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: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Allah, you are hopeless. What’s the matter, the new Star Trek doesn’t look communist enough for you? I bet you’re a ST:TNG fan.
joe_doufu on March 9, 2009 at 4:50 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”
JFC – the line adds to the challenges of space exploration not to mention an excellent description of space.
Not to mention the plot of film.
GFG!
klickink.wordpress.com on March 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
The most important point that can be made in this discussion is that Star Wars kicks ass all over Star Trek nerdom.
And, please, dont respond back with any eewok or Jar Jar Binks smack. Most of Star Trek has been embarrassing.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Whenever I see this, it always reminds me of the 200th Episode of Stargate SG-1.
“Yo, what’d you do that for?”
“Dude, that hot chick was so totally a Goal’uld.”
“Duh, I was still gonna tap that.”
BohicaTwentyTwo on March 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
I disagree.
If you look at Star Trek, from the vantage point of societal evolution, Kirk is the bold explorer finding new things, nailing their women and conquering worlds.
Picard is at our point in society. His goal is to make everyone happy and to make sure they get along.
In fact, if you watch the Insurrection movie (forget the plot beyond the stafleet guys making deals with the devil), you’ll see that modern starfleet tactics of making nice with everyone is failing. The bad guy makes the point to note that SF is under attack from the Borg, romulans, klingons, etc. And needs him to keep themselves afloat.
So kirk and the original series is like our colonial times. ST in the new series is like us now. Just trying to hold onto what we have. The boldness is gone. And has been replaced with being nice and status quo.
lorien1973 on March 9, 2009 at 4:53 PM
But what a difference 20 years makes. The movie actually applies to today’s world very well.
The main villian is an elitist snob who thinks he’s smarter than everyone else. He thinks that the way to fix society is to destroy it and rebuild it by creating a crisis to “rally” everyone together thru fear to remake society as he wants it.
The one real hero of the movie sees the world in black and white terms and submits stuff of a right wing newspaper. He’s also unweilding in what he believes.
The government bans unquie individuals that can actually contribute something to society and big government is focused on heavily.
To tell the truth, albeit unintentional, Watchmen is not as extreme left as you might think given the world we find ourselves in now.
Pcoop on March 9, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Yawn. A real sleeper. Has anyone noticed that todays actors/actresses are so bland that they appear to be cloned from the same mediocre stock?
docdave on March 9, 2009 at 4:53 PM
What is it with all you dudes smacking on Allah?
Other than his dislike for the great Pat Buchanan and his strange obsession with that phony with the british accent that thinks he is smart but is a dumbass…dude that got his ass kicked recently by a muslim (the God Is Not Great dude)….other than those faults, Allah usually gets it right.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM
I think I’ve seen this before on DS9 when Jake and Nog hooked up with Red Squad on the Valiant to play lord of the flies in space.
rw on March 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM
If there’s no Borg Babe with great looking implants, I’m not watching it.
Mister Ghost on March 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM
I forgot. In that movie, if the bad starfleet guy is right, then Picard is willing to sacrifice all of star fleet for (next to) nothing. What an odd choice to make.
And what happened if Riker did make it out and contact starfleet. Would they have stopped the plan and let the federation collapse?
There’s a lot more going on in the background that would’ve been cool to explore, there. Instead, we got a crappy movie.
lorien1973 on March 9, 2009 at 4:55 PM
You must be high. That was ten kinds of awesome. Can’t wait to see it.
BrideOfRove on March 9, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Only the earlier movies were great. The recent three mostly sucked. Star Trek has had far more movies and episodes to pick from, so naturally it’ll have more that sucks.
Just give Lucas more time.
I’m not sure how this is disagreeing with me.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Connery only played Bond over a 5 year period before quitting the role(the first time at least). And from what I’ve read, the public did not respond too kindly to Lazenby as the brand new Bond, even though IMO On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is one of the finest entries in the series.
Star Trek’s original cast played the roles in 79 television episodes and 6 films over the course of a quarter century. They are so linked to those characters that Leonard Nimoy even wrote an autobiography initially titled “I Am Not Spock” in order to disassociate himself with it.
Doughboy on March 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM
If so, he’d probably like it. High generally makes television and movies more entertaining, not less.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 4:59 PM
This looks like a Photon Torpedo bomb.
