TimeChaser Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 It's been a few years, but next summer we'll have a new Star Trek movie. This one is set during the younger days of the original crew, while Kirk is still a cadet. From what I've read, the plot involves Romulans from the future coming back in time to change history. [CENTER][YOUTUBE="Star Trek Trailer"][/YOUTUBE][/CENTER] The movie has been made to cater to the general audiences who aren't hardcore Trekkies, but with long-time fans also in mind. From the comments I've read on You Tube, people seem to be picking this apart already without even having seen it. Personally, I think it looks quite good, and a breath of fresh air for the franchise. So, anyone around here a Trekkie? What do you think? Or, if you're not a fan, would you go see this anyway? [B]CAST:[/B] Chris Pine - Kirk Zachary Quinto - Spock Karl Urban - Dr. McCoy Simon Pegg - Scotty Zoe Saldana - Uhura John Cho - Sulu Anton Yelchin - Chekov Bruce Greenwood - Captain Pike Eric Bana - Nero (the villain) Winona Ryder - Amanda Grayson (Spock's mother) Leonard Nimoy - Future Spock [B][U][URL="http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/large_trailer2.html"] Follow this link to see a larger version of the trailer.[/URL][/U][/B] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdsy Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 [color=deeppink]I'm very aprehensive about this. There seems to be an... [i]extreme[/i] quality to it that really just makes me sick to my stomach. The trailer just screams "LOOK AT KIRK, HE'S SO EDGY!" The cast is great for the most part, though. Simon Pegg! Zachary Quinto! Yay![/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 [quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]The trailer just screams "LOOK AT KIRK, HE'S SO EDGY!"[/color][/QUOTE] Hopefully they've done more to his character than that. Although I look forward to seeing Kirk played in a way that isn't lumbered by those traits of Shatner that were easy to poke fun at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I actually really hate star trek. And for some reason, up until I saw the preview a couple days ago, I thought they were making it into a new season. (Not a movie) But two names have convinced me to watch it: J.J. Abrams and Zachary Quinto. So... Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Blonde Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 It seems they're pumping new blood into a film series that has been stale for quite a while. I've never seen Lost or any other of J.J Abrams stuff so [I]he's[/I] not drawing me to this, but I will probably go see it because it does look interesting. One thing though... they're building the Enterprise on Earth? Gene Rodenberry (creator of Star Trek) knew what he was doing when he had the Enterprise in the original series built in space. There is no way you could launch something that large out of Earth's orbit. Damn you Abrams! *shakes fist at sky* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 [quote name='Mr. Blonde']One thing though... they're building the Enterprise on Earth? Gene Rodenberry (creator of Star Trek) knew what he was doing when he had the Enterprise in the original series built in space. There is no way you could launch something that large out of Earth's orbit. Damn you Abrams! *shakes fist at sky*[/QUOTE] Yeah, I didn't get that either. They try to explain it on the Wiki page though: "One example of a concept which seemingly contradicts Star Trek canon but came from the precedent set in the novels was having the Enterprise built on Earth, rather than space. Orci said that the idea that some things have to be constructed in space is normally associated with "flimsy" objects which have to be delicately assembled and would not normally be required to enter a gravity well. He said that this did not apply to the Enterprise because of the artificial gravity employed on the ship and its requirement for sustaining warp speed, and therefore the calibration of the ship's machinery would be best done in the exact gravity well which is to be simulated." I'm not personally sure of the science behind that, thought I could ask my father. Being a science teacher and having worked out at the Space Center, he might know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Blonde Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Hmm.. Well that [I]is[/I] an explanation, though not a very good one. I enjoy my science fiction movies to have a great deal of science fact in them. We'll see about this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 [size=1]I've been excited about this movie since last year. Actually, since the very moment it leaked on the website... which was aaaaages ago. Now the time comes I'm not so excited XD EDIT: So I watched the trailer then I realised that, realistically, I'm sure Scotty and half the others didn't know each other until they were on the Enterprise. I haven't watched the original series for a good year now so I have to check that out. I looks promising... but seriously, where are all the nobbly multi-coloured consoles and weird flashy designs? =([/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdsy Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Mr. Blonde']One thing though... they're building the Enterprise on Earth? Gene Rodenberry (creator of Star Trek) knew what he was doing when he had the Enterprise in the original series built in space. There is no way you could launch something that large out of Earth's orbit.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]You're fine with them going several hundred times the speed of light, but [I]that[/I] bothers you? I say if they can produce the energy to travel 765,000 times the speed of light, I imagine they can break escape velocity purdy easily.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Blonde Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Nerdsy'][color=deeppink]You're fine with them going several hundred times the speed of light, but [I]that[/I] bothers you? I say if they can produce the energy to travel 765,000 times the speed of light, I imagine they can break escape velocity purdy easily.[/color][/QUOTE] I didn't want to go on a star trek rant, but I do have other issues with the series. Beeming down for instance... but we won't get into that. However I'm not sure they go over the speed of light. I could be wrong though, as I'm not a big star trek fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Mr. Blonde']I didn't want to go on a star trek rant, but I do have other issues with the series. Beeming down for instance... but we won't get into that. However I'm not sure they go over the speed of light. I could be wrong though, as I'm not a big star trek fan.[/QUOTE] Well, I asked my dad about the explanation they had on Wiki for building the Enterprise on Earth, and he's not too sure that it holds up very well scientifically speaking. I'm gonna go geek for a moment and deal with how the Enterprise travels. I remember seeing on some kind of Science of Star Trek program that when they say "warp speed" they literally mean the engines generate a warp in space and they ride it rather like a surfer rides a wave. It isn't light speed travel, but literal warping of the fabric of space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdsy Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Mr. Blonde'] However I'm not sure they go over the speed of light. I could be wrong though, as I'm not a big star trek fan.[/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Oh, they do. 765,000 times the speed of light is the highest non-transwarp speed achieved by a spaceship, from the TOS episde "By Any Other Name." Warp 1 is the speed of light, Warp 3 is about 483 times the speed of light, etc. As for warping the fabric of space, they [I]do[/I] do that, but that warping actually propels them to faster-than-light travel. So it's really both. And fact versus fiction... I don't really care if a show set 250 years into the future takes liberties with what we currently consider fact. I'm sure that after that long, people could have discovered ways to do what is "impossible."[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Blonde Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 I do recall "warp speed" but I wasn't sure of the details behind it. Thanks for enlightening me, Nerdsy. Yeah, TC, I think this is one of those things where we just have to bite the bullet and be like, okay... this is impossible, and just enjoy it. ...like artificial gravity without centripetal force and the rotating space craft, but alas... These kind of things will never bother most people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='TimeChaser']Well, I asked my dad about the explanation they had on Wiki for building the Enterprise on Earth, and he's not too sure that it holds up very well scientifically speaking. I'm gonna go geek for a moment and deal with how the Enterprise travels. I remember seeing on some kind of Science of Star Trek program that when they say "warp speed" they literally mean the engines generate a warp in space and they ride it rather like a surfer rides a wave. It isn't light speed travel, but literal warping of the fabric of space.[/QUOTE] [size=1]That's why they have a 'warp field' and whatnot. And why they're always bitching when the warp field goes down or one of the nessels goes kaboom. But, personally, I favour the Borg's method of transport - they get around, those guys. Besides, I never worried about the science behind these shows, they already took massive liberties with time travel. And anti-matter... it was mostly TOS that took the liberities though and the rest of the shows tried to explain it. Also, beaming up isn't actually [i]that[/i] farfetched because, rumour has it, the theory is already being worked on (except it's not beaming up, it's something dodgy about matter transfer).[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Vicky'][size=1]Also, beaming up isn't actually [i]that[/i] farfetched because, rumour has it, the theory is already being worked on (except it's not beaming up, it's something dodgy about matter transfer).[/size][/QUOTE] The thing about beaming or transmatting or whatever you like to call it, is that the living body is a pretty complex thing. You would have to break all that down into energy, and then reassemble it perfectly One bit of information out of place, and you either come back all messed up, or it's good night nurse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='TimeChaser']The thing about beaming or transmatting or whatever you like to call it, is that the living body is a pretty complex thing. You would have to break all that down into energy, and then reassemble it perfectly One bit of information out of place, and you either come back all messed up, or it's good night nurse.[/QUOTE] [size=1]Or a super flawless computer =p.[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raiha Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Actually according to the files, all of the enterprises were built on Utopia Planetia. Am I the only one who knows this? Yes. Also, after taking a few science courses, we discovered that it's best to just NOT QUESTION the whole transporter part. Since you'd have to make a perfect copy of the original or some nonsense like that. Either way I'm not wildly thrilled, but I look forward to Spock stealing the show. Which will be a very nice change. Also, I'm a pretty serious Trekkie. Hold onto your phasers.[/FONT][/COLOR] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdsy Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Actually according to the files, all of the enterprises were built on Utopia Planetia. Am I the only one who knows this? Yes.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE] [color=deeppink]Which files? 'Cause I'm pretty sure only D was built there. Most of the rest (at least the one's that have had their origins revealed) were built at the San Francisco Fleet Yards.[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Blonde Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 [quote name='Vicky'][size=1] Also, beaming up isn't actually [i]that[/i] farfetched because, rumour has it, the theory is already being worked on (except it's not beaming up, it's something dodgy about matter transfer).[/size][/QUOTE] I actually watched a documentary about space age techonology and they said that "beeming up" or out or down or whatever is scientifically impossible for living creatures because of the complexity of reorganizing the matter. However they can "beam" light and sound waves I believe, but as far as humans go... "For the love of God, don't beem me up, Scotty" At least for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachmaninoff Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 I'm kind of interested in this and kind of not. I've watched so much Star Trek over the years that I'm pretty burned out on it. I'll probably see it when it comes out so I hope they do a good job with it, inconsistencies aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 [size=1]Hang on a minute, just clarify, when is this out again? Also, for anyone interested, George (aka MR SULU!) is on [I]I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here[/i], so for anyone in Britain, go and watch it, the guy's a legend =p.[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 28, 2008 Author Share Posted November 28, 2008 [quote name='Vicky'][size=1]Hang on a minute, just clarify, when is this out again?[/size][/QUOTE] Release date is in the thread title: May 8, 2009. :) Also, here's a shot of the redesigned Enterprise: [URL=http://s245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/ASfan/?action=view¤t=enterprise579_REVb.jpg][IMG]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/ASfan/th_enterprise579_REVb.jpg[/IMG][/URL] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 [quote name='TimeChaser']Release date is in the thread title: March 8, 2009. :) Also, here's a shot of the redesigned Enterprise: [URL=http://s245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/ASfan/?action=view¤t=enterprise579_REVb.jpg][IMG]http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/ASfan/th_enterprise579_REVb.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/QUOTE] [size=1]Aaaawww whaaat? When I first checked, or rather last checked on the website ages and ages ago it said this Christmas =( How boring. I have to wait longer. Not amused.[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeChaser Posted November 28, 2008 Author Share Posted November 28, 2008 [quote name='Vicky'][size=1]Aaaawww whaaat? When I first checked, or rather last checked on the website ages and ages ago it said this Christmas =( How boring. I have to wait longer. Not amused.[/size][/QUOTE] Heh, and you replied before I realized my error and fixed it. It's MAY 8. :animesigh Yeah, they were going to release it in December, but then thought it wouldn't do well at this time of year, so they've changed it to an early summer release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdsy Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 [color=deeppink]Saw this earlier today. The die hard Trekker in me thought (massive spoilers here) [spoiler]OH MY GOD NO THAT NEVER HAPPENED WAIT WHAT I'VE SEEN VULCAN NEARLY A DOZEN TIMES DURING SCENES THAT TAKE PLACE A DECADE AFTER THIS AND WHAT IS CHEKOV DOING THERE HE HASN'T EVEN BEEN BORN YET! AHHHH! DAMN YOU ABRAMS YOU JUST INVALIDATED FOUR DECADES OF STORIES YAGHLBLAGLE![/SPOILER] The sane person in me thought this was a fantastic movie. The cast was perfect (the only person I didn't really felt fit was Cho, but that's because Takei cannot be replaced). The characterization was perfect... I actually thought think it was [i]better[/i] than TOS. TOS spent too much time on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. Sulu had so little pertinent screen time. I think, of all of them, he was the least developed. The story wasn't perfect (in general, I hate time travel), but this is a character piece so it doesn't matter. I enjoyed the hell out of it anyway. And it's flipping [i]hilarious.[/i] The Star Wars fan in me thought [spoiler]Okay, there's the Death Star. Whoops, there goes Alderaan. Hey, Kirk's on Hoth. Better run from that Wompa! Whoops, ran into a cave. Oh, Obi-Wan'll save you. Better have a showdown with the Emperor on the bridge of the Death Star.[/spoiler][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now