First Official Photos From New Star Trek Movie

Philias Fog writes "The most secret project in Hollywood is finally lifting its skirt. Today Paramount released a number of images for their new Star Trek movie directed by JJ Abrams. Shots include images of the bridge of the Enterprise, the villain Nero, a ship (not the Enterprise) and all of the crew in uniform. TrekMovie.com has a complete set of photos and links to all the new shots."

Comments

no comment

[p51d007]

Wow....almost 8am central time (USA) and no comments? Is trek that dead?

Re:no comment

[k_187]

eh people are probably just showing up to work and their caffeine hasn't percolated through their blood stream yet.

Re:no comment

[Spazztastic]

Not all of us sit here mashing the F5 key to get a FRIST PROAST.

Or the photos are so awesome that all the trekkies are running to Kinkos to print out high res photos to plaster on their walls.

Re:no comment

[bpjk]

OK, here ya go:

How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? They don't require people to have serious experience (time in the field) before they can get to positions of that much responsibility?

An adolescent captain just looks wrong...

At least they got that right in (most) of the other Treks.

Other than that, nice pics; love the angry Spock one :-)

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Although from the pics, I see that Hollywood still persists in the belief that there is a significant amount of oxygen in open space. The smoke and fireballs clearly show their mistaken belief.

Re:no comment

[bds1986]

I assume you're referring to the pic of the shot-up starship. Couldn't the fires be feeding on oxygen escaping from hull breaches?

Re:no comment

[dnoyeb]

It looks like High School Space Capades. These kids are way too young and they all look way too much the same. AND William Shatner IS Captain Kirk. There is no way you can cast anybody as Kirk but Shatner. Why even go there? If they want to appeal to new younger croud, then just call it Star Trek: ABC or something. They don't know Kirk anyway. I don't think any trekkies will be happy with that.

I seriously had to check if it was April 1.

Re:no comment

[rugatero]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this film they aren't yet the command staff, are they? My understanding is that this film is set back when the future Enterprise crew are still in the Academy.

Re:no comment

[falcon5768]

Pine is 28. Kirk was 30 when he took command of the Enterprise. Its not that they are so young its that Shatner was so OLD when he played Kirk (over 35 during the series) and your miss remembering how young Shatner really was in WNMHGB in comparison to the series proper which was filmed almost a year after the second pilot.

Re:no comment

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Try to think of it as Star Trek: 90210.

Re:no comment

[inaneframe]

Actually, this is what is known as a "movie", bpjk. So I guess the more pertinent question is "are they all capable actors?" Anything is possible in a movie, whether they are too young or not is open for debate but again refer to the first sentence. You're worse than a lot of the Trekkies drooling over this. Sure I'm excited but I'm going to take it at base value, it's a movie and it has Nimoy's voice, cool. Always enjoyed the Star Trek movies more anyway. Can't wait. I'm also not going to get over-critical with this, it's a fucking movie. Get a fucking life.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

So its like Muppets Jr, but with Star Trek?

Re:no comment

[ajs]

Adolescent?! The guy's 28 years old. Check IMDB, at 28, he's the youngest member of the cast which averages in the mid-30s.

You've been watching too much 90210, and may have actually come to believe that good looking mid-to-late 20s actors are teens. ;-)

Re:no comment

[Bandman]

Not to be the trek fanboy I used to be, but Kirk was the youngest captain in starfleet history. I'm assuming this is before he was legendary, and I'm sure they're going to be making the movies about how he /became/ legendary. Anyway, carry on.

PS - The Klingons didn't have a word for surrender...until they met Kirk

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, except for Nimoy, all actors in Star Trek TOS were just plain bad actors. Kirk and McCoy were
laughable. They could choose anyone at random from the street and there's a high chance he would still do a better job than Shatner.

Re:no comment

[Colonel Korn]

The problem is that they put him (and the 90210 people) in a lot of makeup so that they don't look like 28 year olds. They don't look like real people at all. Why is it that in movies made after the 1980s people main characters can't look real? Even when the main character is supposed to be some sort of grungy curmudgeon, say Jack Black playing a pseudo-bum, he's caked in makeup so that he's a bum with the skin of an adolescent.

Re:no comment

[Thiez]

You'd be suprised how little time it takes for the air to escape from a relatively small container such as the Enterprise into a practically infinite vacuum through a hole a few inch in diameter.

What bothers me more is the smoke in the left side of the picture. Anyone here knows how smoke 'should' behave in space?

Re:no comment

[jonas_jonas]

PS - The Klingons didn't have a word for surrender...until they met Kirk

This sounds awfully like:

The Klingons didn't have a word for surrender...until they met Chuck Norris *gaah*

Re:no comment

[rezalas]

Well, some people just *look* young. My ex is 27 and when she went to pick up a job application she was told "you have to be at least 16 sweetie". I've been carded in movies, and I'm 25. Its not uncommon for people that are healthy to appear young. Also, if you look at the time line for star trek, its all after a big war when we are recovering as a civilization. Even today the young are the ones who serve (at 23, you are considered an "old man" in basic training even today). Who is to say there are that many capable old soldiers left to command a starship AND run a whole fleet of them? Perhaps the oldest and most veteran are needed elsewhere, so they let the younger generation carry the front lines (also, not uncommon).

Re:no comment

[andrewd18]

WNMHGB

Gesundheit.

Re:no comment

[ajs]

The reason that makeup is so heavy is that, when you're looking at a 3-story tall closeup in a theater, "average skin" looks like the surface of the moon, and it can be very distracting.

How, that said, there is a tendency to go overboard, and yes I think most movies could do with more realism in makeup. But, I disagree that these people look like teens. They look good for their age, but then they're actors in Hollywood, so one imagines that's a hiring criteria.

Re:no comment

[paniq]

How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? They don't require people to have serious experience (time in the field) before they can get to positions of that much responsibility? An adolescent captain just looks wrong...

i agree. a captain that young is just going to make life harder for your average joe redshirt ;)

after all, star trek has taught me that leadership figures have to be balding, with gray hair. Who am i to question a work of fiction?

Now if i only knew whether McCain liked earl grey (hot). Then I would be sure.

Re:no comment

[Jesus_666]

Other than that, nice pics; love the angry Spock one :-)

So do I, for an entirely different reason. There's a German spoof movie where the crew is exorbitantly gay, based on a series of skits in a comedy show. I don't think the spoof movie is all that funny but I do think it's funny that Spock really reminds me of his counterpart in the spoof movie in that shot. I can't tell whether he's choking or feeling up Kirk...

Re:no comment

[Hurricane78]

More like the Tiny Toon Adventures. And the Klingons are the Dizzy Devil, the Ferengi are Montana Max and the new enemy is ... of course... Elmyra.

Re:no comment

[Like2Byte]

Too young, huh? Here goes. I'm an ex submariner. As near to a futuristic, fully-operational spaceship as we're likely to see in our lifetime is a naval submarine.

The CO (That's "Commanding Officer") of our boat was a late thirty to a forty-something. An early forty-something. The remaining officers were (junior) sub thirties - One as young as 25. Ranking officers in US submarines tend to be younger than their surface fleet counterparts. Submariners are also a heck of a lot smarter. As a matter of fact, submarines are not run quite like surface fleet ships. Knowledge tends to drive submariners - not rank, so much. I've told junior to mid-ranking officers to go eff themselves after they've issued me a command to do something that they didn't realize would have disastrous consequences. When they complained, the senior officers told them to shut it, lest the rest of the crew loose more respect for that officer because of their lack of knowledge.

Here's another little thing: My first CO and XO (Late 30s to early 40 (sub-43)) were the most charismatic leaders I've ever worked under. I would have followed them to the bottom of the sea. My next CO/XO combo (early 50s/late 40s) were, IMHO, more concerned with book-keeping. It was a very unhappy three years for the entire crew under the command of those asshats. Several ranking CPOs lost the ability to advance because of bad fit-reps these two shitheads issued - our COB committed suicide on board our boat for Christ's sake. The 'official' report said the command had nothing to do with it. Sure, right. I don't believe anyone believed it. The next CO I didn't stick around long enough to get to know.

So, as for being too young? Not buying it. There are many ranking officers that are much younger than their ranking CPOs (high ranking enlisted) on board. Subsequently, junior officers are much younger than the Chief's on-board.

Re:no comment

[Killjoy_NL]

That's all ok, I just love his work now as he plays a cuddle guntoting lawyer whose penis has Alzheimer :)

DENNY CRANE!! :D

Re:no comment

[v1]

I thought combustion (burning) moves slower than explosions? A race would have to develop, between the speed of the venting gases, and the speed at which the burning can spread. This would be eventually overcome by the thinning of the gases as they get farther from the breach.

I picture the effect looking something like the CMEs off the sun, that appear to puff out like a cloud of dust disturbed, swirling away for a limited distance.

Either that or it may be more on keel with say, an oil rig fire, where you've got a jet of say, natural gas, blasting up in the air, and the fire starts 50-100 feet from the well because the flame can't travel fast enough to reach back to the well because of the speed the gas is coming out at.

Still though, this is with a good mix of gas and oxygen, and essentially limitless supply of both the oxygen and gas, so I expect that to burn really well. Ejecting a lot of oxygen into space by itself doesn't DO anything, you have to have something else combustible, and an ignition source. We'll take it for granted that whatever MADE the hole is the ignition source, but I don't think the space ship is venting a bunch of flammable gas in addition to the oxygen?

Considering also the plausible size of the hole made by hostile fire, the accurate representation of the result would likely be pretty short-lived and not too spectacular. About like shooting a can of antiperspirant with a .22 - you get a pop, a short-lived WHOOSH of vented (and certainly not fireballing) gas, and then that's it, show's over in 2-3 sec tops.

But that doesn't make for very good CGI eye-candy now does it? And we LOVE our eye-candy! Watching stuff really blow up is part of watching movies like this. So I suppose the whole discussion of realism here is totally pointless.

Re:no comment

[Like2Byte]

Several ranking CPOs lost the ability to advance because of bad fit-reps these two shitheads issued - our COB committed suicide on board our boat for Christ's sake. The 'official' report said the command had nothing to do with it. Sure, right. I don't believe anyone believed it.

Let me clarify this lest anyone take it out of context. The official report stated that the COB, I forget his name, was having family problems and it was his family problems that drove him to commit suicide. I feel very strongly that may have been part of the reason. I also feel strongly that stresses at work were the root of the cause. He didn't want to hurt his wife more than this was already going to hurt so he came on board, with a loaded pistol, lay in his rack and shot himself in the chief's quarters. His best friend on board, another chief, found him.

It was a very fucked-up day. RIP, COB.

Re:no comment

[MoeDrippins]

I can't remember the formula, but I believe there is one that would give you a rate of transfer (and/or time taken) for the air to move from the Enterprise to space given some parameters; the pressure differential from inside to outside, the size of the hole, and some metric of the gas escaping (atomic weight; density? I've long since forgotten.)

Of course, as the gas escapes the pressure changes so there'd be some calculus involved.

Re:no comment

[Fritz Benwalla]

Hey Kirk, why the long face?

Re:no comment

[PinkyDead]

Just a quick search with google, and the youngest US Navy Captain I can find was 27, while the Royal Navy's youngest was 29.

Presumably Starfleet is an extension of current navies, so late twenties is not so strange. And IIRC, Kirk was supposed to be some kind of prodigy.

Re:no comment

[nosfucious]

"Teletrekkies" perhaps?

Hell, they even wear the nice colourful uniforms. "ooh oh. Full warp speed Mr Sulu."

(Handing in my geek card, I only had a passing interest in Star Trek. Doctor Who was more my style).

Re:no comment

[Manfre]

You're not a fan of Star Trek: 90210?

Re:no comment

[thompson.ash]

Talking of April...

Wasn't Robert April captain of the Enterprise before Kirk?

Hell, Robert April came before Pike...

Or is this another Hollywood example of Continuity Be Damned...

I suspect a lot of people are going to non-cannon this.

It's like Kirk and Spock: The Frat Years

Re:no comment

[geekoid]

Actually I think YOU would be suprised.

A hole a few eachs in diamaters would take weeks to empty a vessel that size.

Hine, calculate the maximum volume that can go through a hole of a given size, vs the 12PSI (assumed) of a ship.
What you have is a long Psssssss sound.

Add to that any spaceships of that size would be compartmentalized. So a hole many inches in diameter would not pose any real threat to the enterprise...unless it was in the containment field. KaBlooy

Re:no comment

[thompson.ash]

shit. I spelt canon wrong :(

*Hangs head in shame*

Re:no comment

[geekoid]

Naw, he's gotten old so everybody seem to look younger.

Re:no comment

[lysergic.acid]

if large clouds of gas (nebulae) can float around in space, then why can't smaller pockets of gas? and a photo captures a split-second view of an event, so even if the oxygen escaped very quickly, it could still combust before it becomes too dispersed.

and since smoke is just a cloud of very fine particulates (solid, liquid, and gases) it would probably behave the same way as comet comas & tails, which are composed of similar physical particles. if there was a significant amount of smoke, it would surely be visible in space. it just wouldn't be disperse by wind like it would in an a gaseous atmosphere.

Re:no comment

[Dun Malg]

How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? They don't require people to have serious experience (time in the field) before they can get to positions of that much responsibility?

"Well, since it's a prequel and the ship itself is young, we were thinking that it might be cool to make the crew young too. You know, give it kind of a Star Trek Kids vibe. The 'kid' angle is great marketing. It appeals to a younger, hipper demographic. It worked great for Roseanne Barr, and people just went ga-ga for Spy Kids!"

If it were me in that office, I'd have the guy taken out and shot; but it's some moron Paramount executive--- probably the same guy who picked that no-talent hack JJ Abrams to direct--- so the pitch was probably greeted with great enthusiasm.

Re:no comment

[geekoid]

Fires can also get a catalyst from another source.

Re:no comment

[bobdehnhardt]

IIRC, Robert April was captain of the Enterprise during its final testing and shakedown, which was largely confined to local space (solar system). Christopher Pike was captian during the initial missions after the Enterprise was placed into active service, and was generally referred to as her first captain. Kirk was her second, more famous, captain.

Hollywood shoulda called me - I've known this stuff for 40 years....

Re:no comment

[S-100]

The oxygen supply and artificial gravity on Star Trek era spaceships use a technology inexplicable or unknown to us now. Breaching the hull while still maintaining an artificial gravity field may well create an environment suitable for huge fireballs.

Re:no comment

[Mister Whirly]

How dare you knock the Priceline Negotiator. I only have one thing to say about that...

Re:no comment

[Neoprofin]

They gave Janeway a ship and she got lost on her first day. Clearly Starfleet aint what it used to be.

Re:no comment

[Neoprofin]

So if we made the next James Bond movie and had him played by Dakota Fanning it'd be ok as long as she put in a good performance?

