Calling all Trekkies...

I'm excited about this JJ Abrams prequel. Trailer #2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yrdEe95Hs0 Third trailer is supposed to start during Watchmen.

Just found out that Sulu is gonna be played by John Cho (Harold and Kumar)...cool

I'm a pretty big ST fan (grew up with OS, enjoyed Voyager, NextGen, even DS9). Never got into the Scott Bakula retro version. I hope this one has a decent plot because it already looks way overblown with FX, etc...I'd rather see a really stripped down dystopian version, rather than some sleek, glossy ubertech version.

is it true that Spok's mom is supposed to be a Vulcon (sp)? I remember seeing something on Yahoo about Trekkie nerds freaking out about that.

I'm pretty sure his mother was human and his father was Vulcan (spelled with an 'a'), and I am a nerd.

P.S. Spock

JJ Abrams

Lock it up Bob

i'm not a trekkie, or anything, but i'm looking forward to this. looks like an entertaining flick.

Is completely overrated.

Have a nice day...

yes and yes.

btw, I believe mom will be played by Wynona Ryder...talk about hurting for work

I wasn't a big fan of Cloverfield but Lost is one of the greatest shows EVER and Alias was good (minus script for pregnant lady)

Look as long as Kirk macks out with the black communications officer Jada will be seeing this.

I wouldn't give JJ too much credit for Lost. Besides directing the first 2 episodes I think he is basically an absent producer.

I was disappointed to hear that the female officer miniskirt uniform has been lengthened.

Abrams had a large influence over the creative concept and direction of the show. He and Damon Lindelof basically planned out the story arc for the whole series, and created the characters and mythology of it.

So I can blame him for retarded shit like smoke monsters and completely dropping plot points left and right. Yep, overrated fits perfectly. Oh and Cloverfield was pretty shitty.

Dammit they need to stay true to the original! Where's the artistic integrity?!?!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/revie...Trek-movie.html

i'm very excite!

Very glad to see this getting GREAT reviews.

I'm still shocked that Kirk is being played by this guy...

I was already hyped up about this movie. You're link only got me MORE stoked!

I disagree.

Cloverfield? Really great. Did exactly what it intended to do, and did it quite well.

Mission Impossible 3? Fantastic. Such an underrated movie.

Lost? Best show on TV right now.

I'm not a Trekkie at all, but I'm really excited for this movie.

I disagree...

Cloverfield, was an okay concept with mediocre execution.

MI3: I'll agree with you there, I enjoyed it.

Lost, most overrated show to ever hit TV.

This Star Trek looks pretty good though so I'll give it a shot despite his involvement, not because of it.

I wonder if they'll have Captain Pike in this movie.

ya i don't get the love for Cloverfied...it really didn't do it for me.

I like all mission impossible films but they're not something I'd go crazy to watch again.

Lost IS truly something special.

I agree with all of this. I love MI:3. I really like 2 as well. One was pretty bad.

2 was by far the worst of the MI films, it's really not even close. I just watched the ending bike sequence the other day, it was sooooo horrible it was beyond words.

Yeah, this isn't correct.


I counter your awful opinion with the entire chunnel scene from MI:1. [/argument]

People seriously think MI2 was better than the original?

While I love Star Trek, this franchise has become old and washed up. Every movie and TV episode was the same. It got really old after awhile. Im very happy that Star Trek is getting a refresher. I am very excited for this movie. The trailer is kick ass. Now I just hope this isn't one of those movies that has all of the good parts in the movie.

don't think so...when was the last time you saw a movie get 100% on Rotten Tomatoes

Wow

I wouldn't take that score as fact yet. RT has been weird lately. Most films the last couple weeks have been getting great reviews up until a week before they opened then they have gone downhill.

For example up until like the 24 of April Wolverine was at like 72% and now its at 37%. 17 Again and Obsessed took smaller but still similar tumbles in ratings as it got closer to opening day.

Star Trek still looks pretty cool though, but I just think it will settle somewhere in the mid to low 80s when its all said and done.

I've seen this many many times right about now in the films release. That 100% is only based on 17 reviews. When that hits 100 by it's 2nd week of release... it will not be 100%.

Still, it's obviously going to be good, and I'm looking forward to it.


For instance... this is one of the 'fresh' reviews:

"J.J. Abrams gives Kirk and Spock a new lease of life, but the plot is a mess. "



Not all critics would say this statement and give the movie a thumbs up.

my mom saw it last night. said it was pretty epic.

It's now at 94% with 67 reviews. Very promising.

Same score on metacritic, though with fewer reviews. All the complaints I've seen look pretty minor.

that's awesome.

Just bought my tickets for Friday night, after explaining to my wife the history of the Star Trek franchise.

A couple Star Trek hating people I know went to see it and they said it was one of the best movies they have seen in quite sometime.

Looks like I am going to be wrong. Its still at 94% after 111 reviews.

You're speaking out of school. The movie hasn't even opened yet. Wait until after it's 2nd weekend of release that then look at the score.

