Video: New “Star Trek” trailer as discouraging as old “Star Trek” trailer
posted at 3:45 pm on March 9, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
And that old “Star Trek” trailer was darned discouraging. I was hoping to revisit my post about it and declare that I take it all back, but nope: This still looks like “Starship Troopers” with Spock and the Enterprise tossed in. J.J. Abrams might as well do the same thing for “Star Wars” next. Take a generic space opera plot, load it up with master F/X, and plop down Chewbacca and the Millennium Falcon in the middle of it. Starring James Franco as a new, broodier Luke and Megan Fox as a bombshell-ified Leia. What could go wrong?
Update: They really nailed the Spock eyebrows, though, didn’t they? Kudos.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
The scooby doo gang flies a starship?
lorien1973 on March 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Bingo.
Allahpundit on March 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM
But the Terminator trailer looks awesome. So we have that going for us, which is sweet.
albo on March 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Ah, cheer up Allah and have some Obama Sushi.
carbon_footprint on March 9, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Obama will play Spock, but they’ll have to cgi smaller ears on him.
marklmail on March 9, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Rats! I thought Allah had been relegated to Quote of the Day posts. Sigh… I guess he has Star Trek posts too.
dtestard on March 9, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Here’s my comments from Ace’s page:
“Star Trek: Teen Angst — IN SPACE!”
“It also follows the brilliant trailer format: All action movie trailers must include the following:
Explosions
A quick flash of a sex scene or nudity. (Nudity of the upper back will suffice to get most teenagers to go see it. Thrusting sexually, and man on woman action, as is present in this trailer, is like a gold mine for nerds)
Angsty, angry looks
fighting
more explosions
possibly a girl in a bikini, or tight outfit, smiling or looking sexy
gunfire
explosions
classical music
some semblence of storyline. If it is a re-imagining, there must, MUST, be an origin story. “
jimmy the notable on March 9, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Maybe some plot continuity to the original and later TV series would be nice too JJ.
davek70 on March 9, 2009 at 3:50 PM
I’d kind of like the idea of Megan Fox as Leia…
trigon on March 9, 2009 at 3:51 PM
AP doesn’t like something?
jacrews on March 9, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Wouldn’t Franco play Solo?
Seriously, don’t let this idea out; Lucas might start tinkering again.
Karl on March 9, 2009 at 3:52 PM
It is almost, if not actually, impossible to harmonize the Star Trek canon. It would take a battalion of Talmudic scholars to even try, and I don’t know that they could pull it off.
DRPrice on March 9, 2009 at 3:52 PM
The new trailer did nothing for me. I still think the idea of casting new actors in roles made iconic by the original cast members for 25 years(28 if you count Star Dreck: Degenerations) is insane.
Doughboy on March 9, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Dawson’s Trek.
Ugh.
MadisonConservative on March 9, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Starship Troopers? mmmmm shower scene…
Otis B on March 9, 2009 at 3:53 PM
You may pan it all you want, AP, but you know you’re going to be there that Friday, with your tricorder and Spock ears on.
Nethicus on March 9, 2009 at 3:54 PM
As to the trailer, I dunno. Seems more Michael Bay than JJ Abrams. Which is good if you like lots and lots of explosions. Which, admittedly, I do. Not so good if you like plot and characterization, which, admittedly, I do.
All of which means I’ll be in the theatre for the opening weekend.
DRPrice on March 9, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Huh. anti-Allah-snark has made its way into the non-political threads as well. Great.
I’m a bit ‘meh’ on Star Trek after that trailer. I’m really looking forward to “Public Enemies.” Old-time gangsters as directed by Michael Mann? Count me in.
Slublog on March 9, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Looks horrible…wont be seeing that boring nonsense.
anybody seen watchman yet? The comic book thingy ruled.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 3:55 PM
All I can say is, thank God for free online streaming.
TheSitRep on March 9, 2009 at 3:55 PM
I’ll see it. Opening night (maybe even midnight showing on Thursday) at the IMAX.
But, in my mind, it’s just a new sci-fi movie called Star Trek not Star Trek.
Because if I try to fit this to the original I’ll hate it. I already see way too much wrong with character interpretations.
(IE – Jim Kirk was a “walking stack of books with legs in the Academy” not a fast drinking womanizer punk…)
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I know, quite a shocker… /sarc
Would be much easier to compile a list of what he does like: Atheism. Kirsten Powers. ?
Eh, can’t think of anything else.
Norwegian on March 9, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I’m not real nuts about her these days either.
Allahpundit on March 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM
?
Share?
carbon_footprint on March 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Just a little nuts. :)
Nethicus on March 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Yes, yes and yes.
warrenmr on March 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Anything Star Trek without hyper sexual green chicks is dead to elgeneralisimo…
elgeneralisimo on March 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM
I’ve gotten to the point where I truly believe Michael Mann can do no wrong. That just looks fantastic.
MadisonConservative on March 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
That’s how I usually handle things of this nature as well.
It looks like a fun, action sci-fi movie and I’ll probably enjoy it…as long as I don’t think of it as a Star Trek movie. If I try to fit it in the canon and look at these people as the precursors of the characters that I know and love, I’ll go crazy.
I can’t remember which movie it was, but, there was another movie I saw recently that was a great movie but should have been it’s own movie rather than being turned into a movie from a particular popular series….I wish I could remember which movie it was….guess it wasn’t that memorable (though I did enjoy it as long as I considered it as an individual movie).
JadeNYU on March 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Meh. There’s some good stuff there but it’s overrun with a lot of lame acting/bad pacing. It’s a character driven movie (not really an action flick) and most of the characterization is painfully wooden. It’s not a bad movie but it’s not something I want to purchase on DVD either.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
I think Star Trek has sucked since the beginning of the first TV show with maybe 10 good minutes in the Khan movie. The rest is booooooring and stupid.
Anybody seen Watchman? Its on IMAX and the book ruled (repeat question, sorry)
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
With time travel and parallel universes, you can do anything.
zmdavid on March 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM
Yeah, that caption photo really made him look like a young Nimoy in ears.
Maybe he could play the part of a Feringi
IrishEyes on March 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I don’t know what everyone is on about. The trailer looks fine to me.
Does that mean it’s a good movie? No. Does it mean it’s a bad movie? No.
Reserving judgment until the release.
BierManVA on March 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM
Hey Skywise, did you read the book first or did you go in with no idea of the story???
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
What bugs me about the trailer is that it seems to say that the only reason Kirk is captain of a starship is because his dad was really good at it once, and he was in the right place at the right time and hey, isn’t it just so cool to watch him sit in that iconic chair?
I’m hoping the movie proves me wrong.
Slublog on March 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Having been an official ‘Trekker‘ since before ANY of the intended viewer were born, I can honestly say this movie will set the entire Franchise back at least 20 years. For example:
1. Diane Duane’s George Kirk actually commanded the Enterprise before commissioning.
2. The ST:TOS Enterprise bridge during Jeffery Pike’s command was far smaller and darker than what we see in the trailer. Jeffery Pike’s Enterprise was set in the past history.
3. James T. Kirk assumed command of the Enterprise as a full Captain not a mid-shipman as alluded to in the trailer.
As for allusions to Starship Troopers – THAT movie was a dud before it was released and STILL makes Heinlein spin in his grave. Roddenberry would be spinning too if he weren’t weightless and consisted of ash.
I’ll wait for the DVD to come out during a Ronco break.
SeniorD on March 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Here Here.
portlandon on March 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Frankly, having all the characters conveniently appear together as yutes diminishes them, not enhances them.
And they’re further ruining Kirk as a character (though that’s been going on a long, long time).
Dumb decisions all the way around, it looks like.
snickelfritz on March 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Either?
You having some kind of reckoning lately?
MadisonConservative on March 9, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Wrath of Khan is a great movie. Not a great Star Trek movie, mind you. But a great film period. Search For Spock and The Voyage Home were inferior but still decent entries and made a nice trilogy.
And while The Final Frontier was a disaster, The Undiscovered Country was a solid rebound and a worthy finale for the original crew.