Comparisons to Starship Troopers and Scooby Doo are accurate (well, Scooby Doo after Scrappy’s arrival–all Scooby Doo’s prior to Scrappy were awesome!!))
Good things about Starship Troopers?
1. Denise Richards (Ya I still like her) Freeze Frame!
2. The wimpy General getting slapped then killed in the Alamo scenes
This new Star Trek looks tailored for today’s cell phone texting generation. The Captain looks like should be in a Fraternity chugging beers and wearing a baseball cap slightly askew.
The whole: “I’m-a-good-looking-metrosexual-James-Deanesque-rebel-fighting-against-the-inevitable-plot-twist-where-I-find-myself-and-emulate-my-deceased-father-and-save-the-world” is pretty apparent and very over-used.
Star Trek peaked with Captain Picard. <– ya I am a NextGen geek.
Montana on March 9, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Oh. My. god, Spock.
It’s EMO Kirk. God. help usall.
JeffWeimer on March 9, 2009 at 5:02 PM
“Nemesis” stunk; even the actors have admitted as much. “Insurrection” was decent, but nothing spectacular. By far, the best TNG film was “First Contact.” I personally rank it among the top three of the franchise.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Personally, I thought they all ruled…maybe episode 2 was too long with the love story…but that is a quibble.
I seriously doubt anybody is going to get in line for a few days prior to the opening of the newest star trek geek flick.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Oops, I didn’t realize you were talking about the Star Wars films.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Well – all I can of to say is this:
A lot of people worked very hard to produce this product – I wish them, and all those down deep in the revenue stream – the VERY BEST OF LUCK…
I want everyone who works hard to make money.
Good luck all.
jake-the-goose on March 9, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Speaking of soiling a legacy, the Star Wars prequels started with these immortal words:
Let the magic begin!
YYZ on March 9, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Yeah, and different actors playing Bond (a role that Connery was identified with to such an extent that he couldn’t get any other work) worked out just fine in the end.
My point is this – a) It makes no sense from a business standpoint to continue the Next Generation timeline, and mainstream audiences are simply not going to go for a cast 100 years further in the future (they didn’t go for Enterprise – a show with people who were supposed to be “more like us,” and a show that I maintain is a hell of a lot better than anything that came after the TNG series, including its movies). b) The characters who are most associated with Star Trek are the originals, but the cast who played them are either way too old or have already passed away (or in Shatner’s case – way too old with a character who was killed off).
What’s the only viable option that makes any business sence if you’re Paramont and want to continue the franchise? The only thing they can do, and did – recast the only characters that the general public still gives a damn about with new actors and reboot.
crazy_legs on March 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
What ever happened to Captain Christopher Pike…….?
Seven Percent Solution on March 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
I’ve been a fan of Star Trek since the late ’60s, and I’ve never once wondered what Spock, Kirk, and Bones were like as cadets/rookies. I admit that Deep Sleep Nine and Bon Voyage never interested me, though.
This movie won’t get any of my $13.00 stimulus money.
BobMbx on March 9, 2009 at 5:12 PM
You can never go back and bring back what was an icon of T.V.and movie history.You can move forward to new people like star trek the next genration and the other spinoffs The roles of Capt.Kirk, Mr.Spock Bones an Scottie can never be played by anyone else.I love all the Star Trek T.V. shows and the movies but that,s the way it is sorry.
thmcbb on March 9, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Still enjoying himself on Fantasy Planet, most likely.
Blink Blink…Blinkety BLINK!
BobMbx on March 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
I am no Trekkie but I think it looks kick ass and fun as hell. Ignore Eeyore Pundit.
echosyst on March 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
Can we at least agree that Kobayashi Maru (my horrible spelling not withstanding) is one of the best Star Trek books out there?
JadeNYU on March 9, 2009 at 5:19 PM
It’s Titan A.E. meets Star Fleet.
Ya know this movie would rock hard if it wasn’t Star Trek, or if they would have made it about Kirk’s ummm other unknown son or something.
- The Cat
MirCat on March 9, 2009 at 5:20 PM
I get it. You’re not a Star Trek fan, but you can’t really be oblivious to the numerous die hards out there.