It's just a movie after all. I hear 50 Cent is still into acting, maybe we can remake Schindler's List since Indian Jones already got the new Speilburg treatment.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

... its that Shatner was so OLD when he played Kirk (over 35 during the series) and your miss remembering how young Shatner really was in WNMHGB in comparison to the series proper which was filmed almost a year after the second pilot.

I'm going to go with... over 34?

Re:no comment

[hey!]

How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? ...

An adolescent captain just looks wrong...

It's just one of those experiences that everybody (or at least the fortunate ones) eventually have, like the first time you go to the doctor and he's younger than you are.

The first time I saw Star Trek TOS, it was in the original run on NBC. I was six years old at the time. At the time, 28 would have seemed quite old.

Re:no comment

[Dun Malg]

Actually, this is what is known as a "movie", bpjk. So I guess the more pertinent question is "are they all capable actors?" Anything is possible in a movie...

See, people throw this bullshit argument out all the time, but it's not some universal excuse that makes everything OK. Cultivating suspension of disbelief is not a trivial task. When writing a decent script taking place in any sort of fantasy world, a careful balance must be struck between the made-up shit and the realistic. What makes such TV and movies good is a solid, believable character interaction, and an internally consistent plot. It may take place in a fictional world, but if it has humans in it, they better damn well act like humans. No amount of "hey, it's just a movie" erases the fact that no responsible human would ever put a starship under the command of a bunch of kids! You can put all sorts of whiz-bang outlandish gizmos in their hand that shoot this imaginary particle, or that made-up energy beam and I'll go for it. But ask me to accept that this is the well-defined Star Trek universe, only for some reason they briefly decided "youth == wisdom" during the period portrayed in the movie, and I'm gonna call bullshit.

Sure, there are plenty of people who will watch and accept any vapid trash you throw up on the screen, so long as it has explosions, boobies, and (most importantly) a twist ending. A lot of people watch Lost, Fringe, used to watch Alias, and actually went to see Mission Impossible 3. This just shows that there's a ready market to make a quick buck distracting folks for 47 minutes (or longer). Do you think any of those abysmal JJ Abrams stool samples will be selling heavily on [DVD|BluRay|*] in 20 years? Highly doubtful.

Re:no comment

[thompson.ash]

I stand corrected.

Of course it doesn't answer the fact why a stupidly young kirk is sat in the big chair...

Unless maybe Pike is there as an instructor?
That could be quite interesting but then Christopher Pike wasn't exactly old in TOS...

I'm not being funny but I can see this film going the way of Star Wars I-III...

It's going to throw the whole timeline right out of whack. Then again Enterprise saw to that quite nicely as well... And that came resplendant with it's "And it was all just a dream" Dallas-style finale!

Re:no comment

[Like2Byte]

You have issues.

And, no, your post didn't have the effect it intended.

Now, finish your cereal so your mommy can put your binkie back in your pie-hole.

Re:no comment

[mikael]

I would assume that the individual particles would continue to travel in a straight line at a constant velocity since there is nothing else in the way. You only get turbulence because of the interaction of the different pressure/temperatures/densities of the burning material and the surrounding atmosphere. Maybe if there was a gravitationally strong enough object, any leaking smoke would form streamers around whatever large gravitational object there was.

The space shuttle had problems with the exhaust vent for the sanitation equipment forming ice sculptures.

Re:no comment

[IndustrialComplex]

at 23, you are considered an "old man" in basic training even today

When I started at the Air Force Academy, one of the guys in my flight was 22. He was older than most of the Cadre (and since he already was previously enlisted, they knew to keep a lot of the BS away from him).

We called him "Old Man Wharton" (Name changed to protect the innocent).

I just wanted to say that you were right on the mark. At age 17,18 and fresh out of HS, someone 23 would appear to be ancient.

Re:no comment

[Rei]

Bright, colorful uniforms indeed.

I love the fact that they're bluescreening in an Aptera Typ-1e electric car as a "flying car" ;) Hey, saves you money on props...

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Submariners are also a heck of a lot smarter. As a matter of fact, submarines are not run quite like surface fleet ships. Knowledge tends to drive submariners - not rank, so much. I've told junior to mid-ranking officers to go eff themselves after they've issued me a command to do something that they didn't realize would have disastrous consequences. When they complained, the senior officers told them to shut it, lest the rest of the crew loose more respect for that officer because of their lack of knowledge.

That's very good to hear, though the bit about the COB killing himself is very upsetting.

Re:no comment

[eno2001]

Where does Jonathan Archer fall in here?

Re:no comment

[eno2001]

Hmmm.. I'm only on the third season of Enterprise so far. (Watching from DVDs borrowed from the library) So... it ends like Saint Elsewhere?

Re:no comment

[eno2001]

Oh if only I had mod points right now. You'd get them all. "Bang zoom! To the moon Alice"!

Re:no comment

[swimsaturn]

So, as for being too young? Not buying it. There are many ranking officers that are much younger than their ranking CPOs (high ranking enlisted) on board. Subsequently, junior officers are much younger than the Chief's on-board.

Good point. A good movie example is Master & Commander: the average age of the officer corps is below that of the enlisted/sailors, and some of the officers are young boys.

Re:no comment

[corbettw]

Look at some pictures of famous people in their late-20s and early-30s from two hundred years ago. They look like they're in their forties or fifties, compared to our standards for today. It's not a stretch to imagine that, in the 23rd century, a 30 year old will resemble (to our eyes) a young adult (16 to 22).

Ref: Look at http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/Declaration_independence.jpg. Notice how old Thomas Jefferson (tall figure in middle) looks. This painting is based on what he looked like 33, but he looks like an old man of 50.

Re:no comment

[tuxgeek]

Mr Shatner & Mr Nimoy once looked young too.

As I recall, it was the mid 60's when the series took to the air waves.

Re:no comment

[Ihmhi]

If you have a reasonable scientific question, remember that it can always be answered with Technobabble and pseudoscience.

(BTW, Plasma fires.)

Re:no comment

[Bemopolis]

A good rule of thumb to use is: in a vacuum, a cloud of gas will expand at the current speed of sound in the gas. Of course, as it expands the sound speed drops, so the dispersal rate will drop drastically once the cloud, say, doubles in size. So, for the 10cm hole scenario in the GP post, the rate of air loss (area of hole x sound speed) would be about 150 cubic meters per minute at 1 atmosphere, not really an explosive decompression unless the flow rips the hole much wider.

As for (emission) nebulae, they have the additional complications of arising from a self-gravitating molecular cloud and the fact that the expansion is isothermal (because of the nearby ionizing source. Also, they are honking huge, so it takes much longer to double in volume.

Re:no comment

[Eudial]

An adolescent captain just looks wrong...

On the other hand, it's not less ridiculous than the geriatric Enterprise crew in Star Trek VI.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

That's 'cause they all wore those old-guy-gray-hair wigs. He actually had a 20" red afro.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

WNMHGB

We don't use that kind of language around here. This is a family site.

Re:no comment

[ktappe]

Of course it doesn't answer the fact why a stupidly young kirk is sat in the big chair...

If this is a shot of Kirk in the Kobayashi Simulator, it does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

Re:no comment

[wootcat]

I'm sure they were picked young so Paramount could have them on hand for decades of movies (barring accidental/intentional death). Paramount probably locked them into life-long, soul-selling contracts so they are obligated to resume these roles for as long as they breathe, or until they can digitize the whole crew and convincingly animate them until our sun dies.

Re:no comment

[chill]

The reason that makeup is so heavy is that, when you're looking at a 3-story tall closeup in a theater, "average skin" looks like the surface of the moon, and it can be very distracting.

Ah, I see you made the same mistake I did and saw "The Matrix" -- and specifically Lawrence Fishburn's face -- at an IMAX theater. [shudder]

Re:no comment

[SupremoMan]

How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? They don't require people to have serious experience (time in the field) before they can get to positions of that much responsibility?

They have the future equivalent of Bush I guess. It's sad to know we haven't outgrown patronage and cronyism by the 23rd-24th century.

Re:no comment

[Colonel Korn]

Having seen a lot of actors at non-events, I can say that they don't tend to look good for their ages. Too many drugs and cigarettes along with too many tans take a heavy toll.

Still, my point was that people on the same giant screens (actually movie screens tended to be bigger back in the day before the multiplex killed the giant monotheaters) showed up looking like real people a couple decades ago and before. Sure, they wore makeup, but it left them looking not just their age, but realistic. Actors today are moving toward looking about as real as something rendered at ILM for George Lucas, and most of the time we don't even notice! Makeup and digital touchups are giving people absolutely unattainable physical ideals.

Re:no comment

[ajs]

I think you're over-generalizing, here. No Country for Old Men certainly did not have actors who looked unrealistically smooth-featured. Neither did Memento, Donnie Darko, just about any U.S./U.K. film (e.g. Snatch) except for the Star Wars prequels, Hotel Rwanda, and many, many others.

What you're reacting to is the trend in makeup for big-budget "Hollywood films." Movies like Star Trek and Harry Potter work hard to create a "polished" and uniform look which is expensive to achieve. It's a barrier to entry for new studios as it requires makeup, lighting, optics and many other elements which are very expensive. However, when it comes to that, I don't think Superman or Pretty Woman were any different, and those movies were certainly not recent. Go back further. I think Gone with the Wind was in a similar boat, as was Breakfast at Tiffany's. Is this a new trend, or just the attempt to portray a blemish-free world in our modern fiction?

Re:no comment

[blincoln]

So... it ends like Saint Elsewhere?

There are basically two endings. The first, good ending (written by Manny Coto), and then one episode later the legendary "Dread Berman Beam" is used to carve a disappointing one.

If you haven't gotten to season 4 yet, you're in for a treat. Early in that season Manny Coto basically took over, and it temporarily became awesome.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no fire in space - it would dissipate very quickly. Look at Nasa launches and the plume behind the rocket get wider and the "fire" almost gone as it leaving the atmosphere.

Spoke would dissipate almost instantly in space. We are talking fraction of a second. You'd only see anything if it was bailing out from the inside. It would still disappear meters from the hole.

Air would not leave Enterprise quickly as you think. There would be bulkheads that get closed. Furthermore, volume-wise, Enterprise is not a small ship. From moderate hole (like 5-20cm), it would take some time for the air to vent from entire volume. A hole like that would "empty" ISS quickly, within a minute or two. But Enterprise is much larger.

Furthermore, all spaceships (including current space station) have systems that try to replace the air being lost. I think it would allow astronauts enough time to close off the damaged section(s) if that were to happen on ISS.

Re:no comment

[thompson.ash]

Hadn't considered that!

If that is indeed the case then it makes perfect sense.

Thanks, I forgot about that!

Re:no comment

[Hatta]

That's what happens when you let a woman drive.

Re:no comment

[jedidiah]

No. It's not that. These days people seem to have an extended
adolescence. They look like kids because they keep their bodies
in good enough shape and deep down they really are kids. It's
a sort of "man child" effect. So, when you look at them you don't
get the impression they've ever been responsible for anything.

This is why it never occured to me that the kid in the chair was
supposed to be Kirk. He doesn't even come off as a proper cadet
(Starfleet, USN or Citadel).

Re:no comment

[jedidiah]

That's not so bad.

The real problem is the idea that they would have been together all that time.

They should have all been spread to the 4 winds.

This is an unavoidable Trek problem in general though.

Re:no comment

[Stargoat]

Nelson was a post captain at 23.
John Paul Jones commanded his first fighting ship at 29.
Cochrane took a 32 gun frigate with a 16 gun sloop at the age of 26.
Steven Decatur fought the Barbary Pirates in a sloop at 24.
Edward Pellew was made post at 23. His brother Israel was made a commander at 32.
I could go through most of the list of captains at Trafalgar and do the same thing.

Re:no comment

[vux984]

Please, except for Nimoy, all actors in Star Trek TOS were just plain bad actors.

Nobody said Shatner was a good actor. But he IS Captain Kirk.

They could choose anyone at random from the street and there's a high chance he would still do a better job than Shatner.

At being a space captain, sure, even Kevin Sorbo who is painfully bad was about as good at it as Shatner. But only a truly great actor would be able to convincingly play "William Shatner playing Captain Kirk" without having the whole thing degenerate into a complete farce.

Re:no comment

[AgentSmith]

Wow....almost 8am central time (USA) and no comments? Is trek that dead?

Mebbe not, but it should be.

I know. I know. Before you flamebait mod me into oblivion hear me out.

It's too soon. We've collectively barely had the time to get the bad smell
of Enterprise out of the air before Paramount starts lighting another Trek stogie.

Also, it is time for something else to come along. Star Trek had its time.
It's been real fun riding around the galaxy in the Federation Universe, but
new ideas need to happen for inspiring the next generations to go into space.

Isn't anyone tired of the rehash, retread and remakes Hollywood and TV have been
making for the past couple decades? Enough with the homages.

Are there no new ideas?!

     

Re:no comment

[jacks0n]

That stardate makes no sense.

Re:no comment

[discord5]

cuddle guntoting lawyer whose penis has Alzheimer

That's what you get for sleeping with all those blue chicks.

Re:no comment

[$RANDOMLUSER]

How about

Star date Nine zero

Two



One zero.

Re:no comment

[TheGeneration]

What bothers me more is the smoke in the left side of the picture. Anyone here knows how smoke 'should' behave in space?

ummm... I think this explains it: it is fiction.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

>Well, some people just *look* young.

We look younger than we are because we don't have childrens anymore. Our society (at least those with a job and college education) is getting older, and we are still single. But, hey, we look younger, and all my money is for me, and for me only !!

Try having a family at 20... you will look old at 30.

Re:no comment

[Alioth]

I don't really care so long as Uhura is wearing the 1960s style short skirt uniform!

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Too young, huh? Here goes. I'm an ex submariner. ...

Once a sub-mariner, always a sub-mariner.

Sewer-pipe sailor!

TUBER!

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

Paramount mounted it and fucked it to death. Does this current abomination have a theme song with *words*? Or does the captain have some sort of crotch liking mutt?

I'm done with them.

Re:no comment

[Drinking Bleach]

Even better: because Star Trek is meant to be served as _entertainment_ and not an accurate representation of the future computers, aliens, society, etc.

Big explosions are more entertaining than a little hole killing everybody.

Re:no comment

[Anonymous Coward]

WNMHGB

Gesundheit.

Nice comeback, but I think I'da came back with:

FTWIHAIHTTS

Re:no comment

[Nimey]

I'm 29 and have been mistaken for an early-20s student by students at the university I work for. I wouldn't blame it on good health, necessarily, since I didn't take very good care of myself in my teenage years.

I'd place the blame with being a lonely nerd who sat indoors on the computer & reading books for those years. Ultraviolet does age the skin.

Re:no comment

[inaneframe]

Not at all surprising to me, you missed my point. All that matters is if the actor can perform in the role, a female couldn't play "Bond" and 50 Cent cannot play in many roles in what would be a remake of Shindler's List for obvious reasons but those are matters of race and sex, which is a bit more complicated to change in make-up than age. Besides, age is a lot more difficult to determine than race or sex and would probably be MORE so in 300 years. This can get as complicated as you want but as I had said earlier "it's just a movie", in so far as you're a human being with a so-called life, move on. It wasn't your problem or determination whom would play the characters and it never will be, so watch the movie, like it or don't like it, shut the fuck up and move on.

Spock

[gijoel]

I can't get over the fact that Zachary Quinto (Sylar) from Heroes is Spock. I keep expecting that the plot will be about a bunch of scalped corpses being found all over the Enterprise.

Re:Spock

[Alicat1194]

Mind-meld, mind removal, it's all the same.

Re:Spock

[Notquitecajun]

Yeah, no kidding. Poor Quinto has pretty much a ruined career, because EVERY time I see him on screen I'll be thinking, "Can't trust him! That's Sylar! Kill him now or it's gonna get worse!!!"

Re:Spock

[LWATCDR]

If he is a good actor he can pull it off. Take a look at Tom Hanks.

Re:Spock

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever I watch a Vin Diesel movie, I always think of the character he's playing (Xander, Riddick) as Vin Diesel. Every time?

"Xander! Get the RPG!" - the movie...
"Who is Xander? ... Oh, right." - me...

Re:Spock

[geekoid]

Not really.
If he is a good actor, it won't matter. If he isn't q good director will know how to use his typecast persona.

Much like Keanu Reeves getting parts whose characters a stiff a wooden~
ZING!

Re:Spock

[Deanalator]

Also, why the hell did they release this picture?

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/aicnkirkspock.jpg

I seriously thought that Sylar had broken onto the enterprise, and the new movie would be some sort of heroes mashup.

Re:Spock

[Anonymous Coward]

And now every time Sylar can-openers someone's head on Heroes, I'm going to think, "He's dead, Jim."

Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

Hope the nerds don't ruin it by complaining about canon or discrepancies with TOS.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[morgan_greywolf]

Bah.

There are rules. Well, mostly. The rules for rec.arts.startrek.* from way back when seem to apply just as well today: if you saw it on the screen, large or small, it's 'canon' -- officially part of the Trek Universe.

Any discrepancies in on-screen material are just blown off as a YATIs -- Yet Another Trek Inconsistency. It's not like a movie and television project that has spanned almost 40 years, 5 television series, about a dozen movies and has had literally hundreds of writers can possibly keep everything consistent. Get over it.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[jellomizer]

Well this pretty much tossed cannon out the window. As well any form of realism. A bunch of friends at the academy then they all get split up for about a decade as they advance in ranks on their own missions. Then they all happen to go back to the same ship.

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain. Being that he was in the same inner circle, as Captain Kirk and friends.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lately, both odd and eve numered movies have sucked

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[smooth wombat]

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain.

Considering Sulu was running around with Kumar getting stoned on the weekends and escaping from Guantanamo, it's no wonder it took him so long.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Hognoxious]

Well this pretty much tossed cannon out the window.

That's dangerous, artillery is quite heavy.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[FauxPasIII]

> Lately, both odd and eve numered movies have sucked

You think? I actually rather enjoyed First Contact and Nemesis. Generations was meh, though, and Insurrection was a cornucopia of fail.
From where I set the quality oscillator is still operating within tolerances. =)

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[elrous0]

When you capitalize on the Trek name, you get a significant guaranteed built-in audience who will definitely buy tickets. That's the upside. But you also invite comparison to previous incarnations and risk complaints from fans who have certain expectations based on those earlier movies/series. That's the downside.

If you don't want to be subject to the criticism of Star Trek fans, that's easy enough to fix. Don't call it Star Trek or set it in the Star Trek universe.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[elrous0]

Nonsense. With the power of NPH on his side, he could do anything.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Sabathius]

Hey, Commander. In Quasar Delema, you used the auxiliary of Deck-B for Gamma Over-ride. But, online blueprints clearly indicate that Deck-B is independent of the Kined Matrix. We were just wondering where the error lies in that...

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[VShael]

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain.

But haven't the fans complained for years about the prejudice against gays in Trek?

Or did I misunderstand that?

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[hey!]

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain. Being that he was in the same inner circle, as Captain Kirk and friends.

Depends on how dysfunctional the organization is.

My wife once interviewed a guy who was retiring from the military after years as a non-com. She'd ask, "do you have experience in such and so?" and he'd answer things like "no, not at all," or "a bit, but I wasn't very successful at it." She's a decent soul, and finally she had to stop him and remind him that he was applying for a job, not discussing his qualifications with an officer who had a complete and comprehensive paper trail on him and every other person being considered. Even so, I imagine within the military a lot depends on who you work for and with, especially in peacetime.

One problem every organization has is recognizing competent team players, ones who do their job so well that they don't get noticed, especially if they are around people who do get noticed for their feats of last ditch derring-do. I'd say that if you want an explanation for why Sulu doesn't become captain until he's almost retirement age, consider that Starfleet promoted Kirk to captain when he was thirty. Given what we know about Kirk, this indicates that frequent brushes with danger, survived by the skin of your teeth, is a fast track for promotion in the fleet.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[ca111a]

is Kumar in the movie as well?

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Hurricane78]

Considering his accent, I assume you meant "NLP" (neuro-lingual programming). ;)

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[lunadude]

Nice.

As far as canon, I understand they will be "breaking the timeline", so that all the other series' inconsistencies, will actually work. I guess it is like having your broken arm, re-broken to heal correctly.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain.

He didna sux the wright coqs!

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Random BedHead Ed]

I agree that First Contact was great and Generations was meh ... but it's easy to forget First Contact (IMHO the best recent Star Trek film) came out in 1996, 12 years ago. Even Nemesis, which I enjoyed but thought went a little too far with the Data/Spock parallel, came out six years ago. It's been a while since we had a good Star Trek film. And honestly, looking at the actors and costumes and bridge sets, I'm suddenly excited about this film. It looks like they tried to capture the aesthetic of The Cage (the original series pilot episode) and the first season, without the gray and red color scheme and wobbly walls. This movie is going to have a very eye-catching appearance.

That said, I'd trade a good Star Trek film for something new and original. No one's making the next Alien, the next Blade Runner, the next Firefly. I'm eager to see this, but as a sci-fi fan there's a part of me that's discouraged to see us mining 1966 for ideas.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is an odd number Trek, technically. However, they broke that "formula" or previous "consistency" with the last two movies. Insurrection was actually good and was an odd number Trek, while Nemesis was worse than Superman III & IV combined and was an even number Trek. So, I would say it appears they have reversed the way their previous numbering worked and this one should be good!

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Lord Jester]

NPH = Neill Patrick Harris (aka Doogie Houser)

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[idontgno]

I rather suspect it's more like having your as-yet-undamage arm broken and mis-set to match your other screwed-up arm. But maybe I'm just cynical.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

A bunch of friends at the academy then they all get split up for about a decade as they advance in ranks on their own missions. Then they all happen to go back to the same ship.

Isn't it possible that Kirk later chose those people to be in his crew, precisely because of their previous shared experience? Doesn't seem unrealistic to me.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[fahrbot-bot]

about a dozen movies and has had literally hundreds of writers can possibly keep everything consistent

The problem I have (with any series) is when the writers get lazy. Many times I thought this of TNG when almost every problem could be solved by more power, creating some new exotic particle beam and Data remarking "it is possible, in theory". Phoning it in gets old fast.

I thought the original series was more character-oriented in its drama, but then there were only 80 episodes compared to the 178 of TNG - and 176 (DN9), 172 (VOY). Hell Enterprise only had 98, but was getting tired.

I'm sure this says something about either the writers of different generations, or the generations themselves -- or me [ I seem to like fewer and fewer kids on my lawn these days :-) ]

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[camperdave]

A wizard did it.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[geekoid]

So it's cannon unless it's not.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[bigstrat2003]

Wait... you liked Nemesis, but not Insurrection? Nemesis was shit! Insurrection was at least decent, Nemesis had no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[dwye]

> No one's making the next Alien,

Wasn't there one a year or two ago? The Aliens were in a ship run by the Predators, which crashed in Colorado?

> the next Blade Runner,

That would be the next movie based on something by Philip K. Dick (hopefully with actors, rather than tracings of them, this time).

> the next Firefly.

Go rent or buy a copy of Serenity. Better, buy 50-100 million copies, and pretty much guarantee that there will be another movie, even if River and Jayne have to make only cameos.

> but as a sci-fi fan there's a part of me that's discouraged to see us mining 1966 for ideas.

As opposed to mining the 19th century? The episode fighting the Planet Destroyer was Moby Dick, for instance. I have read theses claiming that all (written) Sci-Fi is 19th century literature, being the Literature Of Ideas, vs. the 20th century Literature Of Character And Consciousness.

Anyway, all literature mines ideas from the Neolithic, if not the Paleolithic. Aliens could have been about hunting a cave bear in their own cave network, for instance.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Neoprofin]

In the comics industry we call that "retconning" for Retroavtive Continuity and it explains why one character can have 10 fathers, 5 real names, and originate from any time at any place.

You can tell I think it's done wonders for quality story writing.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Sj0]

I have the solution to the problem of writers "phoning it in".

We'll need to remodulate the tachyon emitters to emit a neoepinphrine pulse.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Sj0]

Seems sort of strange that Kirk would be going through everyone's dossier in the first episodes like he did if that was the case. "Wow, so you're a Vulcan, eh? I've never seen a Vulcan before!"

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[fahrbot-bot]

We'll need to remodulate the tachyon emitters to emit a neoepinphrine pulse.

Theoretically, that should work.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Random BedHead Ed]

Oh sure, nothing's really new ... and yet, continuing a franchise or doing a remake is even less original than simply reusing archetypes. If a storyteller mines primal, Paleolithic fears of monsters in the form of an Alien movie set on a future ship controlled by The Company, he or she is at least framing a new story with new characters. Yes, the structures and archetypes are repeats, but the fresh approach makes it worth doing.

I'm not trying to dis Star Trek or Star Wars, or remakes like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. I enjoy them. But I remember watching Firefly on DVD for the first time and wondering how I'd managed to miss the show when it aired, and I lamented that new and original shows like it didn't happen (and succeed) on a regular basis. Yes, it's just a western in space, and yes, the overbearing government of the Alliance has precursors in other stories, and I know the Reavers are recycled zombies, but the fresh packaging, design and characters were something to admire. I wish they'd happen more often. The main reason they don't is that we vote with our feet: I know I'll head to the cinema when this Star Trek film opens. Perhaps I shouldn't be so quick to reward repetition.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[kungfugleek]

With all the time-travel and mirror universe stories they've had, they could easily claim *everything* is cannon -- in some time-line/universe combo...

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[morgan_greywolf]

No. It's canon even if it is inconsistent.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[TheSpoom]

What, do they show up in some holodeck malfunction or something?

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[ultranova]

In the comics industry we call that "retconning" for Retroavtive Continuity and it explains why one character can have 10 fathers, 5 real names, and originate from any time at any place.

In real life we call that a road-trip ;).

You can tell I think it's done wonders for quality story writing.

I remember when Mr. Sinister was blasted to a skeleton, only to return and offer this ingenius explanation: "I faked it."

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[isorox]

At least Sulu was promoted -- Harry Kim will be an ensign till he dies

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[rleibman]

is Kumar in the movie as well?

No, he was too busy playing doctor.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

but considering that Kumar is spending his time now helping Dr. house do diagnostic medicine... Yeah, I can see it.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[fraudrogic]

Hey, Commander. In Quasar Delema, you used the auxiliary of Deck-B for Gamma Over-ride. But, online blueprints clearly indicate that Deck-B is independent of the Kined Matrix. We were just wondering where the error lies in that...

Well that sounds like something a PC would say, not an Apple.


...wait for it...

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Sabathius]

I think you're the only one who knows the reference. Based on these other responses, I don't think they got it. ;)

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well this pretty much tossed cannon out the window. As well any form of realism. A bunch of friends at the academy then they all get split up for about a decade as they advance in ranks on their own missions. Then they all happen to go back to the same ship.

I find it kinda hard to swallow that Sulu took an additional 25 years to rank captain. Being that he was in the same inner circle, as Captain Kirk and friends.

I don't think Sulu ever complained about swallowing, so shutup.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[Anonymous Coward]

But, remember Harry Kim got to be Captain of the Rhode Island in the possible future timeline in the last episode of VOY ... Adm. Janeway from the future goes back to the "present" to help get the ship home earlier, Capt. Kim helps her fight off some Klingons, etc.
But now that Voyager got home earlier, things will be different from that future. Who knows maybe Harry will become Captain sooner?

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[isorox]

But, remember Harry Kim got to be Captain of the Rhode Island in the possible future timeline in the last episode of VOY ... Adm. Janeway from the future goes back to the "present" to help get the ship home earlier, Capt. Kim helps her fight off some Klingons, etc.
But now that Voyager got home earlier, things will be different from that future. Who knows maybe Harry will become Captain sooner?

The bat mobile episode doesn't count.

Re:Wait... is this an even or odd number Trek?

[fraudrogic]

Yeah, I was being pretty obscure without any hints (so was the parent). Not surprised anyone picked it up or even bothered. But thanks for getting it!

Most secret

[Rob Kaper]

Indeed, I didn't even know they were still trying to make a buck from this franchise. :D

Re:Most secret

[morgan_greywolf]

Star Trek has been one of Paramount's top cash cows for a long time. And they're gonna milk that cow for ever dollar it's worth.

Re:Most secret

[elrous0]

Paramount will beat that horse LONG past the point where it's dead, buried, decomposed, and reduced to dust. My God, when you've lowered yourself to recruiting Scott Bakula as your starship captain, you'll do ANYTHING.

Re:Most secret

[moranar]

This says it better than I can.

Re:Most secret

[Chelloveck]

Paramount has been beating that horse LONG past the point where it's dead, buried, decomposed, and reduced to dust.

Fixed that for ya.

Re:Most secret

[Free the Cowards]

If it still neighs when they hit it (i.e. if it still makes more money than they spend) then it ain't dead, buried, or decomposed yet.

Looking at the pictures..

[Splab]

leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[CXI]

leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

It's obvious. Galloping around the cosmos is a game for the young, Doctor!

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[eclectro]

leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

Because they demand a less salary??

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[dkleinsc]

I would think CleverNickName would be the best person to answer that one.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait till he busts out his iphone so the movie can connect with young people.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[pmontra]

Shatner was 35 when he started acting as J.T. Kirk. Pine is 28. He has about the right age for the role he has to play in the story of the Kirk character. Furthermore people at 28 can already be everything they'll ever be if they're really good.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Carewolf]

He might be 28 but it he looks 16, likely because the producers has decided he should look younger than he is. Shatner has always looked 40-something no matter what his real age was.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Sponge Bath]

Shatner has always looked 40-something no matter what his real age was.

Oh really?

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[suso]

I would think CleverNickName would be the best person to answer that one.

Unlikely, looks like he hasn't commented on Slashdot since January.

In other news, a giant wooshing sound caught thousands of noobs by surprise today.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[falcon5768]

Im almost 30 and guess what, not for nothing but I look a hell of a lot more like Pine than I do Shat when he was Kirk. Back then hollywood tended to have older actors play younger characters, to the point that once you have actors who ARE the actual age of the characters play them, it seems jarring.

You know another thing, I love how people call it Star Trek 90210, yet people fail to remember the entire cast of that show minus Brian Austen Green was like 25 when they started. They where 25 and playing 16 year olds.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[dmncstmpfl]

He needs to be at least 45 to be on the same level of masculinity as Shattner when he was 35 ^^

They do seem kind of young and shiny. Looks to me like the crew of some Starship Troopers sequel, which doesn't really let me hope for a good outcome of this movie. And there I was, getting my hopes up when I heard Simon Pegg is playing Scotty...

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[e2d2]

Seen many old astronauts lately?

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[SimonGhent]

Seen many old astronauts lately?

Buzz Aldrin's 78

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[internerdj]

As a 28 year old this post makes me very sad for some reason...

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Jogar the Barbarian]

I just saw Encounter at Far Point and the Naked Now for the first time. They were quite painful, but also amusing in a schadenfreude sort of way.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Ed Avis]

Yeah, dammit, why are all the cast so frickin' *young*? And too good-looking IMHO. Science fiction shouldn't be spoiled by hunky young beefcake any more than by pneumatic Borg-enhanced female lifeforms. One or two green aliens is okay, but the bridge of the Enterprise is not a shaving foam commercial.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[pmontra]

This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:JamesTKirk.jpg is a somewhat younger looking picture.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[OwnedByTwoCats]

In 2003, I stood about 8 feet away from both John Glenn and Neil Armstrong.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Hurricane78]

Hey, I liked them exactly because the team still had its personality edges.

Then after the first season, every detail was lost and they all became the same pathetic federation clones. I really wish, the writers of the new galactica would write the characters of a 31st century star trek show. And I really wish they would completely stop that retarded bullshit of calling people "aliens" because they have a makeup-pimple on the forehead, because this was the stupidest thing ever "imagined" in a sci-fi-show. Being cheap on the money is no excuse anymore!

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Anonymous Coward]

Thus simultaneously violating two protective court orders. Nice.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[geekoid]

Psst... you've gotten old.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[e2d2]

Man I hope to be in such shape at 78, or alive even!

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[blueturffan]

8 feet away is pretty impressive, but in 1969, I stood about 240,000 miles away from Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin!

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? I always thought that Americans were just really slow to graduate. Its not uncommon for people in other countries to be put back every year until they pass. 90210 and Buffy taught me that most American high-schoolers never go up a year! Very different from "Grange Hill".

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Chris Mattern]

I can't recall seeing any *young* astronauts lately. Or haven't you been paying attention on who NASA's been sending into space these days?

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[e2d2]

35 is not old you insensitive bastard!

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Anonymous Coward]

Because doing so the show will attract younger people too, while the risk of losing the die hard fans is still zero. If we watched all episodes of Voyager and Enterprise we'll watch this one as well, even with a toddler as captain.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[LarryRiedel]

the entire cast of that show minus Brian Austen Green was like 25 when they started

Shannen Doherty was 19, Jennie Garth was 18, Tori Spelling was 17, 2 months older than Brian Austin Green.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[badboy_tw2002]

Whatever dude, they totally explained in that episode where they found out some other race seeded their DNA on each planet to make apes, lizards, and whatever klingons came from into humanoids.

Plus that and a wizard did it.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[ggvaidya]

+1 Brilliant.

Re:Looking at the pictures..

[Hurricane78]

Yeah, I saw that episode....

Worst... explanation... ever...

Come on, if you start out that way, you have already lost big time. By trying to explain it, you only make things worse, and more awkward for you. Just let it go, and start with more realistic aliens in the next series. They did it with the Klingons when they went from TOS to TNG, so why not do it again and come closer and closer. With the advanced technology that we have now, the limits are gone.

I recommend aliens that do not look like anything on earth. Not even close. How about much different chemistry.
But hey... most "scientists" can't even accept, that aliens would exist without using oxygen and carbon hydrates, when such lifeforms even exist in our own deep sea.

It's saddening how much average people lack fantasy.

Is it just me...

[Darundal]

...or were you expecting something closer to the series insofar as ship design is concerned? After seeing the pics of the shuttle (specifically, the control console) I figured that the ship interiors would be tastefully done updates, not complete redesigns.

Re:Is it just me...

[McFortner]

And you thought "Enterprise" was the worst thing to happen to Star Trek continuity!

Re:Is it just me...

[Yvanhoe]

I must say, the haircuts disturb me more than the ships designs. It really looks like a student-produced movie with the according casting. I guess there will be the jock, the geek, the goth, the pimp, the blonde...

I really get the feeling from the pictures and the faces (that doesn't work in real life but in a movie you can guess that much) that the characters will be completely, utterly shallow. Sorry, I'll stay on BSG for now. The Star Trek franchise needs a re-invention like they did on Battlestar, they are currently only cashing on nostalgia.

Re:Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah good ole BattleScar Dramatica...going one step further to prove that you really can ruin a scifi show by tarting it up and turning it into a chick flick.

Re:Is it just me...

[westlake]

..or were you expecting something closer to the series insofar as ship design is concerned?

.

ST:TOS was produced for the 21 inch screen and the 21 inch budget - using sets and props designed and constructed pretty much as they would have been for 1950's Space Patrol.

The Enterprise itself is nothing more than the flying saucer from Forbidden Planet thinly disguised by [structurally implausible and rather awkward] external elements added for visual appeal.

Isn't that why they chose Trek?

[khasim]

To get the fans who MUST watch everything under that name ... because they fell in love with something in a previous series / movie / cartoon / book?

So why complain when those same fans complain that X doesn't match the way it was depicted in Y?

If the movie is good enough on its own, then the complaints will be minor nit-picks.

I, for one

[kbrasee]

leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

I, for one, welcome our new Starship Enterprise boy captain overlord.

Why don't you people get a life!

[bugeaterr]

Correction:
Why don't.... you... people.... ..... .....
Get a life!

Re:Why don't you people get a life!

[bugeaterr]

Those modding flamebait need to youtube the Saturday Night Live Shatner skit. It's very funny.

I, for one, HAVE a life, so though I will be seeing the new Star Trek movie opening night, I will NOT be in costume. Those people are freaks! ;)

Re:Why don't you people get a life!

[Maxo-Texas]

I will be in costume as a 22nd century starship captain transported back to the early 2000's before the eugenics war, complete with period costume "blue jean", a "polo" shirt, a "belt", and some "loafers". There I will flirt and fall in love with a beautiful young girl but she will spurn me when I try to use period slang and say "Yea, I was hanging out posting on slashdot the other day..."

After saving the life of an unknown child in the 3rd row by preventing his or her romulan assassination (and thereby preserving the time continuity), I will return sadder and wiser to the present, insult my chief officer and we will all have a good laugh about it on the bridge.

Re:Why don't you people get a life!

[bugeaterr]

laughing out loud! (my abbreviator is broken)

It's the economy, the economy -- stupid!

[flajann]

Though, I could use some escapism right about now!

Those uniforms

[Fri13]

ST:NG had good uniforms. All the uniforms looks like joggin suits on those shots. No style, no correct tags and rankings etc.

Check out the Star-Trek Next Generation season 5-6 uniforms what example a Jean-Luc Picard had.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Luc_Picard

Re:Those uniforms

[Fri13]

A better image of ST:NG uniforms

http://www.kabeleins.de/imperia/md/images/serien_shows/serien/_galerien/s/star_trek_tng/01_star_trek_the_next_generation_500_375_Paromount_Pictures.jpg

Re:Those uniforms

[theaveng]

I think the Star Trek DS9 and Voyager uniforms were better. The main body of the uniform was black, with only the shoulders in color. Unfortunately I cant find a decent picture of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:HarryKim.jpg

Re:Those uniforms

[Grimbleton]

I'm with you on this.

Though honestly, I liked DS9 over most other iterations in general. Way more people-centric.

Re:Those uniforms

[theaveng]

Here's a better picture. When they moved O'Brien from TNG to DS9, they switched his uniform to a more muted style (predominately black with a little bit of color):

http://www.vidiot.com/st-ds9/images/DS9CastCM01.jpg

Re:Those uniforms

[caseih]

The original series had rankings on the cuffs of the sleeves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfleet_ranks_and_insignia

Pike/Spock Retcon

[Culture20]

So Spock's not in Pike's crew at this time, and not wearing the older gold/beige uniforms?

Re:Pike/Spock Retcon

[Avatar8]

Another sign that they are jacking with the original story/timeline.

What I noticed is that Chekov is there. He shouldn't be. Chekov didn't join the crew until the second year (season) of the mission. So if this story is set when Kirk first takes over the Enterprise, Chekov is no where in sight, probably still at Starfleet Academy.

I'm getting tired of Hollywood's visions stomping all over my paradigms and re-writing (fictional) history as I know it. Obviously nothing is sacred.

Re:Pike/Spock Retcon

[kehren77]

This is Star Trek. Now don't get me wrong, I'm a HUGE fan. But the franchise has a history of not caring about continuity.

Plot synopsis

[Notquitecajun]

It's JJ Abrams, which means we get to start out in the middle of the story, backtrack to "where it all began," and finish up with a fun-filled exciting resolution!

MI:III I'm betting was just a rehash of an unused ALIAS script.

Not that he does bad work, it's just a little repetitive after a while.

Re:Plot synopsis

[Zymergy]

Abrams loves to use the classic literary device named "in medias res" (Latin for "into the middle of things")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_medias_res
Hope this movie is very well done and that the acting.... for... Kirk.... is... Overacted... IN... The ... True... Shatner... Style... (Though it will be very hard for any new Trek movie to top Montalban's Kahn villain character though...)

Re:Plot synopsis

[verbalcontract]

It's not so much that he's repetitive, it's just that he has a well-defined style and way of approaching stories. You wouldn't call Stanley Kubrick repetitive because all his characters go nuts.

Re:Plot synopsis

[bigstrat2003]

You wouldn't call Stanley Kubrick repetitive because all his characters go nuts.

Uh... yeah, actually, you would.

Re:Plot synopsis

[Anonymous Coward]

And probably never resolve things. JJ Abrams is the master of the MacGuffin.

Why!?!

[flajann]

Why oh why are they doing a remake of the old generation? I would much rather see something fresh and new. There is no way I will accept this "Spock" as being the Spock I grew up with!!!!!!!!!!

Re:Why!?!

[moriya]

Be glad that Lucas and Spielberg's hands were nowhere near this film. It's either this or seeing a CG render of McCoy.

Re:Why!?!

[Lord Bitman]

Every Star Trek iteration has been an entirely new crew, ship, and usually mission statement. The only way to not just be "more of the same" is to revisit existing characters.

Re:Why!?!

[Rob T Firefly]

Obvious caption to this photo: "Is Fake Spock gonna have to choke a bitch?"

Re:Why!?!

[elrous0]

RAPE! RAPE!

Re:Why!?!

[0100010001010011]

Exactly. To the Future. When star Trek came out those technologies were far far in the future. PTT Cell phones, automatic sliding doors, the simple things that made you go "wow, that's cool". Hell it came out before we had the shuttle. TNG added an android and some other technology. Even Voyager added a 'neural net' for the ships computer. Some how these don't seem as far off as they once were.

Show me after the Borg wars and the Delta Q wars. Toss in a few Borg or Changlings or Jem Hadar into the Academy. Introduce some sweet new technology, ships & people. Fuck bring back Picard as the senile old man that they let wander the ship talking about 'when I was your age'.

TOS: 1966 - 23rd century
TNG: 1987 - 24th century (about 80 years after TOS)
It's now 2008. 20 years after TNG. I want to go another 80 years in the future. I want to see the 25th century.

Re:Why!?!

[sentientbeing]

It doesnt matter. He dies later on anyway.

..sorry..Too soon?

Re:Why!?!

[Random BedHead Ed]

In the Lucas edit the Salt Vampire shoots first, misses Kirk by a yard and then gets shot back. There's also a newly-added scene where a CGI Khan meets Spock in the docking bay and rambles on about nothing for a few minutes before Spock steps on him. Also, in Lucas's proposal for this reboot film young Kirk was to have been played by Jake Lloyd.

Re:Why!?!

[meringuoid]

Show me after the Borg wars and the Delta Q wars. Toss in a few Borg or Changlings or Jem Hadar into the Academy. Introduce some sweet new technology, ships & people.

Like what?

What was the big technological advance from Kirk to Picard? Holodecks and the replicator. That's it. Phasers look less like pistols and more like mice, communicators have miniaturised a bit. And there's a robot aboard. Wow, big change there.

Now you're going to tell me that the Enterprise-D could do warp nine point whatever while the original couldn't get much past warp six, and the phaser banks were amplified and the shields more powerful and yadda yadda yadda. It's technobabble. Makes no fucking difference. In Deep Space 9 they replaced photon torpedoes with quantum torpedoes, but the enemy were upgrading too so that made no difference either. A ship is either fast enough, or not fast enough; its armament either powerful enough, or not powerful enough.

What do you want to see in the next century forward? Warp 12? Polyfrequency superphasers to defeat metaphasic shields? No. The only difference there is in dialogue; the ship will still arrive either in the nick of time or way too late, and the phasers will still either work just fine or not at all. Time travel? Would turn the show into Doctor Who without the sense of its own absurdity. Oh, wait, that's what Enterprise turned into.

I remember once extrapolating the technological trends seen in the TNG to VOY era, and concluding that the Federation starship of the future would consist of a warp core, a computer, and a lot of holographic projectors and replicators. The warp core provides the power. The computer does the thinking (remember, they can run Moriarty plus guest in a device the size of a Rubik cube, and holographic AI crew are becoming commonplace in later Trek). And the holographic projectors and replicators are there to create whatever equipment the ship needs on demand. In flight the ship would be nothing but a warp drive. In orbit it would consist entirely of surveying equipment. In battle, its whole power goes to the phasers and the shields, and it only has to protect a tiny volume, compared to the vast bulk of living space a Galaxy-class ship must defend.

But then there's no crew. No human interest. Nothing for the viewer to care about at all.

Re:Why!?!

[Killjoy_NL]

Technically DS9 wasn't a ship ;)
(still my fav ST series though)

Re:Why!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

What was the big technological advance from Kirk to Picard? Holodecks and the replicator. That's it.

The TNG Enterprise is controlled with reconfigurable flat panel touch screens.

Communicators went from something you hold, to something you wear (Bluetooth headsets?)

Voice activated/controlled computers

The bio-neural computer from VOY (mentioned above)

Nano technology

These are just a few things that I can remember quickly. It has been 20 years since TNG. I think you are doing it a bit of a disservice by eluding that it has not had as much of an impact on the current technology being developed today.

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

DS9 Was a rip-off -- and a bad one at that -- of Babylon 5, as Michael Stravinsky approached Paramount first with his idea and was rebuffed.

Re:Why!?!

[Killjoy_NL]

I still loved it though :)

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

Good points, all, and the problem is that the technology in Star Trek is pure fantasy, with little to no attempts on accuracy.

Having said that, how about this: intergalatic warp so they can travel to distant galaxies, real exotic physics stuff with black holes, aliens so alien it would make your skin crawl. I mean, for real. Get away from the typical boring humanoid aliens that Star Trek keeps falling for, and have some real alien-looking aliens that interact with humans in truly alien ways.

It's all about imagination.

I was disappointed with how TNG treated the Q Continuum, making it look like some borish midwestern scene. When I first watched that episode I was all excited that they would -- FINALLY -- do something truly cool and unexpected; not the crap they actually did. A good story line and plot intro totally wasted.

Humans will care as long as *humans* are interacting with the "thing" that is utterly non-human and are forced to question just what it means to be "human", anyway. Star Trek has oversold the "being human" bit, especially with the Android. Being human is not all that great. If it were, drugs would not be such a popular form of escapism!!!!!

Re:Why!?!

[mrdoogee]

No, obviously he needs to take that fellow's powers.

Re:Why!?!

[vivin]

I'm just glad that those two stupid retards Berman and Bragga have NOTHING to do with this one. As far as I am concerned, those two have done nothing but RUIN Star Trek. Assholes.

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

Where's Gene when you need him?

Oh, probably off gallivanting around the universe with Wesley!

Long Live Gene!

Re:Why!?!

[tm2b]

Michael Stravinsky?

I wonder if Joe Straczynski knows him.

Re:Why!?!

[Ecuador]

So how do you feel about McCoy looking like "Joey" from "Friends". I mean seriously, I just saw the photos with my fiancee (no, I am not making this up) and we both looked at each other "so that's where that Joey character went...".
And then we have Spock angry as hell (yeah, good job not showing emotions), I am trembling with fear for this movie :(

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

Whoops. My bad.

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

So how do you feel about McCoy looking like "Joey" from "Friends". I mean seriously, I just saw the photos with my fiancee (no, I am not making this up) and we both looked at each other "so that's where that Joey character went...". And then we have Spock angry as hell (yeah, good job not showing emotions), I am trembling with fear for this movie :(

Never watched "Friends", so I have narly a clue what Joey looks like there.

And Spock showing emotions? How there they! Well, since Enterprise got away with creating an emotional Vulcan...

Re:Why!?!

[Eil]

I was never a big fan of TOS, but these pictures are clear evidence of Paramount's increasing insanity and willingness to smear feces all over what was once a respected franchise.

Honestly, the actors all look like they just stepped off the set of Saved by the Bell. They can be the best actors in the world, but Starfleet is a military organization and nobody's going to believe they sent a rag-tag team of 15 year-olds out on a voyage in the fleet's flagship.

Gene Roddenberry's rotational velocity surely increased by a few RPM when these photos were leaked.

Re:Why!?!

[westlake]

Why oh why are they doing a remake of the old generation? I would much rather see something fresh and new
.

1 The successors to the ST:TOS [with rhe exception of DS9] present humans without flaws and tech without limits.

It makes for a very dull world.

You need a Loki, a Joker, a Q to give it any vitality at all.

2 Humility is often a disguise for a subtle and corrupting arrogance of power. The Prime Directive is as easy a path to damnation as any other.

It sure makes life hell on earth for a writer, a storyteller.

How often does Picard invoke the Prime Directive where there is no intelligible reason why it should be invoked - only to luck out and be spared standing mutely by as a witness to a Holocaust he could have trivially prevented?

The "races" in Star Trek are so obviously and closely related that any notion of preventing "cross-cultural contamination is utterly ludicrous.

Re:Why!?!

[0100010001010011]

No human interest? There's an endless list of possibilities.

Jem Hadar: No longer 'required'. Can they fit into society being free?
Borg: No longer allowed to freely assimilate. People can make the decisions when they reach 'of age'. Or it's an alternative to the old folks home for Grandma and Grandpa. Body isn't looking so long on the death bed. Get assimilated. Let a whole culture know of all your lifetime of memories.
Holographs: Are they really people. Explore the issues the Dr. on Voyager was going through.

And yes, there are plenty of other new technologies out there to invent. The nerd in me isn't interested in PDAs, Bluetooth headsets or Holograms (see the Cisco announcement yesterday for virtual meeting rooms).

Re:Why!?!

[gmb61]

And then we have Spock angry as hell (yeah, good job not showing emotions), I am trembling with fear for this movie :(

Uh, you do realize that Spock is half human, right? He has shown emotions plenty of times in TOS and the movies.

Re:Why!?!

[CodeBuster]

I was disappointed with how TNG treated the Q Continuum, making it look like some borish midwestern scene.

I think that you are thinking of episode 18 (Death Wish) of season 2 of Voyager where they visit the Q Continuum and Q (the one who takes the name 'Quinn' upon being made mortal) clearly states, when the away team expresses surprise that they are standing on a road in the middle of desert next to a gas station, that the whole scene, "was a representation of the Q Continuum that falls within the human level of understanding". Or in other words, the Q Continuum is not a 'borish midwestern scene', that was only how the Voyager away team perceived it not how it literally was to the Q themselves.

Re:Why!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was disappointed with how TNG treated the Q Continuum, making it look like some borish midwestern scene.

I think that you are thinking of episode 18 (Death Wish) of season 2 of Voyager where they visit the Q Continuum and Q (the one who takes the name 'Quinn' upon being made mortal) clearly states, when the away team expresses surprise that they are standing on a road in the middle of desert next to a gas station, that the whole scene, "was a representation of the Q Continuum that falls within the human level of understanding". Or in other words, the Q Continuum is not a 'borish midwestern scene', that was only how the Voyager away team perceived it not how it literally was to the Q themselves.

Yes, I know that's supposedly how the away team "perceived it", but that was truly too easy of an out for the writers and special effects department!

Re:Why!?!

[ggvaidya]

Humans will care as long as *humans* are interacting with the "thing" that is utterly non-human and are forced to question just what it means to be "human", anyway.

Which is, I believe, the well from which all science fiction springs. If you don't believe me, it's time to re-read The Left Hand of Darkness.

Re:Why!?!

[flajann]

Humans will care as long as *humans* are interacting with the "thing" that is utterly non-human and are forced to question just what it means to be "human", anyway.

Which is, I believe, the well from which all science fiction springs. If you don't believe me, it's time to re-read The Left Hand of Darkness.

Science Fiction. Therein lies the rub.

Does "Star Trek" count as real Science Fiction? Or just Science Fantasy? A Space Opera? I would say much more the latter two than the first.

Having said that, some episodes do get closer to Science Fiction than others. I think most of the Borg episodes get closer to Science Fiction than the others, and they are the ones I enjoy the most.

Re:Why!?!

[kehren77]

Is he wearing blue long underwear?

this film

[ionix5891]

is either gonna be a spectacular failure or spectacular success

now after watching cloverfield and lost i think the chances of this being a success are diminishing

Re:this film

[Dun Malg]

is either gonna be a spectacular failure or spectacular success

now after watching cloverfield and lost i think the chances of this being a success are diminishing

Go watch MI:3 and a few episodes of Fringe, and I think you'll agree the chances of success are vanishingly small. JJ Abrams is a classic example of Hollywood nepotism. His father Gerald was a big producer in the 70's. JJ Abrams certainly didn't get where he is by anything even remotely resembling talent. This is the guy who wrote Regarding Henry, Armageddon, and Gone Fishin' (!!!) for god's sake. Looking through his entire work history on IMDB, I'd say the only thing that keeps him out of the same class as Uwe Boll is Felicity, which was a perfectly serviceable college soap opera.

I hate Hollywood.

[McFortner]

Are there any beloved childhood memories that Hollywood hasn't raped the corpse of yet?

Speed Racer: check
Battlestar Galactica: check
Star Trek: check
Buck Rogers: pending

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[91degrees]

Buck Rogers: pending

They did that in the 70's. The classic Buster Crabbe cinema serial dates back to the 30's, and the character dates to the late 20's.

Hollywood has been raping childhood memories for a lot longer than you might think.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Anonymous Coward]

Battlestar Galactica: check

With the difference that the new Battlestar Galactica is much better than the old one.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Amiralul]

You forgot Knight Rider, Superman (well, kind-of), Indiana Jones, Star Wars.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[grub]

The current Galactica is far superior to the tripe from my childhood. I'm probably in the minority but I really did enjoy Enterprise as well. Voyager with Captain Duck got lame fast.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Anonymous Coward]

they aren't raping anything, they're re-imagining.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Anonymous Coward]

Are there any beloved childhood memories that Hollywood hasn't raped the corpse of yet?

Speed Racer: check

Battlestar Galactica: check

Star Trek: check

Buck Rogers: pending

You can't seriously believe that the original BSG was better than the current one.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[R2.0]

"They did that in the 70's."

But the theme song was pretty good - Queen at it's sturm und drang'y-est.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Jesus_666]

They didn't do (as in "rape") Captain Future yet. Although one could argue that the Japanese already did that to the literary figure.


Well, whatever they do, a Captain Future movie would be met with disapproval in Germany. We're used to having a version of Captain Future with our own special sound track (that, in my opinion, is vastly superior to the original one). In no way would we agree to a Captain Future movie with background music that doesn't sound like Feinde greifen an or Hurra, wir fliegen, not to mention Ken.

To give you an impression of the German soundtrack here's a link to Feinde greifen an ("Enemies attack"), essentially the action scene BGM. Oh, and the German opening; after having sat through the American one I'm suddenly very happy that the German version was contractually obliged to have no lyrics.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[ca111a]

>They did that in the 70's...dates back to the 30's...20's
If that has worked for so long, why would they change the tactics now.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[metlin]

Well, you missed Star Wars.

I'm waiting for this to degenerate into blaming George Lucas, of course (and how he pillaged/plundered/raped everyone's childhood memories).

I'm going to call it the Lucas Syndrome -- sooner or later, every remake is going to turn into a discussion of blaming Star Wars and George Lucas for all their life's problems.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Dystopian Rebel]

beloved childhood memories

It says much if television represents your beloved childhood memories.

Television is an advertising tool using programming as bait. You are part of a demographic. Your feelings don't matter to the business.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[grub]

they aren't raping anything, they're re-imagining.

Your Honour, the defendant didn't rape the victim. He simply re-imaginined her vagina with his penis in it.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[andrewd18]

I believe you need to be introduced to Rule 34. Your childhood lost its virginity a long, long time ago.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[fartrader]

Are there any beloved childhood memories that Hollywood hasn't raped the corpse of yet?

Buck Rogers: pending

Childhood? What grown man doesn't dream of Erin Gray to this day?

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[domatic]

I that's Flash Gordon you're thinking of. I rather liked that the movie was 30s sci-fi cheese with decent special effects. Getta load of those tailfins!

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[bickerdyke]

Mixing it up with Flash Gordon???

http://german.imdb.com/title/tt0077278/fullcredits

Music
Glen A. Larson .... composer: theme music

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think the new BSG is "raping the corpse" of the old BSG, your taste is as elegant as Tammy Faye Baker's.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[bickerdyke]

after having sat through the American one I'm suddenly very happy that the German version was contractually obliged to have no lyrics.

Star Trek Theme HAS lyrics.

http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/trek.asp

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[AioKits]

Carebears, the live action movie! Starring Nicolas Cage!

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[GreenEnvy22]

Indeed, I don't know how anyone could enjoy the original BSG more then the new one. Whereas with Trek, while I personally like TNG and DS9 better then TOS, I can see why people would like the original more.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[grub]

I hated how Voyager emasculated the Borg.

In TNG they were a deadly foe, always exciting. In Voyager it was almost to the point where Janeway and crew would throw cream pies in the Borgs' faces to make good their daring weekly escape.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[aussie_a]

Enterprise sucked until the last season. If only they had gotten Manny Coto from the start, we'd be watching the 6th Star Trek series to grace television.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[R2.0]

Dammit, your right.

That being said, the Buck Rogers TV series had its attractions.

Erin Grey, specifically.
In a skin tight jumpsuit.
In a starfighter.

[leaves for some "private time"]

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Jesus_666]

It's nice that the American Star Trek: TOS opening has lyrics, but I was talking about the German Captain Future opening. So unless ST:TOS turns out to actualy be a Toei Animation production I don't think your post quite applies.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[bickerdyke]

Just tried to get back to the original topic... :-)

But the Captain Future Theme is great. (Christian Bruhn Version)

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[marco.antonio.costa]

Sorry, but Battlestar Galactica kicked ass. :D

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Chabil Ha']

I've pretty much gone in denial with Indiana Jones. I refuse to recognize KotCS as a legitimate movie. It was just some lame fan film that happened to star Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones.

I saw it in the theater and paid $1 to rent it at RedBox just to make sure I wasn't totally inebriated with salt and artificial popcorn butter when I saw it the first time. I was shaking my head the whole time I was watching it again. What a dissapointment.

I half expected a Jar-Jar Binks cameo, what with George Lucas in charge and aliens and whatevers.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[ConceptJunkie]

Look again: TNG ruined the Borg by about Season 6 with "Hugh". While the idea behind the story wasn't bad, making him into a young pupy-eyed teenager was over the top.

They'd become creampuffs in TNG as well.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[kindbud]

Well, let's see....

They're re-making Red Dawn (makes sense, what with Putin rearing his head over Alaska)
They're re-making Weird Science (makes sense, the computer-literate audience of today will totally buy that)
Wil Smith is re-making Karate Kid with his own kid. I kid you not.
They're reviving the Friday the 13th series (make sense, since none of that series made any sense)
And they're re-making Top Gun, because 300 was just not gay enough.

I even heard Zucker wants to re-make Airplane! with an anti-Democrat theme.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[McFortner]

They did that in the 70's. The classic Buster Crabbe cinema serial dates back to the 30's, and the character dates to the late 20's.

True, but the 70's version was better than the serials IMHO. So I'm waiting for another childhood memory to fall victim of the Hollywood hacks.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[master_p]

On the other hand, I find the current Galactica an insult. The old one is way more entertaining.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[RomeReactor]

Are there any beloved childhood memories that Hollywood hasn't raped the corpse of yet?

Speed Racer: check
Battlestar Galactica: check
Star Trek: check
Buck Rogers: pending

There's also a new Flash Gordon movie down the line, and--while not previoulsy a movie--a John Carter of Mars project for 2012; hell, there's even a new Barbarella due out this year. However, just becuase this is a remake of TOS (and because this is J.J. Abrams) doesn't necessarily mean the movie will be that bad, or bad at all. Granted, M:I III was terrible, and I never cared for Lost or Alias, but I actually liked what he tried to do with Cloverfield, even if the end result was stunted by the awful dialogue and its delivery and some of the behavior of the characters. Revisiting the original Trek characters might be daunting, but the cast, while younger-looking, seems spot on. Time will tell, though. And while few of his movies are actually good, Kevin smith praised both Watchmen and Star Trek after private screenings of both, for what that's worth.

He is a geek, after all.

Re:I hate Hollywood.

[Samizdata]

Look, Your Honor, things needed to be grittier, edgier, darker...

Speaking...

[DougF]

As someone who watched TOS on a black and white 9" TV with a towel under the door to hide the light from my parents (it was on after bed time)...I welcome a "refreshing" of the Star Trek ensemble. The key to success will be the script, not the special effects, a lesson not learned in a few previous Star Trek and most Sci-Fi movies...

Re:Speaking...

[Chagatai]

Admit it: you watched it just last week. Although I'd be curious where you got a 9" B&W TV in this day and age.

Damn!

[PontifexMaximus]

You know, I've really been underwhelmed to see this movie. I've been a Trekkie my whole life, and I love the series (TOS and TNG) and the movies. But this one, meh.

I just wasn't into it. Until I saw these pics. Holy Crap! Just based on the pics, I'm almost tempted to see it in the theater. Almost. I guess I"ll look at the trailers before I make up my mind.

Nothing good acting can't fix.

[RulerOf]

That honestly depends on how good of an actor he is.

I had no idea that I would end up loving Leonardo DiCaprio as much as I do now when I saw him in Titanic. But after seeing movies like Catch Me if You Can and The Aviator, you'll understand how simply being a good actor can negate these kinds of labels.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Bandman]

My wife and I struggle with that all the damned time. I keep wanting to see him as a pretty boy whiner kid, but like you said, he keeps doing things like that. I eventually forgot that it was him in Blood Diamond. He's a good actor, as much as I hate to admit it.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[SomeoneGotMyNick]

I had no idea that I would end up loving Leonardo DiCaprio as much as I do now when I saw him in Titanic. But after seeing movies like Catch Me if You Can and The Aviator, you'll understand how simply being a good actor can negate these kinds of labels.

His role in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" blew me away after I found out he wasn't really like that in real life..... Damn good acting....

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[MoeDrippins]

Yup. Amazing in that, and despite the rabid anti-popularity, I still like him.

Hated "Gangs of New York" though. I just didn't get it at all.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[fahrbot-bot]

DiCaprio is definitely a good actor, but I don't really care for him -- and I can't exactly define why. It's not so bad that I won't see a movie with him in it, but I won't see one simply because he's in it.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Amazing Quantum Man]

[AOL]
Me too!
[/AOL]

Seriously, I had the same reaction to DiCaprio. But his later work, such as the films you've mentioned, brought me around.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[blhack]

Not to mention blood diamond, or body of lies, or the departed.

There are a lot of good actors that just get typecast into shitty roles.
Watch the movie "Southland Tales", it has Justin Timberlake, Sean William Scott and The Rock in it. It is one of the best movies I've seen in a LONG time.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[mdielmann]

Having watched a few episodes of Heroes this season, I'd say Quinto is a better actor than the character of Sylar called for until this season. I'm prepared to lay all the shitty lines he's had on the writers at this point, and not his two-dimensional acting. In two episodes, thanks to the joy of time travel, you see him as the classic psychotic villain, someone who's looking at his life and wondering if perhaps there's a better way, and a father who's desperately fighting his demons to give his kid the life he never had. And they were convincing, to me anyway.
I think he'll play a Vulcan a million times better than what's-her-name from Enterprise, and give a respectable portrayal of Spock. His biggest problem is going to be acting in the shadow of Leonard Nimoy.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Neoprofin]

I had a teacher in highschool who spent some time every year trying to convince his classes that the autistic Leo is his "real personality" and that he's just some kind of savant who can meld into all the other roles he plays.

It was a lot easier before he started appearing in a film or two every year.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[CFTM]

Your teacher sounds a bit envious of an incredibly talented individual.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone becomes a homo after watching a movie with Leonardo Dicaprio. But it CAN and DOES happen from time to time. So be careful which cinema you choose to partake of kids! A public service announcement from your local McCain/Palin campaign headquarters.

I'm president Palin and I approve of this message. You betcha!

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[CFTM]

Zach Quinto is the best of the "young" actors on Heroes and definitely holds his own with the likes of Jack Coleman (Noah Bennet), Cristine Rose (Angela Patrelli) and Malcolm McDowell (Linderman). There's a lot of terrible actors on that show, and he stands out from them. Milo, Sendhil and Hayden are all terrible. They need to take some classes and learn how to do something besides brood. Nothing beats Hayden Panettiere when she's trying to show fear, anger or disgust. She puts on these silly moods and broods in to the camera like a 10 year old.

The modern entertainment industry rocks!

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Lurker2288]

He was awesome in the episode where he played a father...and then when Claire and her goons accidentally off the kid, you looked at him and thought "Oh shit...this is gonna be really ugly."

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, thanks for ruining whatever episode that was for me.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Oh and the Lone Gunmen die.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

I blame the writing weaknesses on it's own success. Which is to say, it's not so bad I mind. At this point, I can deal with everyone not being immediately witty and just seeing the seeds sown in the last two seasons come to bear some sort of fruit. Mohinder with powers that are transforming him into something weird? Hell yes!

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Thelasko]

but I don't really care for him -- and I can't exactly define why.

Titanic

It's because women always make me watch Titanic, and I can't stand it!

On the flip side, that scene in Catch Me If You Can with Jennifer Garner was sweet!

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Spellvexit]

I also have a hard time truly liking the guy, but my first exposure to him was in the movie What's Eating Gilbert Grape. Having never seen him before, and watching with a pre-teen sort of naivete, I actually thought he was mentally retarded. Since then, I've never questioned his acting ability.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Chris Burke]

I blame the writing weaknesses on it's own success. Which is to say, it's not so bad I mind. At this point, I can deal with everyone not being immediately witty and just seeing the seeds sown in the last two seasons come to bear some sort of fruit. Mohinder with powers that are transforming him into something weird? Hell yes!

So far I find this season to be vastly better than season 2 (which I think can be blamed mostly, but not entirely, on the writer's strike), and comparable to season 1, and I love what they're doing with Sylar and Peter.

Mohinder's story, though, is just way too "The Fly" for me. Let's see, first he tries his experimental research on himself, gains superior speed, agility, and climbing (even down to performing nearly identical gymnastics), becomes more manly and sexually aggressive, only then he begins to see weird changes including skin sloughing off, and becomes a danger to his love interest. I mean, the actor even looks a lot like Jeff Goldblum with the curly hair. Maybe it's an intentional nod, but it's just too blatant.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

yeah but the scene from the future where he's interacting with present Peter? I mean that scene was fantastic. I really dont' care when shows copy other movies or shows, this is clearly a copy of The Fly or god knows whatever comic book storyline, but it's compelling to me due to the character interactions.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Chris Burke]

yeah but the scene from the future where he's interacting with present Peter? I mean that scene was fantastic. I really dont' care when shows copy other movies or shows, this is clearly a copy of The Fly or god knows whatever comic book storyline, but it's compelling to me due to the character interactions.

I'll give you that scene being awesome, sure. Which if I remember correctly happened before they showed all the scenes with Mohinder beating up the abusive husband and jumping around on the ceiling and so forth, which could be part of why I was dissapointed that what started as an obvious The Fly homage became a blatant ripoff. I mean I don't mind when a show takes ideas from others. The whole show is basically stealing from X-Men, which is cool, right up until someone with the power to have 3 metal claws sprout from their wrists fights someone with magnetic powers wearing a red and purple bucket on their head.

Oh well it's just one subplot. Sylar is still one of the best and most unique villians I've seen, and the rest of the show is good too.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Lurker2288]

Eh, the kid was there for like 2 minutes, and his death wasn't much of a shock. My apologies if I ruined one insignificant mid-arc episode of a TV show for you.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[syousef]

I had no idea that I would end up loving Leonardo DiCaprio as much as I do now when I saw him in Titanic. But after seeing movies like Catch Me if You Can and The Aviator, you'll understand how simply being a good actor can negate these kinds of labels.

Clearly the film "Titanic" turn your brain to mush! I hated the aviator, and I'm a big fan of all things that fly. ("Catch Me If You Can" was passable as light entertainment, but that man's a lousy actor).

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[Neoprofin]

No, he tends to get stuck with a lot of the "less motivated" students which I think he offsets by keeping them on their toes.

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[mmwithpeanuts]

Very true. Leo is great in Aviator. (True) Acting is being able to become another character by making that character believable to those watching. Although, some actors can't get over their past performances when they are only a one note samba, if you know what I mean. I heard they wouldn't let Shatner near the project. Do you know if this is true?

Re:Nothing good acting can't fix.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

i guess I'm not just as funny as i thought I was.

Star Trek New Voyages

[Stavr0]

The first picture looks like it was taken from Star Trek New Voyages. The resemblance between John Kelly as Bones and Karl Urban is uncanny.

Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated horse

[petrus4]

The ship looks way too modern to be anything like something which is actually meant to be *older* technology than what we saw in the 60s. The casting is also terrible; the actors don't look anything like the originals at all.

Star Trek is dead. It died with First Contact. People need to accept that and move on, as do the profiteers responsible for this turkey.

Server down - warpcore overheating.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Error establishing a database connection." Scottie, can you sort that out, please?

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[MBGMorden]

The ship looks way too modern to be anything like something which is actually meant to be *older* technology than what we saw in the 60s.

"Looks" too modern? The whole idea behind "futuristic" designs is one of culture and not technology. You could take the external configuration of cars in the 1960's, and then those of today, and swap them around but retaining the technology of construction and operation, and if no one knew any different it wouldn't matter.

What something DOES is how advanced it is. How it looks, even for things like this, is merely a matter of fashion, which really has no tie to a particular time period.

The cartoon strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in the days when certain cartoons got boring the creators (iirc Hanna Barbara to be one of the first) started introducing new sillyness by taking the main characters back to their teens. This resulted in "A pup named Scooby Doo", "Flintstone kids", "Young Archies", etc.

Naturally they can't call this "Star Trek kids" due to the "serious" nature, but I wonder... ;-)

Obligatory, necessary Coral Cache

[Stormwatch]

Slashdotting across the universe, boldly going forward 'cause we can't find reverse!

What the fuck?

[nawcom]

Why is Harold Lee From the Harold and Kumar movies taking the position of Sulu? Is he trying to passively come out of the closet?

(hehe just kidding - George Takei is one cool dude)

Re:What the fuck?

[falcon5768]

Actually its because producers wanted the Hiro from Heros too but NBC was unwilling to lose two key castmembers for 3 months. So it ended up going to Cho even though Abrams was a little unsure of casting a Korean as a Japanese officer.

Re:What the fuck?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it was James Kyson Lee who plays Ando who was interested in the role, not Masi Oka.

Everything else is accurate though and if Lee had been cast instead of Cho, Abrams probably would have had the same concern about Korean actor playing a Japanese character since James Kyson Lee is also Korean.

Re:What the fuck?

[dwye]

> So it ended up going to Cho even though Abrams was
> a little unsure of casting a Korean as a Japanese officer.

Sort of like being unsure of casting an Irishman as a Scottish engineer.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[Pokey.Clyde]

Star Trek is dead. It died with First Contact. People need to accept that and move on, as do the profiteers responsible for this turkey.

This is where I'm going to have to disagree with you. A good deal of what came after TNG was quite enjoyable. DS9 can be argued to be some of the best Trek ever made. Enterprise really hit a nice stretch in the later seasons. Hell, flame me if you want, but I even enjoy me some Voyager from time to time.

Although I'd really like to see something new that could take the franchise in a bit of a different direction, I won't immediately write-off this movie because it's going the prequel/re-imaging route that so many other movies are taking these days.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[plasmacutter]

This is true.

Paramount declared the franchise dead when enterprise crashed and burned horribly.

Hmmm

[ZDRuX]

I looked at the vidcaps and didn't see Picard. This movie has failed already.

Simon Pegg as Scotty

[Anonymous Meoward]

It's a good thing we have Shaun on board to keep this re-animated corpse under control.

(Actually, I think it's really cool that he's involved. Might even make it worth watching.)

Re:Simon Pegg as Scotty

[Tekninja_Hawk]

whats the plan then scotty?

were goin to the winchester!

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm the only one, but I really enjoyed First Contact. It was the best of the Next Generation movies (in my opinion).

I think it's a bad idea to try to get people who look exactly like the original actors for the new cast. I'd rather see new personalities and faces. Trying to "remake" star trek would be a bad idea. There's to much you can get wrong that way that would make fans angry.

It's a much better idea to do a reboot of the franchise and try to reinvent the series. Sure, it will upset a lot of die-hard fans, but it's bound to retain some original fans, and surely bring new ones into the franchise.

Since I'm a younger Trek fan, I'd like to see the franchise get rebooted and hopefully gain a little more popularity again. At least enough that the show gets scheduled on TV a little more often.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[R2.0]

"You could take the external configuration of cars in the 1960's, and then those of today, and swap them around but retaining the technology of construction and operation, and if no one knew any different it wouldn't matter."

To wit, the current Beetle, Mini, Mustang, Charger, Challenger, Camaro, HSC, Prowler, etc. All are designed to look like cars from the 60's and early 70's.

I hate them all - look forward, not back, people.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[derblack]

The ship looks way too modern to be anything like something which is actually meant to be *older* technology than what we saw in the 60s.

Yes, that was what I thought when I watched the "Enterprise" series.

The casting is also terrible; the actors don't look anything like the originals at all.

Star Trek is dead. It died with First Contact.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. Star Trek is NOT dead. But if you're going to make a film about a certain crew, I think you should take the same "people". If that is not possible, don't. I mean come on...!! SPOCK..?! Is that you...? Leonard Nimoy made Spock the interesting character he is, not the ears and a blue uniform... same with the rest of the crew.

Just my 2cents though..

I'm still looking forward to seeing it, anything Trek is welcome...

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[petrus4]

I never said I didn't love First Contact. I did. I cried like a baby during Cochrane's initial meeting with the Vulcans.

Part of the reason why I cried to such an extent though is because I also saw First Contact for what it was...a final look back at what the franchise was fundamentally about, before the end; it was its' life flashing before its' eyes, so to speak.

That's why I think it should be allowed to stay buried. Truthfully they shouldn't have made any more films after that. It was a beautiful way to end the franchise, or would have been.

It's dead Jim...

[d3ac0n]

In that case they are already too late. Site is slashdotted.

Re:It's dead Jim...

[joeytmann]

Damn it Jim! I am a small web server! Not a beowulf cluster!

Oh Come now

[Technopaladin]

THe newer BSG is better by far then the original series. Go back and watch the old show and I assure you the nostalgia wipes off real quick.

As to Speed Racer and Star Trek, no comment.

I think a remake of Buck Rogers would rock, as long as they keep the Hotpants from the orginal.
- has a signed Wilma Deering photo.

Re:Oh Come now

[Tony Hoyle]

I've watched the old series end to end recently and it was pretty good, for its day... they just didn't have the special effects to pull it off back then.

The 'new' BSG is just a completely different story and shouldn't have even had the same name, really.. not that it's particularly bad (although I still can't sit through most of the episodes in the first series) but would have been easier to swallow with completely new ideas.

mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

someone put a copy of photos on blogspot:

http://swench.blogspot.com/2008/10/jjs-star-trek-pics.html

Re:mirror

[IbnSlash]

Thanks dude

Alternate

[waveformwafflehouse]

More here

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[petrus4]

DS9 was fantastic. I agree that it was probably the best series of the lot. I loved Voyager as well, but the reason I think why I was able to love it is because I saw it for what it could have been as well, not purely for what it actually was.

Enterprise IMHO was an abomination that never should have existed. It was post-9/11 Star Trek; as far as I was concerned, I could never watch a single episode of it without seeing an image of the towers falling silently in the background. That attitude permeated every frame of the series, I thought.

The other thing that bothered me about Enterprise was watching Scott Bakula systematically dismantling his career as an actor, piece by piece; I had loved his work in Quantum Leap, and it was genuinely heartbreaking. Jonathan Archer was a studied impersonation of George W. Bush. He was rock stupid, and horrifically arrogant to boot. I never saw a scenario where he didn't need a plan explained to him less than three times...he was an absolute drooling moron.

Trip Tucker was even worse; American ethnocentricity and xenophobia at its' most disgusting. The idea of him in a relationship with a Vulcan woman was repugnant, and an insult to the very concept of that species.

Like I said...that series should not have been made.

Site's Down

[Slammer64]

Looks like we struck again. site's been /.'ed

SPOILERS

[Anonymous Coward]

The movie opens with the U.S.S. Enterprise crashing on an alien planet after being attacked by a hoard of Cloverfields. While looking for shelter, they meet some weird old scientist dude that keeps remembering old experiments of his that come back to haunt the crew. Also, the entire movie is filmed in shakycam.

Re:SPOILERS

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot that Kirk's dad is an admiral, but it turns out he doesn't work for Starfleet at all.

More pictures and story

[srmalloy]

Entertainment Weekly has an eight-page article with pictures about the movie, as well.

Enjoy the discussion

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're discussing if a movie of a 60s TV show destroys your childhood memories or not, I'll be having sex.

Slashdotted

[sorak]

When I went to the website I saw "Error establishing a database connection". It's good to see that Star Trek is finally giving us a realistic portrayal of the future.

You know you've watched the Bourne series too much

[TheModelEskimo]

...when you see Karl Urban in the cast and wonder why he's not playing Pavel Chekov.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[Animaether]

"I loved Voyager as well, but the reason I think why I was able to love it is because I saw it for what it could have been as well, not purely for what it actually was."

Although it remains to be seen, perhaps Stargate Universe will appeal to you, then; it's a similar premise (stuck on a ship, trying to get home ..alive), but obviously set in a different Sci-Fi setting. Unfortunately the show intends to focus more on character drama than storytelling; I really hope it doesn't become a space soap opera :| But I'm looking forward to finding out :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Universe

disco

[Anonymous Coward]

The current Galactica is far superior to the tripe from my childhood.

What do you mean? I thought seeing "alien species" dancing disco was great drama!

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[Preacher X]

This is because the people with enough money to buy these cars tend to be older and want cars similar to thier childhood. Classic cars are classic for a reason. Give me a 66 mustang over this new stuff any day. I'd be willing to bet that overall mustang sales jumped with Gen 5 (the current car).

Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[name_already_taken]

You'd be suprised how little time it takes for the air to escape from a relatively small container such as the Enterprise into a practically infinite vacuum through a hole a few inch in diameter.

What bothers me more is the smoke in the left side of the picture. Anyone here knows how smoke 'should' behave in space?

Let's be generous and say a 10 cm hole - that's just under four inches.

Well, I don't know the math, but I've worked around compressed air systems a little, and I found a little chart for gas flow through pipes of varying diameters and lengths. Air at atmospheric pressure is at 14.5 pounds per square inch - not very high pressure. This is not very high, so it's not like punching a hole in a compressed air tank.

If we guess that the hull is 3 cm thick, and the hole is 10 cm in diameter (the hole is effectively a pipe), according to the ancient looking chart I found, the flow rate is 748 liters per second. (This is assuming I'm interpreting this correctly).

I can't be bothered to do too much googling for this, but a Constitution class starship is 305 meters long. Let's just guess that it's 120 meters wide and an average of 20 meters thick. I know rabid trekkies will correct all this, but it's not important to be all that accurate. 305 x 120 x 20 = 732,000 cubic meters. That's 732 million liters, for those still reading. 732 million liters divided by 748 liters per second is 978,609 seconds to empty the ship to vacuum.

That's 11.3 days to empty the ship through a 10 cm diameter hole. All based on guesses and an old chart from an engineering handbook, but it's better than just saying "little time".

Of course, I could be wrong.

It might take longer; especially when you consider that as the ship empties, the internal pressure drops - when half the air is gone, the atmospheric pressure inside is only 7.25 psi, so the flow rate is also reduced in half - so it might take a month or more to completely equalize the internal and external pressures (external being close to zero).

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Anonymous Coward]

At what point does the atmospheric pressure become dangerous to people inside the ship?

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Dun Malg]

a Constitution class starship is 305 meters long. Let's just guess that it's 120 meters wide and an average of 20 meters thick. I know rabid trekkies will correct all this, but it's not important to be all that accurate. 305 x 120 x 20 = 732,000 cubic meters. That's 732 million liters, for those still reading. 732 million liters divided by 748 liters per second is 978,609 seconds to empty the ship to vacuum.

That's 11.3 days to empty the ship through a 10 cm diameter hole

A constitution class ship has neither an infinitely thin skin, nor is it 100% hollow, nor is it a perfect box. Your air volume calculation needs work.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[TrekkieGod]

I know rabid trekkies will correct all this

I wasn't going to, but now I can't resist.

a Constitution class starship is 305 meters long

Well, after the refit, the Enterprise became 305 meters long. However, the refit happened after the 5-year mission, so this Enterprise is 289 meters long.

Let's just guess that it's 120 meters wide

That's probably overestimating quite a bit. Sounds about right for the saucer section, but the engineering section isn't anywhere near as wide.

and an average of 20 meters thick

Well, the ship has 24 decks, but it's not a cube. Actually, that's really the biggest problem with your estimate there. You'd arrive at a much closer volume if you divided the ship up between saucer, nacelles, and engineering hulls. Then sum them up.

but it's not important to be all that accurate

Blasphemy! I have to head to work right now, but I somebody else should take my recommendation and get on that.

The rest of your calculations seem pretty good, though :)

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[hey!]

A constitution class ship has neither an infinitely thin skin, nor is it 100% hollow, nor is it a perfect box. Your air volume calculation needs work.

On the other hand, you have to take into account the fact that warp drive is made possible by an arrangement of massless, frictionless pulleys.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[XchristX]

If we guess that the hull is 3 cm thick, and the hole is 10 cm in diameter (the hole is effectively a pipe), according to the ancient looking chart I found, the flow rate is 748 liters per second. (This is assuming I'm interpreting this correctly).

Yeah, it look ok. You can also go with a crude order-of-magnitude approximation (which is as accurate as we're ever gonna get for this topic) by assuming streamlined flow and applying Bernoulli's law ( http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BernoullisLaw.html so the hull thickness isn't directly relevant), with P at about 100 kilopascals, and the density of air at about 1.2 kg/m3, the velocity of air escaping is about 400 m/s, times pi*r^2 gives about 1.147 m^3/s or around 1147 liters/s. Given that there will be a helluva lot of turbulence and nonlinear transport effects due to the nitrogen in the air freezing into microscopic icicles as it nears the cold vacuum of space, the actual speed will be less than that but at the same order of magnitude, so 748 l/s sounds about right.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[name_already_taken]

A constitution class ship has neither an infinitely thin skin, nor is it 100% hollow, nor is it a perfect box. Your air volume calculation needs work.

More or less what I said in my post. So what's your estimate, captain pedant?

I guessed that the skin was 3 cm thick at the hull breach, but on TV it looks like several separate layers. I also remember what one of the "experts" said about the aircraft that hit the World Trade Center; that the aircraft had similar density to an empty soda can. Since aircraft and TV spacecraft seem to be somewhat similar in construction, I made an engineering decision to throw out the volume occupied by the material the ship itself is constructed from and it's contents.

Heck, I made the ship a rectangular box. It doesn't look like one, but I remember from a course I took on designing gating systems for metal castings (fluid systems to feed odd-shaped empty cavities) that simplifying the shape you're trying to feed (to or from, it doesn't matter) makes the calculations a lot simpler. A more accurate volume guess would be a set of cylindrical sections (the saucer is a very short, wide cylinder for example).

But, who has the time.

Even if I did that, people like you'd probably want me to factor in the effect of bedsheets and seat cushions, and liquid water that would flash to steam from the sinks and toilets.

In short, you can't ever make a rabid fan happy, so why even try?

That was a rhetorical question, by the way.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Anonymous Coward]

That's 11.3 days to empty the ship through a 10 cm diameter hole.

That is, assuming that the hull of the ship can withstand the initial 748 liters/second through that hole without taking further damage. The flow will cause mechanical stress to concentrate at the edges of the hole, and the hull already weakened there due to the presence of the initial hole.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[IchNiSan]

All of that is assuming no one thinks to close the fucking blast doors.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Anonymous Coward]

If they had any sense when designing a StarShip, the engineers would have used compartmentalization. (Modern navy ships do this, so I don't see why they'd suddenly forget this concept in the time Trek is supposed to take place.) That means the some subset of doors and bulkheads would be airtight, and any ventilation systems would also have blast shutters or pressure/fire traps. Thus in a damage control emergency, the problem can be isolated. Your problem wouldn't be how long it takes for the ship to empty, but rather how long it takes for the particular compartmentalized space you're in to do so.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Nimey]

On top of that, the Constitution class's designers can't be dumber than wet-navy ship designers. She's going to be compartmentalized so that damage to one area doesn't compromise the entire ship. They'll seal off the area with a hull breach until it can be fixed, and the rest of the ship will be in no danger.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Nimey]

The nacelles aren't going to be pressurized, so you can ignore them and likely the pylons as well. You only have to worry about the saucer and engineering hulls.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[TrekkieGod]

The nacelles aren't going to be pressurized, so you can ignore them and likely the pylons as well. You only have to worry about the saucer and engineering hulls.

The nacelles are pressurized, at least when not under warp. When the plasma stream is not operational, you can walk inside them and perform maintenance. Here's a picture of what they look like in the inside, with the doors open. The episode is "Eye of the Beholder", TNG. Humans travel to the nacelles and control room where they can be monitored during operation is done through the pylons, so they're pressurized all the time.

Re:Actually a very long time - 11.3 days

[Anonymous Coward]

IF you take into account the compressed air tanks and life support systems then his calculations of the air onboard are with in reasonable accuracy.

And as this is star trek realism is ignored

And automatic air tight doors are everywhere.

So close to being awesome

[Frangible]

How to make this one of the greatest movies of all time:

1. Neil Patrick Harris as Captain Kirk
2. NPH as Kirk
3. NPH as Kirk
4. Kumar as some cast member (can't have Harold solo)
5. The climax of the movie must involve a fight between "Spock" and Nero, where "Spock" uses telekenesis to slam him into a wall and open his skull

Re:So close to being awesome

[faraday_cage]

Kumar's there, he's just got a red shirt. And we all know what that means, don't we kiddies? I second the vote for NPH, only he has to sing. Perhaps they are saving him for Kirk for when they do Star Trek: The Broadway Musical.

George Lucas is that you?

[bemo56]

The ship looks way too modern to be anything like something which is actually meant to be *older* technology than what we saw in the 60s.

I seem to remember having this discussion about the Star Wars prequel trillogy

Re:George Lucas is that you?

[XeresRazor]

Except as much as the Star Wars prequels were devastatingly bad as far as writing and execution, their design fits in the timeline perfectly. The prequels start during the pinnacle of Republic that's become bloated and stagnant, parts of the Universe are filthy rich and sparkle with incredibly ornate bespoke engineering (Naboo represents this side) on the other hand you have the ghetto where everything has a dirty cobbled together look (Tatooine). As the prequels go on and the Republic starts to fall apart you get a much greater sense of function over form as the Republic gears up for war.

Lost me after "I did enjoy Enterprise"

[SmallFurryCreature]

Sorry, but saying you enjoyed Enterprise robs you of any credibility. It was the worsed of all Star Trek ever created. Only the most braindead morons spoonfed on reality tv and informarcials could like that show.

Voyager was not much better, that you mention the two worsed series as examples shows that you are about 12yr olds and have yet to develop taste.

Once you grow up you will realize that there are only TWO star trek captains. Kirk and Picard. Everything else is crap.

Re:Lost me after "I did enjoy Enterprise"

[Darundal]

Almost all of Enterprise was crap, but there was the odd episode out that worked really, really well. The last episode of Enterprise was most assuredly good. In a Mirror, Darkly wasn't all that bad either (although it was less because it managed to do the standard Trek stuff well and more because of the fact that they spent the entirety of both episodes in the Mirror Universe, which made the standard Enterprise formula not stick out). Similitude was the type of episode that really defines Trek, and Judgement was the type of episode that actually fleshed out the Trek cannon, and was really more of what the show should have had.

Re:Lost me after "I did enjoy Enterprise"

[trytoguess]

By last episode are you talking about the episode with a faction of human xenophobis, or the TNG episode that masquraded as an Enterprise episode with Riker playing make believe in order to resolve a moral conflict? Ugh, Trip pantomiming his death scene, and the entire Enterprise crew remaining stagnant for almost a decade? I'm about ready to accept the fanfics that claim it was all a pointless ruse by Section 31.

Re:Lost me after "I did enjoy Enterprise"

[Chris Burke]

Once you grow up you will realize that there are only TWO star trek captains. Kirk and Picard. Everything else is crap.

Meh, if you can't appreciate Sisko then you're just a curmudgeonly old fool stuck in their ways... Or maybe since Picard gets a pass, you're not that old and ST:TNG was when you got into Trek and is thus acceptable, with of course the original brought into the fold for authenticity.

Voyager and Enterprise are crap though.

a Trekkie's take

[Gryphoenix]

As long as 'Kirk' locks lips with a green woman, I'm golden! I would like to see some tribbles too! I wonder how much tie in to TOS there will be. I know this may be uber nerdy but I wish they could have taken TOS set and used that technology level/look only older for the movie (not the mention the TV series Enterprise)! Will we get to see where Uhura learned to fan dance?

That just shows your age

[SmallFurryCreature]

There are two kind of people in this world. Those who think Star Trek TOS is the best and those who think Enterprise could be watched without suffering major brain damage. The first group is right, the second is wrong.

The simple fact is that while the name continued, the product changed.

Telephones. I remember a day when there were public phones with phone books in the booth. Now you need a card to even make a call and directory inquiries is something like 2 euro per call. Same product, even same company but totally different market and experience.

TOS was Sci-Fi with balls, you either had sex with the aliens or beat them up.

TNG was the 80's, lots of sex, lots of carebear but not actually getting your hands dirty because someone might object.

DS9 was the soaps. Lets introduce a continues story but one that never moves. We also need a kid. And a father, single father because that shows he cares.

Voyager was the 90's. The US is right, oops Federation is right no matter what. We don't help others because it violates the prime directive but take from others because that doesn't.

Enterprise was... well just crap. Gone was ANY notion of a united earth. US vs them and the US was the US of A.

Slowly overtime any ideal the original had of a united earth together with other species trying to create a better world was gone. It was never that strong to begin with but each series turned the franchise more into just another US telivion series with US sentiments about how the world, including the future should be.

I see the varous series as reflections of US politics of the time (or rather the politics of the producers at the time).

Re:That just shows your age

[zoney_ie]

TOS is conceptually nice, the themes were often great, and it of course has nostalgia. However, there is a lot of the execution of the series that is pretty poor, and of course quite a high proportion of poorer episodes by the third season.

TNG is for me, the pinnacle of Star Trek. It still captures some of the original essence of Trek (esp. during the oft-derided first two seasons), it has a reasonable proportion of good episodes in most seasons bar 5 and 7, and the execution rises to incredible at some points (not least due to Patrick Steward's performances - but particularly when those are combined with stronger writing and themes). Each of the crew have their moments too (particularly Spiner, who has some amazing parts, e.g. playing himself, his brother and creator, distinctive and related characters, in a single scene) - although Sirtis and McFadden suffer from the fact that really their two characters could have been replaced by one (doc/empath), the characters are written terribly at times, and also Crusher is often just annoying.

DS9 is a disappointment, because at some points it rises to the occasion and shows what the show should have been like, and at other points it is the worst dross imaginable. I managed to follow it (and indeed enjoy some points immensely) until the second last season or so (roundabout where they killed off Dax).

VOY is pretty pants, and I for one cannot make the best of it (even if there are better episodes, better crew performances, the overall dross just puts me off it entirely - I hate half the cast entirely!)

I did not even attempt to watch Enterprise.

Re:That just shows your age

[westyvw]

DS9 was the soaps.

Glad someone said it. I grew up on TOS, reenacting it in the games we played as kids.
Although I could enjoy TNG after I warmed up to it, I always called DS9 Deep Sleep 9. I have always thought of it as a soap opera. I know others who disagree, but everytime I saw it I began to look at my watch and wondered why I wasnt doing anything better with my time.

Arrgghh

[cherokee158]

Does anyone else think the bridge photo looks like a bad SNL sketch of Star Trek? Why does Uhuru look like she is about to check and see if our table is ready?

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[geekoid]

What?
The actors aren't supposed to look the same, and it would be foolish to attempt this.
Y9o seem to ahve forgotten the most important part of Star Trek. The story.

Don't go see it.

The technology in the original series was supposed to look futuristic, not old. Considering there budget, or lack there of, they did a pretty good job.

Wait... is this an even or odd number Video Game?

[Ostracus]

"That said, I'd trade a good Star Trek film for something new and original. No one's making the next Alien, the next Blade Runner, the next Firefly. I'm eager to see this, but as a sci-fi fan there's a part of me that's discouraged to see us mining 1966 for ideas."

You forget we're mining video games too. e.g.Hitman. I think Deus Ex with Wesley Snipes would be interesting.

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[zoney_ie]

Actually it looks like they have examined the "concepts" behind the original Trek, and tried to execute something that looks like ST might have if it had the money and technology (for film-making) that they didn't have then, and we now do have. From the couple of photos, it looks like a reasonable attempt at that, at least visually.

I personally want more Star Trek than what we have. Attempting to revisit TOS is a quite welcome change from yet another iteration of ST following on from the existing ones. Enterprise could of course have been that, but they screwed up on execution (I don't think the concept was inherently flawed).

This may of course end up a failure also, but as a Star Trek fan who didn't bother with any ST for about a decade, I'm hoping otherwise (ST gap from mid/late 90s until last year when I finally got TNG on DVD at a sane price. DS9 is next if I can get it cheap, but I'll avoid VOY).

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[geekoid]

"The idea of him in a relationship with a Vulcan woman was repugnant, and an insult to the very concept of that species."

Yeah, No Vulcan and Human would get together, it's a complete deviation from the original Vulcan Character~
That said, I hated that series as well, but for different reasons. Mostly the inability to tell a story without leaping through time...yes, That was a pun.

And the Vulcan was stupid.

DS9 had horrible writing and destroyed, not just Canon, but the POINT of what Star trek was.

Voyager had horrible writing, a whiny Capt. who put themselves before the ship and crew.

OTOH, I'm glad you enjoyed it. If everyone liked what I liked it would be a great world...for me.

GET A LIFE!!!

[Amazing Quantum Man]

But will we see Kirk pick the original combination to the safe?

Disclaimer: Subject is not intended as an insult, but as a tribute to Shatner's SNL appearance.

Kobayashi Maru pwned?

[argent]

All the rest of you are missing the important question:

Will we get to see Kirk using his leet skills to pwn the Kobayashi Maru test?

Re:Kobayashi Maru pwned?

[pugugly]

Read the book - Julia Ecklar came up with the only version of Kirk 'Cheating' on the Kobayashi Maru that I can actually imagine not getting him court-martialed.

Anything less imaginative than her solution is unworthy - {G}.

Pug

Re:Kobayashi Maru pwned?

[argent]

I personally can't imagine anyone pulling the crap Kirk did not getting a dishonorable discharge long before he made captain, so that doesn't bug me.

13 psi you start to get wobbly

[name_already_taken]

At what point does the atmospheric pressure become dangerous to people inside the ship?

At 5.8 psi you become unconscious, but even at 90% of normal atmospheric pressure (13 psi) most people would be strongly affected by the reduced oxygen saturation.

You can imagine that the internal structure of the ship would slow the flow the further away from the breach you are, so pressure would be lowest in the breached compartment, and higher as you move away from it. Seems like automatic airtight doors are a staple of Star Trek, so chances are only that one compartment or an area of the ship would be affected anyway.

Plenty of time to get to an escape pod, transport out, or put on a space suit, anyway.

Unless you're standing next to the hole and get stuck to it. In which case you'd seal it nicely, saving the air and getting a nasty bruise.

Re:13 psi you start to get wobbly

[Leebert]

Unless you're standing next to the hole and get stuck to it. In which case you'd seal it nicely, saving the air and getting a nasty bruise.

All hail the inanimate carbon rod!

Re:13 psi you start to get wobbly

[Alioth]

At 5.8 psi you become unconscious, but even at 90% of normal atmospheric pressure (13 psi) most people would be strongly affected by the reduced oxygen saturation.

No, that's nowhere near right. At 13 psi you can function just fine. I've done vigorous exercise all day long at over 10,000 feet (that's 700 millibars, atmospheric pressure at sea level is 1013.25 millibars). In fact, anyone who's been skiing in Utah has done vigorous exercise at 700mb or 10.15 psi. If most people were strongly affected at 13 psi, Denver would be uninhabited (Denver is at 850 millibars, or 12.3 psi).

Some people are strongly affected at 10,000 feet - they typically tend to be smokers, or people in very poor health. But for most of us, the worst we feel is a little bit of a headache under strenuous exertion; while hiking briskly uphill at 12000 feet, I got a mild headache which cleared up as soon as we stopped. I've been up to 14,500 feet, with no ill effects (although that high you do start to feel a little mental degradation).

Re:13 psi you start to get wobbly

[hazem]

I've been up to 14,500 feet, with no ill effects (although that high you do start to feel a little mental degradation).

Ah, that's nothing. My town's at about 50 feet, and I can experience mental degradation just by walking to my favorite pub (the Widmer Gasthaus)... no need for all the heavy exertion.

Re:13 psi you start to get wobbly

[CorporateSuit]

Unless you're standing next to the hole and get stuck to it. In which case you'd seal it nicely, saving the air and getting a nasty bruise.

Outside of the geek world, those are called "Hickeys"

Ah, Enterprise...

[SanityInAnarchy]

I loved Enterprise for being the one Star Trek where they couldn't fall back on the Prime Directive as an excuse to never actually make a political statement.

Unfortunately, it also had that other thing I hate so much about Trek -- all the temporal plots. Yawn!

What's with the hair?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it me, or does Kirk have... just... too... much... coif?

I must be getting old.

[Nethead]

I must be getting old but it looks like a high school production of TOS to me.

DS9 vs B5

[flajann]

I still loved it though :)

B5 spoiled me -- DS9 simply could not measure up at all. Watched the first season or two of DS9 then totally lost interest.

Re:DS9 vs B5

[Killjoy_NL]

In all truth, these were the most boring seasons.

The dominion war was excellent stuff :)

(And it can't hold a candle to B5, but it's not bad)

Re:DS9 vs B5

[flajann]

Well, maybe I'll give it a 2nd shot. I've recently watched Enterprise and found the same to be more or less true. First season sucked; it went up from there.

Re:DS9 vs B5

[Rogerborg]

It does take patience; it only started to rock the fuck out in season 4. Then it rocked the fuck out like it was 2399.

Re:DS9 vs B5

[Killjoy_NL]

During the dominion war, keep an eye out for the episode "In the pale moonlight", it's imho the best ds9 episode ever :)
Enjoy

Question

[rlp]

I lost track, is this an even or odd Star Trek movie?

I'm mad at the 6-month delay

[peter303]

It was originally scheduled as a 2008 Xmas movie, but deferred to summer 2009 for marketing reasons. Its pretty much in the can already.

Spock??!!! What happened

[omfglearntoplay]

That guy from heroes isn't right for Spock ... i'm sure he's a fine actor, but man he irritates the hell outta me on that tv show.

Otherwise, pumped about John "Harold" Cho being in it. The villain looks cool. Should be fun.

wrong...

[whopub]

Sure, there are plenty of people who will watch and accept any vapid trash you throw up on the screen, so long as it has explosions, boobies, and (most importantly) a twist ending. A lot of people watch Lost, Fringe, used to watch Alias, and actually went to see Mission Impossible 3. This just shows that there's a ready market to make a quick buck distracting folks for 47 minutes (or longer).

I disagree. Boobies are ALWAYS more important than a twist ending in my book.

Does anybody but me think this bunch of college..

[Paracelcus]

kids look waaay too young for these parts?

And doesn't anybody in Hollywood have any originality? why keep flogging this poor tired beast!

Enough already.

Gosh I've missed the fans

[faraday_cage]

Ahhhhh, I love the smell of fresh Star Trek discord and dissention in the morning. I've been missing it now for a couple of years since there's been no new Trek for us to nitpick about. I'm just waiting now for the Zombies to come out of Engineering right there behind Simon Pegg, and for Spock to start slicing open foreheads and we'll know we've reached complete fandom critical mass.

Ohhh YEAH . . .

[pugugly]

I am *so* looking forward to this - a young Kirk shows his stuff before he becomes the legend he was in later life in a never before referenced adventure that completely ignores all prior continuity, but the entire crew of the Enterprise happens to be there for.

I especially waiting on the next one, "Star Fleet Babies" where the entire crew of the Enterprise, being kept by odd coincidence in a babysitting clinic run by Amanda Rogers in Iowa, save the young federation from a very young Trelane of Gothos and the baby borg he teleports in after baby Spock beats him at chess.

Pug

Re:Flogging a dead, buried, exhumed, reanimated ho

[chebucto]

Well put.

IMHO, discovery and the possibilities of the unknown were always central to what Star Trek was about. Not future war (DS9) or survivalism (Voyager), or even space battles with exploding consoles (last 2 TNG movies). Just the great ship Enterprise and a whole universe to explore, really.

Unfortunately, Leo went "full retard"

[default luser]

"Check it out. Dustin Hoffman, 'Rain Man,' look retarded, act retarded, not retarded. Count toothpicks to your cards. Autistic, sure. Not retarded. You know Tom Hanks, 'Forrest Gump.' Slow, yes. Retarded, maybe. Braces on his legs. But he charmed the pants off Nixon and won a ping-pong competition. That ain't retarded. You went full retard, man. Never go full retard."

But yeah, that movie was excellent. Catch Me If You Can is also excellent work.

Oh Great, Beverly Hills 90210 in Space

[halfdan the black]

So, what's the plot about, Kirk is grounded by his parents, but sneaks out and steals the Enterprise?

Calculus

[Weaselmancer]

Of course, as the gas escapes the pressure changes so there'd be some calculus involved.

The formula would most likely closely match the exponential decay function. y=a*e^(-bx)

The a would be the amount of gas you have just before the rupture. The b would be determined by the size of the hole.

Sombreroprise

[Anonymous Coward]

If the Enterprise doesn't have a sombrero, I'm boycotting the film!

YASJ (Yet another snarky joke)

[Torodung]

Looks like the cast of Beverly Hills 1701. ;^)

--
Toro

Pavel Chekov - should not be there

[arthurpaliden]

I knew they would fchk it up. There is no way that Pavel Chekov would be anywhere near old enough to be interacting with them let alone be part of a star ship crew. Unless of course the reinstitued the Royal Navy practice of employing boy seaman.

Re:Does anybody but me think this bunch of college

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, most of them are over 30.

Nostalgia certainly plays a part

[SmallFurryCreature]

Notice that everyone who says TNG was great when PRESSED, talks about the middle seasons. You mention 5 and 7. The first seasons are RARELY mentioned.

The same of course goes for TOS, not everything is a city on the edge of forever. No sir.

Picard certainly had some good proper sci-fi episodes. The torture one, the being part of an alien civilization about to be wiped out was good.

TNG, for a few eps was really good, but it has so many seasons that the ratio of good vs bad episodes is less then in TOS.

Frankly I think TNG started out as to big. TOS has the trinity of kirk, spock, mccoy. The rest have their place but that is the core. There is no such core in TNG. Picard, piker and data? No. Data, wesley and geordie? No. As you said, the characters just didn't mesh for a long time and the best episodes are eps that don't focus on the entire crew together. Other really good eps in fact focus on incidentel characters like the one about three juniors competing for a position and one being send of on a suicide mission.

No series can be consider truly good is four seasons are totally discarded by all by the most hardcore fans as 'must watch'.

What

[Friendly Pyro]

I saw these a while ago

It looks consentual to me

[Anonymous Coward]

http://blogs.indiewire.com/jamesisrael/archives/spock-kirk-bath.jpg