Doughboy on March 9, 2009 at 4:05 PM
Michelle Obama stars as Uhura in the episode “She’s smuggling a Tribble”
marklmail on March 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Um, I’d watch this…
Kensington on March 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
The trailer does nothing for me. But I’ll probably still watch it . . . and then dismiss it as just another odd numbered film.
Star Trek needs a shot in the arm, but unlike Batman, a reboot isn’t the way to do it. It makes much more sense to jump ahead about a hundred years.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
*Yawn*
What’s Megyn Kelly up to today?
DamnYankee on March 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
JJ Abrams knows elgeneralisimo. The movie will supposedly have one.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Hey Allah, don’t go bashing Starship Troopers. It was bad in a good fun way.
Anyway, in a world where I have to live under military dictatorship for unisex showers, where can I sign up?
Lance Murdock on March 9, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Welcome to Hollywood! Re-hash old ideas -check- Create un-imaginative dialogue -check- Eye Candy -Check- Explosions and loud bangs -check- Advertising that gives away the whole storyline -Check-
Well done here.. looks like another summer blockbuster. Next… GI Joe. (Yes, they are really coming out with a GI Joe movie)
Luckedout on March 9, 2009 at 4:07 PM
That Miami Vice movie was pretty lame.
trubble on March 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM
The antagonist is a time traveler, so that makes it automatically bad.
Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I thought Starship Troopers was good. Ridiculous, but good.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I’m not sure what the rest of you were expecting, but this trailer is pretty much what I figured the movie would be. It’s Abrams. Love stories, high drama, everything larger than life…
The original show was pure camp, but the SciFi nerds that love it don’t necessarily want that for a big screen adaptation, and the Star Trek films haven’t disappointed in that respect.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 4:10 PM
True, but to paraphrase Callahan, “trailer editors could sell a ketchup Popsicle to a woman wearing white gloves.”
darclon on March 9, 2009 at 4:10 PM
I guess oddballs just don’t get the new Star Trek.
///
~B
Brian on March 9, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Damn guys. Obama is not the end of the world (yet). No need to take it out on Star Trek.
As a conservative, I will always appreciate that in ST the enemy is usually humanoid (not PC) and MUST get his ass kicked. Don’t spare the phasers and torpedoes!
I do object to the tattooed human enemy in rags? A terrorist? Disenfranchised minority driven to genocide by the elite Earthlings? We’ll see.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:10 PM
I think Geithner should chuck Treasury and get a job as a Vulcan….doesn’t he look a little Spock-y (though not particularly logical)?
clnurnberg on March 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM
I read the comics as they came out (still have the originals), but haven’t re-read them for at least 10 years.
I remembered the basic plot but the details had faded.
I don’t dislike the movie because it’s not the comic book, (I actually liked the new ending over the Squid and liked that they kept putting Rorsharch out in the crowds in broad daylight.) Snyder LOVES the book and it shows but the execution doesn’t work for me.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:13 PM
I have to respectfully disagree with most of the comments here. As a fan who has been watching TOS his entire life (and who’s Mom was part of the original letter-writing campaign) I am absolutely psyched to see this movie. Leonard Nemoy has even spoken highly of it (he has a cameo, he would only do it if he loved the script, and it’s not like he needs the money).
TOS’s all-praised and untouchable cannon was a confusing mess of contradictory throw-away lines at best (the best example of that is some commadore telling Kirk that he and Pike are “about the same age.” Pike commanded the Enterprise 15 years earlier than Kirk, and Kirk was in his mid-30’s at the time the line was spoken. You do the math). If this reboot (and that’s what it is, no matter what way you slice it) can clean some of that up, all the better.
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 4:13 PM
How is that any different from 6 different actors playing James Bond?
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
That’s what I thought, leaving the theater.
Then I watched it again. I believe a second watch is necessary. It’s not all I wanted it to be, and Tubbs is more a supporting character than co-star, but it really grew on me.
MadisonConservative on March 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Looks highly entertaining.
I’m there. If only to hear the soundtrack.
Hoodlumman on March 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Given the hype about Watchmen, a disturbing commie rag when I first red it – I am gonna pay for this one.
Also given the straining to find a “conservative” theme in Dark Knight – I anticipate Star Trek conservative themes…
Sacrifice. Risk. Good over Evil. Self reliance. Hot babes.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Damn guys. Obama is not the end of the world (yet). No need to take it out on Star Trek.