I'm not sure if what I'm going to talk about is really a spoiler or not, but better safe than sorry..


First off, I want to go on record and say that I'm not a trekkie/trekker/what ever the **** they are called. I think the original series has an important place in television history, and our cultural history, really. I used to watch the Next generation as a kid, but I think it's insufferable now. I've seen some of the movies, and think they are okay. You know what you're going to get with them. Space battles and overacting. This movie is better than most (all) of the previous ones, but there are 2 things that annoy me about it. The first is all of the annoying little gags the movie has to reference the characters, to make you sure to notice that hey, kirk is meeting this character or that character for the first time. I'm sure those things are nods to the trekkie nerd, but each one of those moments I think brings the story to a crashing halt, even if for a few moments. The second, and for me larger issue I have with the movie, is how film makers and writers feel it necessary to have "continuity" in the story line. What I mean is, that they feel it's necessary to explain where a story fits in the larger Star trek universe. This is a problem that plagues comic books, and you have all these crazy and convoluted and terrible story lines, trying to explain why person X is alive, or why person Y appears to be 25 years old, or why they are rebooting the whole universe. Specifically to this movie, I think every scene with Leonard Nemoy is terrible, I see no reason to have him at all, and no reason to have this whole over arching plot line about the alternate universe, or why a geriatric politician would be on a solo scientific mission to save romoulus. You don't need any of that shit, you could have just had any vulcan or other star fleet person be the ones to failed to have saved romulous. The only reason you need Nemoy, and the whole alternate universe sub plot is to appease fan boys who would screech " but Kirk's father never died!! Vulcan was never destroyed! What's going on here!!". Why even bother with that shit? Why even bother to make ridiculous pseudo-scientific explanations about why the continuity doesn't match. If you have a story, just tell the god damn story, don't worry if it matches up with all the back ground garbage source materials.


I think the characters of Kirk and Spook have moved beyond their Nemoy and Shatner origins.. they are larger than mere characters anymore. They are achetypes. They are like Superman or batman or james bond. You can just tell stories with them, you can play around with the archetypes in interesting ways, turn them on their ears if you want to. You don't need to be religiously worried about making sure the story "makes sense" in connection with all of the other star trek material. I think the james bond series gets this the best. They don't try and have an over arching story line or continuity. Other than a couple movies, all bond movies are independant of each other, and each man who plays bond owes nothing to the previous one's. That way, you can always re-invent bond, always have your own twists, your own interpretations of the character while staying within the general archetype. I would have liked to have seen this star trek movie do that, instead of wasting so much time doing a corny origin story. They are obviously re-booting star trek with a new crew, playing the old characters.. so just do it. DOn't bother with Nemoy, don't bother with trying to place it inside of some dumb fictional time line. Just tell your story.


Also, Orura ( SP?) is really, really hot.

Main reason I want to go.

you won't be disappointed. Unless you were expecting her to do oral or something.

Ok, I saw it tonight and I can't say much since BigD pretty much said almost exactly what I would have said. Ok, I guess I can add a couple things.

The things I have to say are my complaints, but I do think it is definitely the best Trek movie of all of them, if only for the fact that it doesn't suck, and I definitely enjoyed it.


I think the movie is more about the original tv series than it is about what the tv series was about. That's partly what is so annoying about all the self--references, like when each character says his "signature line". I would have preferred to cut all of that crap out. Oh man Nimoy was excruciating. If you have to have him in make a brief cameo, OK. But the role he played was way too much especially the very end. I get it, we are saying goodbye to him, but thats the kind of stuff that doesn't make sense in the context of the movie and only makes sense as an homage to the series.

Chekov was absolutely ridiculous.

I thought Kirk & Spock were done really well and were interesting treatments of those characters. The rest of them were just caricatures, which was disappointing. Bones for instance could have been explored more but instead came off as just an impersonation of Deforest Kelley.

I am bit annoyed that they destroyed Vulcan for some reason.

This is exactly right, and perfectly said " golf clap". I do have to say, that I really enjoyed the Kirk and Spock characters tremendously, and thought they were by far the best part of the movie. I'm particularly impressed with Kirk. It would have been very easy to take the route taken by a few of the other characters and just have done a shatner impression. But he really made the character his own, and the character of Kirk is more like Han Solo than it is Shatner's kirk, which is not a bad thing by the way. It's a very, very good thing.

Spoilers suck...

I agree. I've never really seen anything Star Trek before, but after seeing this movie, I sort of get why people would be so into it. I get why people would feel giddy when they hear the name Spock, or see someone with long ears or when they they do that signature hand thing.

I thought the movie itself was good, not great, but it did many things very well. It was a movie about space exploration, but it felt realistic and tangible. And, again, Kirk and Spock as characters were so well done that I find myself wanting to see more of them. I guess that's the point. This movie did a great job setting up the world and characters. Hopefully, if there's a sequel, it'll be The Dark Knight to this movie's Batman Begins.

So do the odds say that John Cho goes gay soon after assuming the role of Sulu?