Star Trek XI - Trailer #3

[The Seeker]

Yeah, I agree with stingerhs. I am not a Trek fan. Saw Generations and First Contact. Thought they were good. Never really liked the pieces of the others I saw. My point is I never even liked Star Trek, and I'm really excited about this one. Even if you took out the title it looks like d@mn good sci-fi. I'm gonna give it a chance.

 

Fanboys may commence boycotting sight unseen now.

[Tommycat]

jeez, its weird to see something as simple as a trailer get ripped apart by a bunch of whiny fanboys.

 

being a "average joe", i rather enjoyed the trailer, and i'll be looking forward to the movie when it comes out.

Ahem... How quickly we forget.

As proof I present: OVERSIZED HILTS

Now, I know, it's not as minor as replacing an established era's ship with a completely different ship.

How about the whole "Han shot first" debate?

That was just changing one minor thing in a movie.

What would people say if Star Wars replaced the lightsaber with heated metal swords? would the fans of SW be happy? What about if they replaced C3PO with Asimo? What if they replaced Darth Vader with a CGI character and ditched James Earl Jones. What if they redesigned the Falcon?

 

Might want to put yourself in another's shoes.

[stingerhs]

see, that's just the problem: i really don't care about either series that much. if they want to change something for a sensible reason, fine. let them change it. what i care about is that a good movie gets made and not one that caters to every fanboys' dream.

 

something to think about: what they're trying to do is to revive the series at the box office. if they can successfully reboot the series (a la Batman and James Bond), then they can line up at least two sequels. more sequels = more money. as such, its in their best interests to make a good movie and not necessarily one that caters exclusively to the fanboys. granted, its also in their best interests to make a movie that the fanboys will enjoy as well, but i don't see the point in sweating out every little detail and neither will anybody else.

[SW01]

if they want to change something for a sensible reason, fine. let them change it.

 

Fine and fair enough, but what purpose is served by cosmetic alteration of one the most recognisable symbols of the series, being the Enterprise? Sure the old model wouldn't fit with modern effects, but why wouldn't a new rendering of the old shape?

 

I haven't heard many complaints about the actual plot, the issues I have seen (and to an extent share) are the now confused continuity of the Enterprise, Pike and Kirk, the design of the ship, and - as Astor pointed out - other recognisable props, like the phaser pistol. The trailers look incredible, the plot seems interesting, but those flaws are highly irritating. I do not see what violence would have been done to the plotline if Kirk fires the established phaser rather than a superfluous new design, or why the undoubted nostalgia of watching the old and proper USS Enterprise would be detrimental. There is little point in alienating the established fanbase with such things in the hopes of drawing in new ones...but then that seems to be the direction we're going with Sci-Fi genres at the moment *glares at TOR artwork*...

[Astrotoy7]

... There is little point....

 

I'd venture to say there is a big point! The Trek that started with Rodenberry and ended with Berman etc is plain dead Paramount know they are sitting on a huge franchise, with an established fanbase, but they cannot re-do it the way it was done. It is not suprising that they went with Abrams, with proven sucesses on the small and big screen.

 

I often wonder how much thought vehement fanboys place into how truly and staggeringly difficult and expensive it is to see through a major project like this. None of the Trek films were mind piercingly cerebral. It is silly to entertain the thought, or use as basis of critique, that the Abrams effort will be substandard because it wont be a mind-bender.

 

To me at least, the reimagining of the ships/costumes etc of the era are long overdue. Had Roddenberry had todays film making tools back in the 60s, the (cheap plastic) look people cling so strongly too woould likely be very different

 

I wasnt alive back in 65, but I can imagine looking at the Trek set would have been impressive and futuristic. To be able to match this for a contemporary audience, the look needs to evolve to look 'impressive and futuristic' by todays standards. By the time Sulu ended up on the Excelsior etc, ships and costumes had evolved markedly. In the scheme of things it wasnt a massive oeriod of time ahead from the original series.

 

Why didnt anyone get mad at Gene for not sticking to tupperware sets then ?? Using those sets and designs looked new and modern for the era those films were made in. This is no different.

 

mtfbwya

[Astor]

The first screening of Star Trek XI in Austin has been met with a warm reception.

 

Story.

 

Of course, we all won't know for another month or so...

[Titanius Anglesmith]

Some relatively new clips, if anyone is interested -

 

Kirk/Uhura

 

Kirk/McCoy

 

Kirk/Spock/Scotty

[Astor]

Digging this up again, i'm afraid...

 

I've just watched a special about Trex XI on TV - If I was sceptical before, I'm won over now, if only for seeing Karl Urban's excellent portrayal of Bones.

 

If you don't believe me, watch this.

 

It's like Bones never left.

 

EDIT: It appears it's the same clip Schmorgy posted. Oh well.

[jrrtoken]

Hm, he sounds as surly as ever.