As a conservative, I will always appreciate that in ST the enemy is usually humanoid (not PC) and MUST get his ass kicked. Don’t spare the phasers and torpedoes!
I do object to the tattooed human enemy in rags? A terrorist? Disenfranchised minority driven to genocide by the elite Earthlings? We’ll see.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Who’s to say he doesn’t start as a fast drinking womanizer punk, and then become a “walking stack of books with legs” when he gets to the Academy?
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 4:17 PM
*Imagines Megan Fox in the bikini*
[Jayne]I’ll be in my bunk.[/Jayne]
Rogue on March 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Better yet, Geithner should probably spend a few (or several) months on Ferenginar. Those Ferengi will whip him into shape.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 4:20 PM
They got lucky with the choice for Spock. I am impressed with this guy for Kirk. Good looking, in an odd way – just like Shatner. I hope they show him getting hit in the head to explain the “unique” speech pattern Shatner pioneered.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Cannot wait! There was only ever one Star Trek and that was the originals. It would be great if they could redo them with some good computer generated graphics to replace the old stuff. I few of the shows were goofy,, but Capt Kirk was the man!
JellyToast on March 9, 2009 at 4:22 PM
It’s not a problem of canon so much as a redefinition of the character of Kirk for me. In the series Kirk was an academic first whose one great love was to explore the stars (ultimate freedom) and got his command through work and determination (and a little bit of creative “cheating”) Now Kirk is a troubled youth who only needed a goal in life and a kick in the pants to uncover the leader within and a lucky shot at the death of his captain to get a starship to get the gang together (including Chekov!) to take a cruise in the Mystery Machine.
Now, admittedly that’s just from the trailers. I could be wrong. But that’s my take on it.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Dude, they are massing for an invasion as we speak.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:23 PM
I don’t mind reboots, but what irritates me about these reboot movies is plot continuity and genere. That’s why I’m glad there are no plans now to remake such shows as Magnum PI and Dallas. Rumors were that they were going to make movies of them into dramadies (I guess Magnum was kind of a dramedy at times) and ruin the entire premise of the original show. Kind of like they did w/ Starky and Hutch. Charlie’s Angels was pretty bad too in that respect.
With Abrams, I was very disappointed that he did not adhere to more of the original series(s) and movies continuity. I guess he’s more concerned about younger viewers who have not seen Star Trek before. So if that’s the case, just substitute different characters and name it something else.
davek70 on March 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM
It looks awesome to me…if a little action, somes explosions and eye candy reinvigorates the franchise then lock on photon torpedoes baby!
crazywater on March 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM
I was impressed with his acting in “Bottle Shock.” I haven’t really seen enough of any dialogue from this movie to rate whether they nailed their characters, though.
Slublog on March 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM
No link to Tiberius cologne?
Leopold Stotch on March 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM
Ah but you are assuming he is going to stay in command. The bureaucrats at Star Fleet will have something to say about that.
All we know is that Spock served with Pike, before Kirk was “Captain”. We also know that Kirk “got” the Enterprise as a major promotion – thus the privilege of picking his crew.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM
From old-school Campy to new-school Cheezy.
Sigh.
But the graphics look cool, which is what most people will be paying to see anyway.
Me? Unless I have a date and need something to do, I’ll probly wait till it comes out on video later in the year.
Lawrence on March 9, 2009 at 4:28 PM
I admit I am avoiding some of the details/spoilers. Kirk takes over after the loss of the captain. Is Pike supposed to in command out of space dock?
That don’t seem right.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:29 PM
DUDE GET OVER YOUR NERD SELF!
Redglen on March 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM
You’re just ticked because Kirk was a better Captain than Picard could ever hope to be.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Let me get this straight–you are afraid a Star Trek Movie might be too soap operaish? Or maybe not realistic enough? I see. That is like saying you are afraid a Bat Man movie might be campy. This is escapism man. It isn’t real.
Are you afraid the special effects might look like a little toy space ship surrounded by sound stage stars…and a voice saying dramatically, “….where no man has gone before!….”
