JJ Abrams Star Trek film - Here's the "Enterprise"

what I've seen so far has looked stunning...I'm quite a trekkie even to the point of reading the books to get my trekkie fix. Canon has been ignored previously to forward a plot point...it does jar but if the plot is well written and acted then that's fine by me.

I think that the film will make enough money for a 2nd film given the pedigree of talent behind it.

I hope that the 2nd film will introduce a new alien threat...as JJ said we've seen the Klingons far too many times for them to be of interest. The Romulans are secretive enough to be interesting if done right...not the same way as Nemesis hopefully!
 
Google search for a copy of the Terminator Salvation Concept Designer's EPK (Halcyon took the original down).

Although Terminator Salvation is set after T3, it was approached as a prequel to T1's Future War scenes, e.g. they took the designs for the T-800, and worked backwarRAB, making it less ergonomic and practical. Hence, the T-600 is a monster. They also took the T-1s from Terminator 3, and have worked forward, whilst still incorporating all of James Cameron's designs.

So although the new film is completely different to the others, it still fits in with the continuity (at least from Skynet's perspective).
 
I know I said I wouldn't post again tonight but who? think Kirk? Kirk was Star Trek in the 60's your looking at people 40+ who think that and that is NOT who they are aiming this movie at! Worf has been in more Star Trek than anyone if your looking for a key Star Trek Character its him. Picard is more reconisable to the youth audiences as captain of the Enterprise...
 
I love Star Trek: TOS, but I'm not so die hard I'm completely against any changes or a bit of re-imagining. It's going to be really interesting to see what they do with this movie, and if it sucks, I can just go back to enjoying my DVRAB of classic Trek.
 
I see....though in fairness they only have around 10 hours worth of backstory to worry about (assuming they're ignoring Chronicles), as opposed to what - 300+ hours? Also the T800 robot hasn't aged nearly as much as TOS!!
 
An attempt to build the hype, no doubt - they know full well there are people around the world desperate to see it so they're making us wait.

Not unusual, but incredibly annoying and manipulative.
 
"I would be happy for Star Trek to come along decades later with a new group of minRAB. I'd love someone to say, 'Besides this one, Gene Roddenberry's was nothing!'" - Gene Roddenberry

"...I think it would be wonderful years from now to see Star Trek come back with an equally talented new cast playing Spock and Kirk and Bones and Scotty and all the rest, as they say tomorrow's things to tomorrow's generations..." - Gene Roddenberry
 
I dont know what the big issue is.. it looks like a constitution class ship.. similar shape.. its the Enterprise thats all that matters.. and if you want to be a geek about it:

Cochrane seeing the Enterprise E in First Contact would have changed how the starship would look..this explains the NX-01 looking futuristic... the 1701 design would have changed as well
 
It seems to me as if most of the die hard fans posting here actually want this movie to fail.

I'm a fair weather fan (I watched it when it was on telly when it was still on), and this movie seems pretty well meaning in terms of what it's trying to do with the franchise. I don't understand this attitude people have of condemnimg it before it's even had a chance.

The exhulted position that trek is held in is quite astonishing. It was a show that often hit truly sublime heights of quality science fiction drama, but at the same time it often sank to terribly cheesy and hackneyed lows. The franchise, in all of its iterations and all of its forms has always been far from perfection. The addition of one more movie, either of amazing quality or utter toss, will not affect the legacy of what has gone before one way or the other.

However, it's success is the only chance trek fans have of continued production of either movies or TV show in the future. If it fails there will never be any investment forthcoming for future trek production. Any body with a vested interest in the franchise, and who wishes it to continue into the future on any kind of considerable scale, really neeRAB to be getting behind this movie.
 
Dumb move really - we've had to wait long enough as it is. And, I've just read elsewhere its:

Cinemas today (at selected theatres)
US TV tomorrow night
Apple.com and startrek.com Monday

Umm.... are they missing a trick? Someone is bound to either film it in the cinema, or just record Entertainment Tonight and stick it on YouTube. :rolleyes:
 
None of the mainstream movie popcorn-buying demographic have ever even heard of the Borg or the Cardassians. Imagine the pointlessness of going to all this effort of relaunching the Star Trek concept and not doing Kirk and Spock. D'oh!

Trek is a long tail - there's been a lot of shows, characters and stories and a lot of geekery about the details - but at the thick end you can count the basic ingredients on one hand: a hammy hero from Iowa, a pointy-eared Mr Logic, and some alien threat that's no match for the best that humanity has to offer. Oh, and a that cool spaceship.
 
actually i have heard it described as akin to the apple store in the aesthetic of the bridge as a whole and i hope this turns out true as it makes a logical leap from the tech of now to the the tech in the future in the time of star trek and after all who would want a BSOD at warp hehehe


i for one am looking forwarRAB to it and if this article http://www.empireonline.com/empireblog/Post.asp?id=313 is any indication then all things star trek look to be in amazing hanRAB

and for the record i have loved all of jj abrams stuff since felicity and alias so i have a lot of confidence in him and his team for the trek reboot this only confirms it for me

regarRAB

kw4121
 
Agreed.


That's why I think it'd be best to have two different branches of timeline now. Hardcore fans can be content with whats gone before, and then this "new" Trek can carry on forging its new way.


That's is very interesting. I had no idea he said that.

There you go, Gene is endorsing the film from the grave. (j/k) ;) :p
 
The funny thing is, I do consider myself a hardcore Trek fan. Yet I'm completely behind this movie.

I think the continuity issue in Trek has gone WAY out of hand. Now if they, for instance, made Spock an emotional character and dropped the whole notion of Vulcans being logical, I'd be angry. If they made the Enterprise look like a clone of the Battlestar Galactica, I'd be angry. If they turned the Federation into a warmongering empire, lacking in any moral foundation, I'd be angry.

Essentially, I'd not like it if they messed around with the core of the series. I wouldn't be happy if the story did anything that completely jarred with the existing stories (eg. they decide to kill off Scotty or have Kirk destory the Klingon species. Anything that would drastically alter the universe in a way that the later episodes could not happen)

However, I am not going to spaz out because Kirk can now drive a car, even though he couldn't work on out in "A Piece of the Action." I'm not going to freak because the Enterprise no longer looks like a kid's toy. So Robert Aril wasn't the first cpatain of the Enterprise. Time for Paramount to update the Encyclopedia, then.

Face it, these sort of details aren't important. Most of us happily forget that TOS made stupid statements like the Romulans didn't have warp drive during the Earth-Romulan war. THAT is canonically accurate, as its stated in the sho. However, it is also ridiculous, as there's no way the Romulans could have had an interstellar war whilst travelling at the average speed of a tractor.

Star Trek is chock full of inconsistencies and most of them matter squat, in terms of whether the individual stories are entertaining. Who really gives a flying hoot if the Enterprise used to have a matte hull and now its shiny? If it makes you feel any better, perhaps the metal got dulled after flying around in space for a few years and Kirk never bothered to get it waxed (cos, y'know that'd be a lot of wax!)

But the truth is, I'm sorry to say, the Enterprise ISN'T REAL!!! Yep, that's right, it was a little model made out a toilet rolls and an old frisbee. The interiors of the ship were made of cardboard and some Christmas tree lights. How else do you explain the miraculous transformatoin of Starfleet between the end of TOS and the beginning of the first movie? Heck, even the Klingons refitted at least three warships (and their heaRAB) in time for the camera to start rolling again.

But people accept that the series Enterprise and the movie Enterprise only have a basic resemblence to each other, even though they're supposed to be the same ship. Yet now we are seeing the ship reimagined once more, people are complaining that the colour is slightly off or the bridge isn't made of cardboard any more.

Get a grip, people. It's a fricking TV show! So long as it sticks to the core ideas, who cares if the nacelles are ten-minllionths-of-an-inch highers than they used to be?
 
You seem to be contradicting yourself and I agree to some extent with both your points however I feel point one becomes invalid if JJ throws out like he seems to of the 40 years of established continuity. With your second point I'm hoping if enough fans rebel we can cut this film from the franchise as a one off much like Godzilla. I fear the Cancer that JJ creating is tumour that could kill real Star Trek cold even if it sucessfull. My Hope is Coto is given a chance to rescue us.
 
Back
Top