Slashdot Mirror


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."

4 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. Isn't that why they chose Trek? by khasim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  2. Re:no comment by rezalas · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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).

  3. Re:no comment by Like2Byte · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  4. Re:Looking at the pictures.. by blueturffan · · Score: 4, Interesting

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