Please don’t take your entertainment so seriously! Get some pop corn have fun. (Pop it at home and save some money, this is a recession!)
petunia on March 9, 2009 at 4:32 PM
On that we agree!
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM
I’ll admit that I’m no Star Trek nerd, but what are you seeing in the trailer that tells you he isn’t?
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM
I am too… I’m only going by what’s in the trailers so I’m speculating and could be wildly wrong.
I also don’t mind changes to canon. I’m more worried that they’re going to infuse Star Trek with Gen-X angst for a Gen-Y audience and we’ll be left with Twilight Trek.
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:35 PM
I’m with crazy_legs on this one. The much-vaunted Trek “canon” was more buck-shot than bullet, with contradictions all over the place. Any devoted fan learned to live with it, or else bathe in antacid on a nightly basis.
As I understand it, this new movie contains the logical seeds for any subsequent deviations from earlier arcs (yes, it involves time travel. Sigh.). This at least is a respectful nod to those who will go apoplectic over every inconsistency, and I’ll grant it…so long as it occurs within a good movie.
There’s a lot of mayhem and flashy-bangy in the trailer, which is fine; Trek was originally painted on a modest canvas more for budgetary reasons than anything else. If this movie should go for a more “epic” scope, and show much of what was hinted at/took place off-screen in TOS, then so much the better. I don’t mind the eye candy, so long as what’s behind the eyes gets fed, too.
I, for one, will be there.
Noocyte on March 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
What I am afraid of is the Obama references.
Hate to bring you down…
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Truth.
Lawrence on March 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
I hear there’s a scene where Spock is caught in the closet with a tribble… can this be true?
maintenanceman on March 9, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Eh, two completely different captains with completely different styles.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 4:38 PM
What? But is ship is so wack, and rusty!
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:38 PM
I thought Starship Troopers was good. Ridiculous, but good.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I’m with you on that one Wall… a sequel would have been nice, they were setting it up great at the end with Doogy turning into a kind of Dr. Mengele, etc…
shame that only films with ridiculously large b.o. get sequels (often terrible ones ) made, i.e. WHERE IS MY MASTER AND COMMANDER 2!???!
max1 on March 9, 2009 at 4:39 PM
“No, the Enterprise is a beautiful lady and we love her!”
:)
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:39 PM
The real shame is that if you rewrote the script and deleted the Star Trek references, it looks like it might be a good movie. Too bad Hollyweird won’t do original sci-fi unless it matches leftist “Utopia” belief system.
darktood on March 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Norman, coordinate!
Noocyte on March 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Sorry, I was making a sarcastic super-nerd quip in a childish put down attempt to being called a super-nerd.
…
Kirk was better though :)
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Oh please! If Khan came aboard Picard’s ship, Picard would have had the common sense to restrict what technical manuals he would’ve been allowed to review.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 4:42 PM
McCoy – “Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence”. Sound like a lefty to me.
What happened to “it is full of stars”.
Guess that will be after Obama is President of the Federation.
Agrippa2k on March 9, 2009 at 4:46 PM
The problem has been fans who took cannon as God’s Own Truth. Look at how some of them tied themselves up in knots to try and explain how Kahn could have “never forgotten Checkov’s face” instead of just going with it for entertainment’s sake.
It’s because of those annoyingly apoplectic fans that we have a time travel plot in the first place. They howled bloody murder when they first heard about the reboot (as if some jack-booted Paramount secret police were going to confiscate their DVD’s in the middle of the night). The time travel angle and “honoring all that came before” is an attempt to placate them (the one group who will never be satisfied). Personally, if I were JJ Abrams, I’d have just done a straight-up reboot and let the chips fall where they may, but I’ve got to give him credit for at least trying to keep the “get a life” crew happy.
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM
I thought that, unlike the original Star Trek, it actually looked entertaining. Can’t wait.
It's Vintage, Duh on March 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Folks, the movie looks incredible and will probably outshine any ST movie so far. Abrhams is not hindered by all the prior ST myth, but uses it like many other current filmmakers to build on by adding layers of human emotion and small details.
We’ll be fine. It is, after all, just a movie.
klickink.wordpress.com on March 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »