Nov 12 2008'Star Trek' Enterprise: Here It Is

first

HA I DID IT.

and fuck this stupid reboot piece of trash. who the hell does jj abrams think he is throwing away 30 years (our time) and 200+ years (trek time) of canon just so he can make the space exploring equivalent of the new Indiana jones movie.

not so cool.

Hopefully this will keep the trek line going down the tubes, I'm so tired of that and Star Wars already.

It's good, but not steam trek good ('tube steam trek).

ahh quit yer bitchin y'all.

It's a movie, you already hate it and it may be better than the original. Look at the new Bonds.

@2
Right on.

Death to JJ Abrams. And then Stuey.

Seriously people take it for what it is. Just a film that happens to be star trek. Its a new take on it and thats the end of it. I understand its hard to not get annoyed being a trek fan myself, but i dunno i think it looks pretty cool. I mean its not a million miles away from the original design. Unlike the bridge, but nevermind. Im still up for this flick.

FAKE!!!!

lol.... kidding. We all know that Star Trek is real.

Only Trekkies will hate on it but they will hate on every aspect of the remake because...you guessed it, its not the original.

Looks pretty cool to me and the film will be better than any of the last 4-5 treks that were made(Khan rocked of course). But Insurrection?....I mean someone gave that film the greenlight, really? Fuckin Trekkies.

I don't mind so much if they mess with e bridge interior.
Interiors can be remodelled and redecorated over time.
The Enterprise however is iconic. You don't change it because you can.
you can brighten the colours or add shading to the skin like they did in ds9
but you don't mess with the shape. It's history. It's legend.
the movie enterprise (I-VI) looks 10 times better than the TOS Enterprise
but no one has the right to change the TOS enterprise even if it makes it look "cooler". You can't change history.

Doesn't look as bad as I figured it would.

Anybody who thinks this is okay clearly has no fucking idea what they're talking about. The franchise itself is very vulnerable right now and may well not be able to survive this megalomaniacal douchebag. This self-important jackass is making a mockery of a veritable institution of entertainment and science fiction that is built in large part on the notion of continuity. He ought to be flogged. I'm talking Edward I, spool his fucking guts out tortured for this.

the warp engines remind me of a '59 impala......

@Uncle Eccoli

Get over yourself man. You should read your post and make sure you aren't talking about yourself.

This movie will be great. JJ is not taking it lightly and Newsflash folks... TREK IS DYING. Sure, there are a couple thousand convention goers but come on! Unless you are a pointy ear wearingtrekkie, Trek for the most part has lost all relevancy - maybe this will bring it back. i hope it does.

Oh, I'm sure. Thanks, though.

Josh, your assertion that the movie will be great carries no more weight than mine that it will be disastrous, which is what worries me. Abrams' works to date can best be described as masturbatory. Given that he is wholly uninitiated vis a vis the ST universe and that he seems to have no problem with violating well-established canon, I think my concerns are justified. We agree that Trek is dying - that's my point, really. It kills me to see this fuck reaching back for the death blow. Material released to date demonstrates that Abrams IS taking it lightly - it's himself that he's taking seriously. If only it were the other way around...
The challenge for recent producers/directors/etc. has been to satisfy the hard core followers while simultaneously making ST accessible to casual fans and first-timers. Abrams is not the man for that.

Re: The Turtle Blimp

Why would their logo be on the blimp? Were they aware that they were a cartoon series or was that their official corporate logo? How would they have a blimp in the first place? The Turtle Van is like....remotely plausible. But a giant blimp with their group name on it? That doesn't make any practical or strategic sense.

@17
You can't have a blimp without a logo. The Hindenburg had the swastika, the Goodyear blimp's got that Mercury's foot... I bet the Turtles came up with the logo just so they could have a blimp.

I'm just going to come out and say it: this version of the Enterprise is fugly. In fact, let's just call it the "USS Fugly" from here on out.

I hate Star Trek. I don't think the WB movie version of Star Trek is going to change that. You have to play to the fans on this one.

@6

Couldn't agree more...

I agree with Tetrashiva. Though Trek breifly crawled out of the box and got some pop culture acceptance in the 90s, the 90s pretty much sucked, didn't they? I mean, who wants to remember that! And Trek totally pissed away that support in the late 90s and early 00s with shows that not even the hardcore fans could stand.

At the end of the day 90-95% of you haters out there will go and see it and some of you may even enjoy it. I've liked Star Trek my whole life and i think that design its ok. As said before, its not a million miles away. Im not saying this movie isnt going to suck. That ship is apart of history. So take it for what it is. A reboot of sort, a Casino Royale but for Star Trek. Is it a good thing? Who knows.

I think the best part of this whole remake business is watching all the Trek nerds collectively shit themselves.

I don't think this looks too bad, and I'll reserve my judgments until AFTER I watch the movie, as I'm sure all the normal, well adjusted folks will, too.

@ Red Hood:
"Haters?" What are you, like twelve?
I can't speak for anyone else, but as for me: I have no interest in seeing this movie. The Trek movies were inconsistent at best for most of their run (#1, #3, #5, #7, #8, #9, # 10 - all awful. Not a good average!). The TV shows long since lost my interest because they kept telling the same six stories over and over and over again, and if an SF show doesn't have any imagination, what's the point?
Bottom line: This movie is all about re-establishing a merchandising brand, and not about imaginative storytelling.
So why should I - or anyone else - bother? Trek died because it ran itself in to the ground like a decade or more ago and then burried itself. I don't see Mister Abrams changing that.

Why don't all you "it's just a movie" guys just STFU and GTFO. Of course it's a movie. We come here because we're movie fans and like to opine about movie news. This is a site for movie fans (duh). We don't need you here working out your hall monitor issues here. Go kick your dog or beat your kids if you want to be in charge.

Do you go to restaurants and berate people for paying so much attention to the food?

And yeah, it's UGLY. And if you don't think trek fans have reason to be afraid of Abrams wandering in and crapping on something people love from their childhood just read his script for a Superman movie.

http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Superman(JJAbrams).pdf

tetrashiva is completely right. This is going to be "the WB movie version of Star Trek".

@ Mr. BoJangles

You're taking issue with the fact i said "haters"? Seriously?...Seriously?
Treks dead and everyone should just get get over it, thats basically what you're saying. I mean i respect your views, i do. I don't agree, i believe that it maybe Treks last chance.
But in all seriousness, and i mean this....really.
Next time i'll try, dislikers, negative people or something. Any suggestions would be helpful. I really dont want to come off as sounding like...i'm twelve?