Now, again, with sheer volume, you’re far more likely to see the camping out for days in a Star Wars film just because there were several decades in between the first trilogy and the second (or second and first, depending on how you’re looking at it), whereas no Star Trek fan has ever had to wait that long in between silver screen returns.
Still, if any set of fans can rival Star Wars fans, it’s the Star Trek fans.
That said, J.J. Abrams isn’t the original creator, so it’s still not the same as Lucas coming out with another set of films.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Where is the green chick?
CDR Salamander on March 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Are you accusing us of saying we want Star Trek to FAIL?!
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Don’t go to the movie if you start thinking like this. I mean Star Trek doesn’t believe in continuity as it is but this . . . . Has calls himself James Tiberius Kirk for crying out loud!
If you remember, when the Klingons put Kirk on trial, General Chang used Kirk’s middle name to goad him.
- The Cat
MirCat on March 9, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Huge StarTrek fan! Kirk can’t be replaced! I hope this is better that other re-do’s. Will be a must see, however!
sabbott on March 9, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Is no one seeing the obvious? Or perhaps hotair needs Brain Preston back for a day for the scifi geek blog. IMHO JJ Abrams and a few other people with money have been watching Ron Moores reimagined Battlestar Galactica with its gritty realism i.e. firearms that fire bullets,use of nukes,etc,and decided hey lets do that with Star Trek.
BTW only 2 episodes left till the end of the new Galctica series.
Kevin43 on March 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
uh-huh… Genndy Tartakovsky showed us that sometimes new creators can do a better job than the original…
Skywise on March 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Looks like they’re gonna blow some stuff up…GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME!
boomer on March 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
You nailed that on the head. Anyone recall the trailers for Ransom or Six Days, Seven Nights
TASS71 on March 9, 2009 at 5:29 PM
I’ve never been a big fan of Star Trek, I would watch the movies when they hit the cable channels I was already paying for. But this one has me intrigued and I plan to see it in the theaters, but not opening weekend. Looks like a fun movie.
Hog Wild on March 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM
heh. my only question is are the guys in the red shirts still expendable??
*ducks*
grasshopper68 on March 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM
Yes, the movie involves time travel (stop sighing). I watched all of Enterprise, OK, and I’m still reeling from the “Great Time War”. Essentially it’s a way to totally tube any responsibility for plot continuity.
I think this is Abrams’ way to say, “Hey, nerds, everything you think happened never really happened! So blow your continuities out your airlock!”
I just hope the ending involves some space disturbance that prevents the use of time travel ever again. Then we’ll all be able to sleep easy at night.
Unless you’re watching the Terminator TV series.
Nethicus on March 9, 2009 at 5:41 PM
The reason why Trekkies didn’t fall in love with “Enterprise” is because it takes place 100 years prior the the original series.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Star Trek is too big to fail!
ronsfi on March 9, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Star Trek and the GOP have much in common. Ok follow me with this. There are Original Trekkie’s they are like Nixon/Ford Republicans then there are TNG fans they are the Reagan Republicans, There are also Bush Republicans they would be akin to DS9 and Voyager there is even McCain Republicans would go to Enterprise. Now here comes this new movie, Is it canon is it a reboot. All that matters is that it is Star Trek and will unite all, and this is what the GOP needs something to unite.
Remember all that has been and get a reboot back to the factor settings without all the baggage. But do the best not to lose all that has been and find the things that binds.
P.S.
I am watching DS9 now and will be in line as soon as opening night.
tjexcite on March 9, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Good God! I hope you’re being facetious. If you’re not, then God help us all.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 5:47 PM
I liked Enterprise better than Deep Space 9.
Season 3 of Enterprise was awful, however.
I think the reason it failed was because it was on an obscure network and no one knew it was on.
zmdavid on March 9, 2009 at 5:48 PM
Call me a heretic, but I think I’m going like this one (if they don’t have a whole bunch of sex scenes like the trailer’s hinting at). My favorite movie is #4 (even though it was all about saving the whales), mostly for the dialogue and Kirk & Spock marching through downtown San Fransisco.
Oh, and Watchmen blew chunks. If you want to turn out like Allah, watch it over and over again, but if you want to stave off your imminent depression caused by the current resident of the Oval Office, stay far, far away.
pookysgirl on March 9, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Now I hope you’re being facetious. Entertainment is entertainment. It doesn’t have to be meaningful.
Esthier on March 9, 2009 at 5:54 PM
I’m pretty sure Bruce Greenwood plays Pike, pre-accident.
DrSteve on March 9, 2009 at 5:54 PM
Maybe this will be like Wicked (the play not the book) and totally explain why things are like they are and nothing was what it seemed when Dorothy went to OZ in the 1930s.
petunia on March 9, 2009 at 5:55 PM
“What is it with all you dudes smacking on Allah?
Other than his dislike for the great Pat Buchanan and his strange obsession with that phony with the british accent that thinks he is smart but is a dumbass…dude that got his ass kicked recently by a muslim (the God Is Not Great dude)….other than those faults, Allah usually gets it right.
The Wall on March 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM”
AP, spoofing yourself is not cool.
klickink.wordpress.com on March 9, 2009 at 5:56 PM
Same here. The humor and light-hearted approach to time-travel made that one a keeper. Giving the plexiglass scientist the formula for transparent aluminum cracked me up.
“How do we know he didn’t invent the thing?”
Feedie on March 9, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Man, so many crazy people on this site. Deep Space Nine as one of the worst STs? Is it April 1st? Okay, maybe you hate it because it was an admission by Paramount that ST could not hold a candle to Babylon 5, but honestly, what could?
Come on, you actually get to see the communist dream of the Federation start to crumble. You’ve got Garak, who exhibits more personality in a minute than every character in TNG in every season combined. You also got a story arc happening, so continuity actually matters in ST for the first time. Although I notice many of you lump it in with that abortion of a show, Voyager. Maybe that’s your problem.
Anyway, at least in DS9, they had to find solutions to problems that were not some combination of “Fly through it” or “Shoot at it,” as happened in every TNG episode.
JSchuler on March 9, 2009 at 6:12 PM
Both Picard and Kirk are bold explorers, and neither was “conquering worlds”. You’re right about nailing their women, but that trait’s about as meaningful and useful as picking your nose. Plus, Picard’s old. Expecting him to keep swinging at that age is a bit unrealistic. When he was younger he was just as wild as Kirk.
Darth Executor on March 9, 2009 at 6:16 PM
I just don’t walk into a theater having high expectations. These days one could get very dissapointed doing that.
boomer on March 9, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Why do I get the feeling that I have just seen the best bits from the movie, and whatever I haven’t seen is just “filler”.
I will probably see it anyways, I spent some of my teen years as a trekkie. And because an acquaintance of mine is acting in the movie.
Johnny 100 Pesos on March 9, 2009 at 6:33 PM
And one other thing: the music from the trailer soundtrack: just a dull orchestra riff repeated several times.
Johnny 100 Pesos on March 9, 2009 at 6:34 PM
I watched the trailer hoping to get excited about this, but I just can’t. I want a great Star Trek film as much as any fan, but this just doesn’t look interesting. The cast is bland, the action reminded me of Death Race more than anything else, and the FX don’t really look all that amazing. More than anything, it doesn’t suggest Star Trek at all to me, but looks like a generic sci-fi film.
I know trailers don’t always show the real film, but I get no sense of wonder from this project at all.
Dave in San Diego on March 9, 2009 at 6:48 PM
Geez Louise, Allah!
State-of-the-art special effects in a 2009 Sci-fi flick? How banal of them! You have a nostalgic penchant for rock monster aliens that look like a big pile of excreted pizza sausage or something?
And by all means let’s continue Roddenberry’s (or Rodney’s) utopian vision of us all just getting along, “one big happy fleet.” No conflicts, no egos and completely unrealistic; not to mention the serial fornicating and adultery of Roddenberry and his alter-ego Kirk. It looks like the movie retains at least a measure of Kirk’s appetites. Perhaps the movie should continue to dwell ad nauseum on social commentary of the ’60s? I’m sure the writers thought, “Yeah, we should make this about Vietnam!” Right on, brothers.
Evolution or enlightenment of man? Bah! The human condition is what it is. We can improve certain things about ourselves, but our nature remains the same. Life, and we, grow and change. Let’s see if the movie’s story is relevant to today’s viewers, both the storyline and the characters. If it brings in some of us old-time boomers, so much the better. But let’s not get stuck in the past. This happens every time a new version of an old favourite comes out. It’s so childish. Before any new vision is fully realised, the fans have a tizzy. Just remember the reactions to the various Trek incarnations before they aired. There are many fans who took back their initial criticism and reticence. Look what happened with Battlestar Galactica. What a tremendous storytelling work that new series turned out to be.
I, for one, will not pan Star Trek before I see it. I’m not going to jump on the fashionable hate screed bandwagon yet.
However, if after seeing the film I find myself in the wrong, I’ll apologise to everyone here.
Long Live and Prosper! (correct Vulcan syntax)
Pilgrimsarbour on March 9, 2009 at 6:51 PM
I already saw the ultimate Trek film: Galaxy Quest.
A terrific, funny homage to the Trek world and Trek fans, with a good heart and great message about people rising up to a challenge that they didn’t know they could face.
You know this Trek reboot isn’t going to have one ounce of the great story, characters, humor and love of Galaxy Quest.
“Quick! Let’s get out of here before somebody kills Guy!”
bonnie_ on March 9, 2009 at 6:58 PM
There’s so much eye candy in this, my eyes are gonna be diabetic after watching.
Iblis on March 9, 2009 at 7:23 PM
I just got one question. How can anyone be that critical of a movie based on that trailer? I guess I lack any talent in this area so i’ll have to take your word for it. But on the surface it seemed as entertaining as “The Incredibles”. Now that was a great movie! Elastigirl is soooooo Hot…
Amadeus on March 9, 2009 at 7:32 PM
I’ll be giving Star Trek 90210 a pass.
Rip Ford on March 9, 2009 at 7:43 PM
Both are owned by Sisko. That guy took down a whole quadrant, a band of cranky Gods, shapeshifters, cloned warriors and managed NOT to smack Kira during seasons 1-2 when she was in her annoying yappy phase. Sisko for the win! Now let us all agree Janeway sucked.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 9, 2009 at 8:00 PM
Heh, best trailer review evah! That’s exactly what it is, generic by the numbers sci-fi with Star Trek splatted on the title to sell tickets.
clearbluesky on March 9, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Sacrilege! Had Janeway truly sucked, the show would have been much better!
Seriously, tho, folks. DS9 had continuity, character development, and Terry Farrel. It pwns!
Nethicus on March 9, 2009 at 8:20 PM
I’m guardedly optimistic for this movie.
Yakko77 on March 9, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Is the movie going to talk about how Emperor Obama made the whole world a commie paradise?
And, yes, Janeway sucked.
29Victor on March 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Did they kinda rip off the Batman theme music or is it just me?
Constantine on March 9, 2009 at 9:12 PM
Not only that. Sisko quite literally became a god. (Or wormhole alien.)
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 9:13 PM
It does sound little like the music in “Batman Begins” now that you mention it.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Next Generation Star Trek would be the Chris Buckley/Kathleen Parker Republicans. I.E. they think they are smarter than everyone else but they are just more boring.
Speedwagon82 on March 9, 2009 at 9:20 PM
I’ll see it, but one question: why question its lack of conformity to “canon” when the series has always been riddled with continuity errors? I hope they reject a lot and come up with new stuff. I want this movie to be as dark as possible, with the crew initially at each other’s throats, then slowly come together as time, and the sequels, go on. Just keep me entertained.
KillerKane on March 9, 2009 at 9:23 PM
Did you HAVE to inject filthy politics into a nice sci-fi thread? This is why we can’t have nice things.
Constantine on March 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Jean-Luc Picard can mop the floor with Christopher Buckley.
eaglescout1998 on March 9, 2009 at 9:38 PM
I LOVE Star Trek…I will be middle and center in the theater. The soundtrack alone will be worth it!
SouthernGent on March 9, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Looks good to me, AP, and I loved DS9. I have much faith in Abrams and Lindelof, and it’s good to see the Trek movies headed back towards FX extravaganzas. They haven’t even tried since 3. I don’t expect it to be “Wrath of Khan” good, but if it isn’t 2nd best I’ll be amazed.
Blacklake on March 9, 2009 at 10:01 PM
Oh come on guys…this looks like the first Star Trek movie that NON trekkies might like! Insurrection was boring, Nemesis ripped off the Orcs from LOTR, the last good Star Trek movie was First Contact (Generations was good too). Give Abrams some credit, both MI:3 and Cloverfield were awesome. I think Star Trek is in some good hands.
dalejrfanfreak on March 9, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Is Spock Syler???
LordDaMan on March 9, 2009 at 11:19 PM
I’d rather they had made Galaxy Quest II. The first was the best Star Trek movie ever, even though it was a parody.
TDBURN on March 9, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Nothing. Absolutely nothing could go wrong.
*imagines Megan Fox in Leia slave girl outfit*
Mmmmmmm!
Yakko77 on March 10, 2009 at 12:50 AM
Yeah the music to Star Trek and Star Wars is pretty much timeless.
I’m not sure if you’re a video game fan but the soundtrack to Mass Effect has lots of inspiration from those 80’s sci-fi movies in that there is lots of the electronica type stuff but also lots of the bombastic classical music as well.
Yakko77 on March 10, 2009 at 1:09 AM
Yeah Galaxy Quest is AWESOME.
dalejrfanfreak on March 10, 2009 at 1:54 AM
Just a few notes for the fans…
This is not the second trailer AP, it is the third. If you go to the official Star Trek movie site you can see them all including a couple TV spots.
To the Star Wars is better than Start Trek crowd, WHO CARES! If I wanted your opinion I would give it to you! ;-) In truth they both have their highs and lows, but since Star Trek is massively more explored in television and movies, it is going to have more detractors. As always, the more you say, the more you give people to criticize you.
Finally, I have always been a big fan of the Star Trek episodes and movies where they get into a good fight. My favorite Star Trek movies are The Wrath of Khan and First Contact. So I will probably like this one. I do not look to Star Trek as anything but good escapist entertainment. If I was political philosophy and “change the world” stuff I will come to Hot Air and debate here.
Hawthorne on March 10, 2009 at 3:12 AM
Only because the inject subtle politics into the series. I (heart) Star Trek, but the whole thing is Lennon’s Imagine come to life. It paints a beautiful picture of a communist, atheist, one-world utopia that really gets on my nerves after a while.
Capitalism is personified in the greedy, disgusting Fernegi, reason means lack of emotion and love, religion is only okay if you’re not human or, if human, an Indian. Energy is free and forever and non-nuclear. Leaders don’t send others into danger, they go themselves…please.
I love science-fiction, what I can’t stand is human-fiction. I can’t stand when the entirety of humanity acts out-of-character.
29Victor on March 10, 2009 at 3:22 AM
Star Trek is dead. Star Wars is dead.
They’re recycling a dead franchise over and over again.
Can’t wait for a remake of the whole series with Kirk. Just like I can’t wait for the 500th “definite” edition of Star Wars.
Pffff…
And that kid in the new Trek movie is NOT James T Kirk. He’ll NEVER be.
Just like Brokeback Mountin will NEVER be a real cowboy movie.
Penguin on March 10, 2009 at 3:38 AM
Here’s what I don’t get about these “They Ruined Star Trek” posts: how can one ruin that which sucks?
OscarSchneegans on March 10, 2009 at 5:22 AM
Geeks.
lizzee on March 10, 2009 at 6:10 AM
You missed my point. My entire point was – the audience wasn’t there for the last couple of TNG movies and it was there even less for Enterprise, a show that was supposed to have characters we could relate to more. Whether you like it or not, the only characters the mainstream movie going public gives a fig about are the TOS characters. Continuing it 100 years past TNG is not going to bring in the audience. The TNG spin-offs have been done almost to the death of the franchise, and 100 years further (and in a two hour movie) makes no sense from a business standpoint. Going to the “past” and trying to make a prequel series was an Epic Fail. What’s left if Paramount wants to continue the franchise?
crazy_legs on March 10, 2009 at 8:09 AM
That’s really the Next Generation and subsequent series, not TOS. It was only after Roddenberry became famous and started believing in his own hype that the one-world utopian crap started.
crazy_legs on March 10, 2009 at 8:25 AM
This I will forever forgive because William Shatner (an action actor in his day) was the star of the show and it was the 1960’s. It also always bothered me that the Captain in TNG would sit in the living room (sorry, the bridge) yelling “What’s happening?!?”, while Riker would get into all the crap on the planet’s surface. If you want to know what’s happening, beam the eff down to the planet yourself!
crazy_legs on March 10, 2009 at 8:28 AM
Fanboys can kill anything and they certainly can kill what is one of the best Sci-Fi franchises. People who were costumes to conventions or speak in Klingon need serious mental help. It really kills any hope for appeal among non-losers.
If Star Trek is to survive then it needs to be redone. That I don’t have a problem with. All the worthy cast (original or TNG) are either dead or old. This actually looks like a decent attempt, my problem is not with the trailer but with Abrams who has made a crappy series – Lost, a poorly done movie Cloverfield. His best work was MI 3, which was ok but nothing special. This is what the new Star Trek looks closest to emulating in quality – a remake (or continuation) of a known series. Abrams does not give me much hope.
Star Trek (Original) – The TV show was too campy but it did allow the likeable actors to make some excellent movies later on, ST 2, 4 and 6. The appeal was Kirk as the James Bond of Space, Scotty as every technician and engineer’s ideal, Spock a role model for those with aspergers, McCoy the cranky southern religious medicine man, Sulu the asian – best voice in a Sci-Fi show next to James Earl Jones, Chekov the Russian to prove the cold war was over and Uhura, the token black woman to prove the show is not racist. What a cast! Star Trek the original was character driven without question and highly entertaining – a thinking man’s cowboy movie.
The Next Generation – The biggest problems were Tasha Yar as the politically correct security officer which killed the first couple of seasons until she left. To most everyone watching it was obvious the Worf should be in charge of security. That and the useless plots with the worthless Wesley dragged down the solid performances by Picard and Riker (the closest to Kirk) Data and Worf. Mr Reading Rainbow did little to inspire but he worked ok, he was certainly no Scotty. It was a different show without question but at least the episodes tried with the story. First Contact was first rate and deserving of a worthy sequel that never came.
Deep Space Nine – Take one of the coolest characters (Hawk) and make him Captain of a crappy station with a useless second in command who emulates Katie Couric, an all powerful shape shifter who makes himself look like a total wuss, a disturbing hot young science officer that you cannot stop thinking of as a transexual thanks to the male alien implant and his useless son who wants to be like the NYT. For some hope add an arrogant but entertaining doctor, an engineer with the right accent and a bartender who loves capitalism. When none of that works add a very cool Starship and bring back the Klingon. Don’t forgot to use all of this to write really bad stories with Religious subtexts.
Voyager – Lets make Politically Correct Star Trek, lets pretend we have a “tough” woman captain, an American Indian second in command, a black Vulcan security officer, a female Klingon engineer, an asian operations officer, a virtual white male doctor (with no authority), some useless girl who is friends with the useless alien onboard and make the only main white male character subordinate to all the other minorities. When this doesn’t work (for obvious reasons) bring in the borg with boobs. This show was such crap I have no idea how it stayed on the air for seven seasons? Are you kidding me?
Enterprise – Much, much better than Voyager but suffered major story problems. NEVER do a story where a male gets pregnant, it totally killed the show for me in the first season. Not to mention the hokey engineer had the wrong accent. He was probably the biggest problem of the show, the should have made him celtic or german. I have no idea why Star Trek has not tried an arrogant German engineer character yet. This show had a lot of potential with the wrong writers.
So what are you going to use? Sometimes it is better to start over. Fanboys need to get a grip and stop crying, lets see how it is before you crucify it.
Poptech on March 10, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Exactly.
But throw in some tits (the SHOWER SCENE zomg!!!!11) and the boys go wild.
pseudonominus on March 10, 2009 at 10:29 AM
WATCHMEN was fantastic…and I read the book beforehand.
AP really missed out on site traffic by not posting a dedicated WATCHMEN entry.
pseudonominus on March 10, 2009 at 10:35 AM
Watchmen is overrated unless of course you enjoy looking at Dr. Manhattan’s genetalia over and over. The writer Alan Moore is a nut job who got inspiration from wack-job drug addicts like William S. Burroughs.
Poptech on March 10, 2009 at 10:41 AM
I liked Starship Troopers… Dude its just entertainment, lighten up.
Maxx on March 10, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »