and devotional fan base. I wouldn't say I could make it better, but I would've signed on as Artistic Continuity Director or something in a heartbeat (Trekkie Relations Coordinator?) That being said, I think this movie looks likes it could be f*cking awesome and cater to the fan base adequately while hopefully gaining new ones to the franchise at the same time.

and #15, you are my hero LOL

Agree with the up to DS9 thing....although i did keep up straight thru Enterprise....
the last good Trek movie I saw was First Contact.... I'm looking forward to something NEW.... Apparently the OLD hasn't been working for a while.
So instead of making negative comments about this trailer, maybe you guys should put on Final Frontier or Insurrection again and tell us how Great those were.....
Trek needs another Wrath of Khan!
This could be it.............

I am a fan of Star Trek OG and TGN. And I think the movie looks pretty good. Remember that to show was always a little campy and done on the cheap. It was a fun show and I will always something I will remember fondly. But it is kind of cool to see the back story and see it with 500 Billion dollar budget.

Go to Badawesome.com or they'll take my legs

Hey, if you don't like it, don't watch it. No one's twisting your arm. It'll be be $20 saved for something more important.... like beer. Or stuffing it in a stripper's bra.

Hey look at it this way. There is no way it can be worse than Star Trek: Insurrection. Unless Abrams changes the title at the last minute to Star Trek Insurrection 2: Ba'ku to the Rescue!

Visually, it looks great. I might want to watch it muted.

Very excited about the movie, not so much about the actors, especially Quinto and Pine...

I agree with who says Spock is too emotional...

Pine's Kirk doesn't seem as bad-ass as William Shattner's.

Plus, Simon Pegg CAN'T be Scotty... It's obviously a photoshop job, you know, because of all the shadows and stuff...

Okay... I'm watching the trailer again and I'm getting a really bad feeling from it.

Right off the bat - what kind of person is going to push a car, full-throttle, towards a cliff? A swashbuckler? A rebel? A totally kewl, hip, in-your-face bad-boy?

Um, no. Maybe a MORON, then?! Yeah, that's it. A MORON.

And when you jump out of a car, your body is still going the same speed as the car. You are going to fly over the cliff alongside the car.

What kind of fucking idiots do they think we are? Uh, yeah, if you're plummeting down in a broken elevator, you will be okay as long as you jump at the right moment.

Suspension of disbelief doesn't mean we must turn our brains off.

NEXT!!

FYI #26 Kirk was the youngest star fleet officer to command a ship, and seeing that this is their first mission yeah they're gonna look a little young, green,hell even inexperienced let's see the movie first before you and all the haters go on your respective periods ok.

Yeah, because flying through space at warp 9 and stopping instantly is totally believable. Arguing physics in a trailer for a futuristic space movie is straight up silly.

I am a trekkie, have loved the franchise since I was about 4 (26 years ago), and I am excited to see this movie. Haters can suck donkey nuts.

#41

Um, full stop from warp 9 is believable because they have this thing called an "inertial dampening field". If you are going to believe that warp exists, then it's not a stretch to believe in some other technology tinkering with the physics of the bodies on board the vessel. Suspension of disbelief does not equal stupid.

Explain the technology behind some brat jumping out of a car. And explain why we are supposed to think this is "cool", instead of just plain stupid.

I'll lay it out right now - they are doing everything they can to pull in other people besides Star Trek geeks (the base). And this is perfectly okay. But its not ok to alienate an intelligent base by loud, stupid, cheap-shot gimmick scenes that break the "suspension of disbelief" barrier.

I'll give you an example. Imagine if they took "Hamlet" and replaced all the monologues with fart jokes. Yeah, this will attrack the "American Pie" and the "Just Another Spoof" movie fans, but the people who truly appreciate Shakespear are going to stay away.

I agree with 33, last good Star Trek movie was First Contact. I'm actually more curious about the movie now that I have seen the trailer... Spock bothers me a bit... Either it will be a cool movie or kill off all hope of a good Star Trek movie ever being released again.

I don't think it looks bad at all... I'm sure it will at least be entertaining... and all you haters make sure you let us know your impression of the movie after you see it opening day.

@41 & 42

Stopping from warp 9 isn't any different than stopping from any other warp factor because (get this) the ship isn't actually moving. When traveling at warp, velocity is *relative* to a fixed point in space. The idea is that you can circumvent laws of relativity by propelling a locality (the space immediately surrounding the vehicle) through larger space-time. Essentially, the 'warp field' contracts spatial geometry in front of you and expands it behind you. Think of it as a bubble of air traveling upward toward the surface of a body of water - the bubble may be moving up at a fair clip, but all is serene within the bubble.
This doesn't all come from being a major Trek nerd, either, by the way. I'm also into theoretical physics. Believe it or not, this sort of propulsion isn't as far-fetched as it sounds - the major stumbling blocks at our present level of understanding involve learning about negative energy and how to manipulate it. It's not unthinkable that we may be only three of four generations away from a real-life 'warp' drive. Check out the work of Dr. Miguel Alcubierre - particularly the Alcubierre metric - for more information if you're interested.

hey nerds, how about this?

go out side.
get laid.
do some drugs.
shut the fuck up.

#46

Wow. Busting on nerds. Way to go out on a limb there, pal. Shatner beat you to it 20 years ago.

BTW - I got the first three things on your list covered (technically #2 since I'm married). Number three is essential in getting through Star Trek 5. If one is sufficiently baked, then one can achieve Nerdvanna when Kirk utters the infamous line "Hey, why does GOD need a spaceship?!". And fat Spock raises his eyebrows and nods like "Hey, good point!". Like that didn't occur to him.

As far as the fourth item on your list, you can take care of that yourself.

A FUCKING CAR!

Why, why did he have to put a FUCKING CAR IN THE MOVIE.

UGH

And yet Ill still watch it with an erection

Why is everyone bitching about cars and motorcycles? You do realize Kirk lived on Earth right? Do you really think that no evidence of present-day Earth would survive into Kirk's time?

@49

Well, there HAD been two enormous world wars, each killing hundreds of millions before Kirk's time. Which isn't necessarily to say that NOTHING would've survived, though.
That particular car would be about two hundred years old unless it's meant to be a replica. But why build a replica of a two hundred year old car to joyride in the 23rd century? Surely more inspiring hot rods would have been available to a young Jimmy T. Now, none of us is aware of the circumstances surrounding that scene, but up front it SEEMS that somebody involved went out of their way to get some product placement money out of Chevrolet. (It IS a Corvette, isn't it?)

If this thing still exists and is prized by collectors...

http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/06/25/worlds_oldest_car/index.html

Then surely a Corvette would still be around somewhere.

And who knows... maybe in the future GM makes a line of REALLY retro cars.

None of you have ever been laid. That's why you're all angry.

@52...

I'm not sure if that thing I did to your mom qualifies as getting laid technically so I guess you might be right... but in all fairness her face was stuck to the pillow in the morning so points for me anyway.

#53

You actually hang around until breakfast? Cheers.

I usually get the job done in 20 minutes. If not, then the next guy is coming into the room to throw me out.

Mr Jones....you, my friend, need to smoke some weed or chill out. Im reading your posts over here and you are getting so flustered and upset its HILARIOUS! Go outside and take a deep breath or smoke a cigarette...it'll be ok dude.

F@ck you all who hated the trailer, It looks like a fun flick. F@ck you too all the people on here who fell for the obvious troll responses. F@ckin nerds its just a movie so what if I masterbate to the revamped Enterprise, dont judge me it has sexy lines.

By the way Mr. Jones....the kid DOES move with the inertia of the car...if you watch the scene again...I recommend some glasses...you will see that he DOES move in the cars direction while in the air and DOES slide on the ground in the direction the car is moving. So shut the fuck up dude and get your shit straight before you start runnin your cock sucker :) Capish?

Matt:

Geez, you must be some sort of cyber-empath that you can devine my emotional state simply by my choice of words. In reality, "dude", I'm not losing any sleep over this.

And I would suggest you turn your laser-like critique upon your own musings. Uh, dude, you are the one who is twisting yourself in knots defending one of the most idiotic scenes these schlockmeisters have crapped out yet. Do you work for the studio, pal? Because that is the only thing that would make any semblance of sense as far as your motivations.

Science Fiction movies work when they are SMART. Science-Fiction fans tend to be more intelligent than average and expect more from their entertainment. If these morons want to trash it all in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator, good luck with that.

Let's make it loud and big and lots of explosions and sexy and the "good" guys are bigger jerks than the bad guys and real fast camera cuts and more explosions and everyone has lots of quotable one liners and all the heroes are troubled and fight with each other but still beat down the bad guys but the main bad guy survives at the last second so we can have a sequel and more explosions and sexiness... yeah, that's how you make a good movie.

...well maybe it'll be better than the trailer leads me to believe. I'll still go see it anyway. Damn loyalty!

I think it looks pretty good. I still have some mixed feelings about it tho. For instance Trek is not "pew pew" like Star Wars.. there were always slow tactical battles instead of fast paced ones, but I think this will be okay because it will be exciting and attract the non-trekkies. The actors all look okay to me too... cept Kirk needs to talk like Shatner... lol.. I think all you haters out there shouldn't be so picky. Who cares if kid Kirk is stupid and jumps out of a car... HE IS A KID! KIDS ARE STUPID!... and the crap about stopping at warp 9 seriously its a freaking science fiction movie.. FICTION! Anyways... this looks like it could really take off and get Star Trek back on its feet again. Enterprise was horrible.. and the movies were never good at gaining new fans. I have had non-trekkie friends who come to me and say "hey! The new Star Trek trailer looks awesome! I'll come see it with you!" That makes me happy.

I agree with 60, how the f*ck can you play James T. Kirk and NOT sound like Shatner? It's just not right, it's like jumping off a car that's heading towards a cliff and not get caught up by inertia...

Kirk looks like he came out from The Galaxy O.C.

"Let's make it loud and big and lots of explosions and sexy and the "good" guys are bigger jerks than the bad guys and real fast camera cuts and more explosions and everyone has lots of quotable one liners and all the heroes are troubled and fight with each other but still beat down the bad guys but the main bad guy survives at the last second so we can have a sequel and more explosions and sexiness... yeah, that's how you make a good movie."

If your beloved St. Rodenberry had access to modern cinema technology that is exactly what his fu.cking show would have looked like. You act like the guy was making a deep, thoughtful, quality show when his single dimensional tripe was the Baywatch of it's time. Grow the fuck up and let better people try to make something at least somewhat viewable from that crap show.

Why is Zoolander(s) dressed in a Star Trek costume?

Alright. This movie looks awesome. But that is what we're supposed to think. All of the people excited are justified, because that's what a trailer is for, to get people excited who are slightly inclined to see the film. The indignant ones, however, are not afforded the same rights to their emotions. You've seen 2 minutes minus the green and the 8 second credit thing at the end. That is nothing to judge a film on. We can get excited because the action was tense and the excitement built up during the 'quick cuts'. Oh, not to mention. OF COURSE A TRAIlER WILL HAVE QUICK CUTS, NUMBNUTS. How can you show a lot in a little amount of time? And those people complaining that Kirk doesn't talk like Shatner? Have we seen him in this trailer say more than a few words? And, wow. We all know as massive Trekkies that Kirk has a particular affection for 'the way things used to be done' in our present time, and before that. Who's to say Pine's Kirk is interested in fast land cars and Kirk slowly matures into an appreciation of older things as he ages? And the car on the cliff, get the fuck over it. It's an action sequence, the kid is clearly running from the police and doesn't see the cliff. Alright, so 'hardcore canonites' you'd rather have that scene (because you can't change that) and have Kirk obey the laws of physics and die when he's 10, for the sake of scientific implausibility.

The cast look fantastic, as if they are the exact genetic duplicates of the originals, reverted back 5 years. It's amazing. Pegg is a perfect Scotty, even if merely for the comic relief and he quite looks the part, too.

And with regards to the earlier comment about Roddenberry's vision changing provided he had high tech effects... That's totally erroneous. TOS and TNG clearly make up a set of stories about pressing matters at the time, hence why Star Trek has entrenched itself in our culture. It was relevant then and now. And I firmly believe that the show wouldn't have changed with the technology. Just because this film has a massive budget doesn't mean that they didn't spend the time writing a fantastic script. They clearly hired great actors for the parts. So Abrams decides to get a brilliant script done and then thinks, "Hmm, that cost $500,000. I've got $95 million left. Hmm, I'll abandon all of the great scenes that would be truly brilliant and just make more battles and explosions." He's not a fucking moron. Need I mention Lost!?! They had an $11 million or so budget for the pilot, but that didn't change the amazing quality of it, and if it did, it certainly only made it better and more engaging (flying an entire plane to be set up crashed on a beach). Budget isn't bad.

And neither is a refresh. It's clear Trek needs it to get new fans and re-herd the waning few. He's hardly capitalizing. How many times do you think Paramount tried to get another Trek film going? It's taken until now, and I'm sure that's because of the script. It had to be right. Fine, Kirk has a fast bike, the Enterprise was built on earth and Uhura's a bit too hot. Get the fuck over it and enjoy it! I'll tell the same to anyone else making a critical judgement on months of shooting and editing based upon a 2 minute spot.

Can we all just agree to go see it and reserve our criticisms for when we know the context of the scenes in the trailer and when we have a better idea of what Abrams is rebooting and what we're gonna get. Wouldn't you rather get the chance to watch a shit Trek film than watching it fade slowly into dust on your hermetically sealed DVD cases in the past. No one wants Trek to end, we've just had a lull. And this is going to fill it wonderfully.

To all of the whiney super geeks that find dissatisfaction in any fantasy that cuts into their lonely mastabatory schedule.....
You are going to continue to complain about something you have not seen until the day it comes out, then wait on line for hours to get a good seat behind someone wearing fake ears.
You are secretly going to like it, but have very serious and smug conversations about how you would have done it differently.
You are going to say goodbye to the one person you know that can stand your incessant complaining long enough to sit through a movie with you.
You are going to go home....alone....again.
You are going try in vain to get someone else to go with you, but end up buying a ticket on fandango to go again tomorrow....by yourself.
And finally, check facebook, see that you have no new messages, jerk off for the 5th time that day, fall asleep and dream about beaming to a cynical nerd colony on a class M planet.

All I see here is epic fail, both on the part of the movie AND on the whiners who think they know a thing about what they're whining about.

Why is everyone so bent out of shape about what they're seeing?

(1) Watch The Cage and The Menagerie. Watch how emotional Spock is. Christ, he even SMILES when arriving on Talos. You'd think he's never seen a plant before in his life. Given that Kirk assumed command years after Pike (Pike was NOT disabled while serving on the Enterprise, BTW; he was serving on the Daedalus at the time), we can only assume that Spock acquired additional control over his emotions during that time. This movie appears to be playing off of that scripting mix-up.

(2) How does Sulu (in ST:IV) have experience flying a helicopter, if there aren't helicopters on Earth in the 23rd century? Remember, holodecks didn't exist in the TOS era, except for that ONE (non-canon) incident in The Animated Series where the ship's rec-room goes haywire. And, let's not forget the near tornado-like conditions created by the shuttlecraft when landing on Earth in a subsequent movie. Remember that? So, considering those two things combined, PLUS modern man's love for preserving antique hardware (cars included), WHY THE #$(@*#&$(@*#&$ NOT have a car in the 23rd century?

(3) Laws of physics of a ROLLING car having a mass of 1 to 2 tons of mass versus the FRICTIVE GRINDING movement of some teen-aged brat, wearing high coefficient of friction clothing I might add, and having a mass of only 50kg, is it any wonder why the kid stops short of falling and not the car? Hello, it takes less force to stop a smaller mass!! Highschool physics anyone?

Now, that being said, I also think this movie will be a disaster. First, JJ claimed outright that the ship would be different, but still "be true to the original." I see none of the truth he speaks of. OK, mounting explicit photon torpedo tubes in the saucer section instead of the neck, I can agree with that. But what's up with the Cadillac finish? That's bull$#!+. No space agency ANYWHERE would do this. Matt Jefferies explicitly wanted a smooth exterior precisely because it would minimize the need for engineers to spacewalk if repairs to the ship were needed. That is VERY pragmatic, and NASA also tries as hard as economics will allow to engineer their vehicles the same way today. The laws of economics and human danger don't change in only 300 years!! And, for those who believe in them, have you EVER seen a non-Hollywood UFO with lots of external gunk on it? No; their envelops are always smooth.

Ya think there might be a reason for it?

I agree with the "perfume department" look of the bridge -- no way, no how, in any capacity, would even a non-military exploration organization invest in that kind of lighting power. If the bridge was going to be that white (as it was in ST:TMP, by the way), they'd use subdued lighting behind baffles mounted in the ceiling (like in ST:TMP and ST:TNG).

I mean, with all that explicit, highly specular lighting, you can bake a potato on photon radiation energy alone. Or boil an egg inside the shell. Good thing they have all that transparent aluminum ballistics shielding installed, conveniently coated with contemporary Federation-grade anti-glare technology, everywhere else on the bridge. And when it's done, there'll be two stand-up tables in which to eat. Convenient!

That being said, I *do* like the giant viewscreen. I *do* believe that this would appear in a real situation. Heck, we already do it today; every NASA HQ location on earth has multiple gigantic viewscreens. Heck, even telecom companies have network service departments with giant screens filled with status and sensory information.

Finally, the Enterprise was engineered in the Utopia fleetyards in orbit around Mars. It positively was not assembled on Earth. It *WAS* refit in orbit around Earth, but this is still many years too early.

As others have said, it's one thing to re-envision, to reboot, etc., but what irks me right off is that JJ and crew essentially lied to the viewership: they adamently insisted they respected the history, designs, and the other things that go into the story -- the very things that MAKE it a continuing space opera to begin with. And, they're throwing it all away.

That's fine, except insofar as they lied about it.

I'll continue to watch the movie, and will probably enjoy it overall based on the story's merits. But, like the Animated Series before it, I seriously doubt that this movie will ever be considered "canon."

@65: And people like you will continue to masturbate at home to pictures of your mom because you, unlike the rest of us "nerds," don't even leave the basement to shit or pee, let alone exercise discretion or appreciation for an artform they care deeply about.

Oooh 67.....guess I hit a nerve. I'm sure you will find someone to go with you....you seem sweet.

I love Star Trek, I'm excited about them bringing back TOS, I might be the person wearing the ears! I am going to reserve opinion until i see the movie, enjoy what I can, and dismiss what isn't spot on. After all, its just a movie.

Question.....What artform are you talking about? complaining? watching movies? blogging? And my mom is HOT!

Space the final brassiere.

Why did they have to have him as kirk? Everyone else looks alright, but him? Dawsons Crack.

Bizarre. People keep saying that the last good (awesome!) Star Trek movie was First Contact, while complaining all the while that ST11 looks like it'll be a melodramatic action-fest.

... First Contact was a melodramatic action-fest, and it kicked butt.

I don't see the problem here. It's TOS minus the old-school camp. Then add new (2008 contemporary) camp, action and a decent budget.

Anybody complaining about Spock obviously hasn't seen Zachary Quinto in Heroes. I think he'll do a masterful job.

That's definitely not as good as the original. >.
Spock isn't supposed to have any emotion. At all.
Really dims in comparison of quality.

I am going to go see it and then figure out if I like it or not. I don't really base my decision on whether I like the trailer or listen to you all rip it apart. Some of the pics I like actually was torn apart by critics and that is the reason I went. I seem to recall, now I will show my age, that when Star Wars (the first one, that would be eps 4)came out some critic called it "Gunsmoke" in space, Oh the good old days. So excuse me if I don't believe any of your thoughts about this movie.

Well well well, how's it feel trekkies? finally after years of lucas raping star wars do we get to see your beloved "trek" whitewashed and homogenized, plastered with breasts and testosterone. If Samuel Delaney was dead he'd be rolling in his big white bearded grave. Goodbye SciFi, it was nice knowing you.

Star Wars - Deceased (1999)
H2G2 - Deceased (2005)
Star Trek - Deceased (2009)

(i used a time machine.)

Just watched the official trailers.

OMFG

I love Lost and Spaced, but Simon Pegg is fucking abysmal and up his own ass these days and the film just looks like an embarrassing pile of shit.

@42...

I thought you were smart until I got to "attrack" and then the deal was sealed at "Shakespear"... I'm sure you're a very intelligent college freshman... but why doesn't anyone think that a little spelling lesson will enhance their argument... not just logic?

For those of you playing at home...
"attract" and "Shakespeare"

Don't all other versions of ST show the ship being assembled in space? If it were built on Earth... how would you get it into space? Can the Enterprise fly in atmosphere and gravity? I was fairly sure it couldn't...

Why Kirk wearing black, is he evil?

this version makes the characters fresh, and the effects the makers have at their disposal, i think, will make a good movie. this is an attempt to get new attention from people who weren't interested before. you can't keep making the same thing over and over again, and movie making also invloves advertising. the point of advertising is to capture peoples attention. im pretty sure if they made this movie utilizing the very flat, unimaginative and not to mention boring characters as the predecessors did, this would just be another failure.

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude...

you have GOT to be joking me. who the white-trash thought this was a good idea!?! granted, it is guaranteed to make loads of cash by exploiting the masses of trekkies dying for another one of these things... but SERIOUSLY. making yet another star trek movie with this 'pre-quel' grabage and ripping off the look of the 'transformers' movie with worse acting (don't tell me that seeing the kid from 'heroes' in nimoy's role doesn't piss you off).... at least have the decency to attempt another installation of the tv-series first. prepare us for the pain.

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

:) Check out this watch movie online page for more!