Slashdot Mirror
First Trek Film Footage Unveiled
Ostracus writes "Lost creator JJ Abrams has unveiled footage from his Star Trek prequel at a press event in London.
The clips featured US actor Chris Pine as the young Captain Kirk, Heroes star Zachary Quinto as Mr Spock and Simon Pegg as Enterprise engineer Scotty.
The audience also saw Leonard Nimoy reprise his role as the older Mr Spock in one of four excerpts from the film.
In his introduction, Abrams said he wanted the film to be released in May 2009, to feel 'legitimate and real.'
Speaking at London's Vue West End cinema on Tuesday morning, the film-maker admitted he had 'never really been a huge Star Trek fan.'" Note that the article doesn't actually contain the footage, just brief descriptions of it. The video clip included is just the old trailer that we saw many moons ago. But that won't stop me from lusting.
The REAL trailer is coming out in another five days. (Per startrekmovie.com where you can watch the previous trailer in HD.) Perhaps it would have been better to wait before proclaiming it? Or at least give useful information on the release date of the footage?
The real news at the moment is that a photo of the new Enterprise was released yesterday. I was expecting changes, but this awkward kitbash makes me very unhappy.
The new bridge was also revealed about a month ago. Many refer to it as the "iBridge" because of its resemblance to Apple hardware. Personally, I'm mostly happy with the bridge design. It appears to be functional and otherwise looks nice.
I just wish they hadn't made a parody out of the old girl. :-(
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Good. The series has become a tired ass glorified fan flick from insiders.
Fresh blood and a new outlook sounds good to me.
make a point of saying "was never really a fan of the original show"? Maybe they really never saw it, but arent' they taking the fans for granted then? They don't know how important it is for us "TO NOT SCREW IT UP"?
I understand a reboot of the series is sometimes necessary to make it fit contemporary audiences. But for every BSG, there are a hundred ruined series that chose to do something so out of character of the canon that it appeals to neither fans nor new audiences.
I'm really upset that they decided to make Scotty gay. Why do that? Other than the captain, mccoy and spock, no one else was getting any on the original show.
Come on, this is slashdot. What we need now is the ability to mod tags as "-1: Redundant."
My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
I never noticed it in the original series (I wonder why lol) but the characters are way too young to be taken seriously as astronauts, esp if you want this movie to be 'legitimate and real'. I'm not bashing young people of course, but we all gain experience as we get older.
Zachary Quinto is probably the most perfect person to play Spock in the prequel.
If they do this right, there could be three, four, five, or six more movies to be made.
If they do this right.
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
What is the significance of May 2009?
If the post is about a new trailer, wouldn't it be a good idea to have the trailer for viewing?
I hold this up there with the articles about images that don't even show the images. A WASTE OF TIME!
~ Ron Fitzgerald
Ok, this may sound childish, but I fear I might hate Spock being locked in a planet with polar bears, killing smoke and never-ending nonsense.
Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.
Why do Star Trek producers keep going backward in time?
We want the Next Next Generation, not a bunch of back story.
The new Enterprise looks neat, but the fanboy in me wishes the change to the secondary hull hadn't been so pronounced, because the part of my brain that can explain away the differences ("Obviously, they did another refit between when this was shot and when Pike was captain, yeah, that's it!") would have trouble understanding why the entire shape of that secondary hull is so different.
But then again, I don't want to be one of those sad Battlestar Galactica fans who still hate the new series because they DARED to change things from the original one.
Blast! Different nerds are fighting it out in my head, and the only constant is the martial trek 'fight music' that's playing right now.
is that grant from myth-busters in the background?
Just like any MMORPG franchise that claims they aren't trying to be or beat World of Warcraft.
In other words, get in and apologize before it hits the fan then point back to the statement and date as somehow providing you cover.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
McCoy isn't the original ship's surgeon on the Enterprise. I guess nobody who worked on the film ever saw The Cage.
And as others have mentioned in comments to previous stories here, Chekov wasn't on the Enterprise until later on well after Kirk took command. He really doesn't fit into this movie.
And why have a Korean play a Japanese character (Sulu)? WTF? I guess they are depending on the old cracker saying "what's the difference?"
There are a couple other sites that give a lot more detail on the clips that were shown. From the description it seems easy to piece together the overall storyline of the film. If you don't want to know what the storyline is then don't read these links
http://denofgeek.com/movies/144620/star_trek_four_full_scenes_and_new_trailer_reviewed.html http://www.empireonline.com/empireblog/Post.asp?id=313
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Get to the Dark Tower movies already!
I thought this movie was supposed to come out this Christmas season. Now I see on the Star Trek movie website 'Summer 09'. Am I imagining things?
Look back a hundred years and more and tell me how old you had to be to something dangerous, to lead, or raise a family. Look back to the recent Veteran's day and tell me that some of them were to young to be thrust in a world war.
Do we know how old the people in the show are supposed to be? Do we know if in the future that older people will look a lot younger simply because of better medical care or environments?
Do not apply visual cues to determine true age. It doesn't work anymore. Not with advances in medical science. Considering its the future as long as they look like they passed puberty I'm fine with it.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Maybe with the casts of TNG and DS9 ??
I wouldn't be surprised if there were many other trekkies who love the newer stuff, but don't give a damn about the old material ...
*raises hand*
Its interesting because in the Slashdot poll of Which Trek is Best, the original series actually lost to DS9. If Slashdot isn't a place to guage this sorta thing ... you couldn't do it anywhere else.
The real news at the moment is that a photo of the new Enterprise was released yesterday. I was expecting changes, but this awkward kitbash makes me very unhappy.
From TFA:
"If you're going to do Star Trek, there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people."
And so, naturally, they changed it. :D
Bow-ties are cool.
I looked at the picture of the Enterprise, the curves remind me of a 50's car. Less concern for functionality than for looking stylish.
It is not like those curves are for aerodynamics!
What, you never read "Lensman"?
Bow-ties are cool.
This really brings "News for Nerds" to a whole new level....
Eschew Obfuscation
I liked how the original trailer looked like a Rammstein video, iron workers constructing the ship by hand on a planetbound spacedock.
Strangely enough, our modern warships are essentially built by hand because the volumes aren't large enough to warrant assembly lines with robots. The ships are built in large assemblies that are joined together, huge machines moving the parts but humans inspecting every piece as they go together. But trying to model the construction of a futuristic starship after a modern-day navy vessel is about as silly as modeling space combat tactics after WWII....ok, yeah, they do it but it's still silly! Though I did dearly love the depth-charging scene from the Wing Commander movie, especially the part about the crew having to remain silent so the Kilrathi couldn't hear them, presumably on space sonar. :)
But aside from the issue of how the pieces would be put together on a starship, there's the question of where it would be built. Trek has always had a thing for spacedocks in space. I remember asking my dad questions when we were watching Trek and was amazed when he told me the ship could never land. It blew my mind to think of a ship built in space, always in space, never landing.
Anyway, I wonder just how awful this movie will end up being. Is it considered an even or odd-numbered film?
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
in that they make the Prequels better than the Original films.
Otherwise it will become another Star Wars: The Phantom Menace and mess up some of the continuity in the original films and TV series, and have a plot that does not make sense, and acting that was not as good as the originals as they are using new actors and actresses that hardly anyone heard of before and have not yet fully learned the art of acting.
At least make the Prequel better than the Star Wreck parody. I am sorry to say but Even Stark trek fan based films seem to be better than the original most recent Star Trek films, since Gene Roddenberry passed away. Maybe they should hire some of the Star Trek fans who made those films to help make the Prequels, if the current Star Trek film bombs? When Gene Roddenberry was alive, he was able to write or at least inspire the writers to have a good plot that follows logic and inspire the actors to act better, and have better combat and drama and more Sci Fi than Space Opera. I got a bad felling that this Prequel will end up more Space Opera than Sci Fi and deal more with relationships and personal issues between the characters than the Sci Fi story it should be. I hope it does not become, gasp, "Broke Back Starfleet Academy" or something. ;)
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
McCoy isn't the original ship's surgeon on the Enterprise. I guess nobody who worked on the film ever saw The Cage.
They're not following canon at all, they're re-booting the series.
The canonization of the 20 year history of the Enterprise before Kirk took command was mainly just a way to recycle the pilot episode that used a different cast and FX model. I wouldn't say it's necessarily the best thing for the story to keep that around in a reboot.
Bow-ties are cool.
The constant push of limits on the supposed speed of the craft, capabilities of the ships, and expanded population of the available area took away too many plot devices.
In the original series, they were kind of out there on their own without help available. By the time the big war with the Borg came around in TNG, they got to the point where anything that was a threat could wipe them out entirely, and anything else was easily dealt with.
Both DS9 and Voyager were attempts to revive the sense of frontier self reliance. DS9 was more of a city, and a sort of 'futuristic cop show' was the original goal. Voyager was to be an attempt to get back to the spirit of the original series.
Going forward you have a more urban setting with the known region pretty much all settled and all the borders drawn.
Going backward just gives you more room to work in.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
The original enterprise from tos is more like what real space gear looks like. ie. no need for aerodynamics and clean lines/utilitarianism that don't waste precious living space. That is why the sweeping aerodynamic design is just stupid and insulting. Having said that I would rather have a wacky low IQ starship and still keep the dream alive than have no dreams at all.
"The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget." -Thomas Szasz
Except that the official line is that they are NOT rebooting the series. Which is rather two-faced when you think about it. On one hand you're telling the fans that you're not rebooting the series (at a time when fans are probably most receptive to a reboot) then you go and reboot it anyway.
With PR management like that, is it any wonder that fans are upset?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Star Trek has always been a predictable mirror image of what Hollywood multicultural world-government pseudo-Marxists would like the universe to be. They hope if they push enough of this thinly veiled propaganda through films and the Talmudvision it might actually come true.
"I was expecting changes, but this awkward kitbash makes me very unhappy."
Younger fans that don't give a crap about the franchise will love the new iLook, in all probability. But those of us that have been fans all our lives aren't going to like this very much. Most of us are, frankly, sick of the retconning in the cannon. We fought for years to get Rick Berman kicked out of the franchise for precisely this kind of garbage. "Canon? Fuck that! If we can eke out another Nielson's point or two, lets do yet another time travel story and totally screw the franchise history up! It'll be Die Hard on a Starship!"
You'd expect some minor touchups to take advantage of current technology, but this is a complete retooling of the classic series, a reboot. Real longtime fans would probably be happier with Jim Cawley's New Voyages/Phase II. How ironic that an Elvis impersonator has more love and respect for the series than the current movie's creative team does.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
In his introduction, Abrams said he wanted the film to be released in May 2009, to feel 'legitimate and real.'
So, films not released in May of 2009 do not feel "legitimate and real"?
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
What makes you think they care about continuity? As much as JJ Abrams is hyped to be a great sci-fi writer, it's obvious he didn't know and didn't care about the history of the series. And in Star Trek, the history of the series... the canon, if you will, is very, very important to Trek fans.
I think this movie will appeal to teenagers who don't know and don't care about Star Trek. But it's looking like it'll absolutely horrify the rest of us with it's typical Hollywoodish "who gives a fuck about the details?" attitude. If it's turning out how I think it will, I hope it crashes and burns and Paramount refuses to make another Trek movie for 10 years. Then at least it'll be another ten years before they fuck things up again.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
And why have a Korean play a Japanese character (Sulu)? WTF? I guess they are depending on the old cracker saying "what's the difference?"
Crackers do too know the difference: Korean food hot and spicy, Japanese food cold and slimy.
Please stop stereotyping us as ignorant backwoods rednecks.
Thanks y'all.
This new Enterprise (the ship & bridge) look way too advanced. They should have made the exterior the same as TOS, but maybe modernized the bridge a *little*. Maybe somewhere between TOS and ST-TMP. I definitely think they went WAY too far.
Now, if they wanted to acknowledge that the "old" consoles, etc. are just because of our real-life tech limitations, then I could go with touchscreens like TNG on the bridge, but the Enterprise was also a warship, and they wouldn't use the latest and greatest tech on it. They would rely on older "more proven" technologies for critical systems.
Also, if you look at the novels (as Abrams supposidly did) you'd learn the control systems of the Enterprise was designed by an Alpha Centauran, and they are aesthetic minimalists.
Logic is the beginning of reason, not the end of it.
new, clean energy source discovered: Gene rotating in this grave :-(
I don't think reboots of classic series are needed.
It stifles creativity. People need to come up with new things like Babylon 5 and Firefly.
If the current "reboot" fad was the mentality in the sixties, we wouldn't have Star Trek at all, we would have Buck Rogers reboot (wait, we had that in the seventies... and it was NOT the quality of Star Trek).
Reboots are about selling product, not creating art.
no... it's "is it any wonder that HARDCORE fans are upset.
Actually, Scotty fall in love in "The Lights of Zetar" to Lieutenant Mira Romaine.
Then of course there's "Wolf in the Fold" in which Scotty tries to pick up a dancer and she ends up dying and Scotty has her blood on his hands.
myke
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Actually a Star Ship can land, but only once and only in the San Francisco Bay.
"The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
You all are aware this is a work of fiction, right?
Or not! Look at how many novels there are, written by hard core fans, set in the Star Trek universe. And almost all of them stick to established canon.
Any GOOD writer can take an existing universe and create ORIGINAL stories in it.
Any BAD writer can take an existing universe and "reboot" it.
This is about bad writers and bad producers trying to wring a hit movie out of a dedicated fan base.
Trek has always had a thing for spacedocks in space.
As opposed to the spacedocks built underwater?
It was called "Enterprise".
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
That's true! Scotty liked the ladies, he was just more focused on a long-term commitment.
Abrahms Star Trek I think will be as different from the original series, as was Battlestar Galactica Reboot to its original 1978-79 series. They are taking continuity and throwing it out the window, which means everything we've seen between 1966 and 2001 (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY inclusively) will be shitcanned.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
MORE: "Abrams wanted to take the original TV-series Enterprise and the movie-franchise Enterprise and fuse them together."
He has no concept of continuity. The Enterprise didn't just suddenly change. It had an original design, and then it was upgraded with new nacelles and internal systems. It was a logical, consistent process of military upgrades. Abrams is a fucking idiot to just suddenly decide to "morph" the two designs together; how does that make any logical sense?!?!? And you know what? His show Alias sucked after the first season, Lost is slow & boring, and I don't recall anything else Abrams has done that was worthwhile.
I'm just starting to think Abrams is the worst thing to happen to Trek since Ron "I never watched Star Trek" Berman. Why don't they had the reins to someone who actually cares about the franchise like Babylon 5 creator J. Michael Straczynski? Or even Joss Whedon. I'm sure he'd do a better job than Abrams.
"I'll fuse the TV ship with the movie ship" - stupid twit.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
Good entertainment has always been about the story, but I believe Star Trek also has to be futuristic in a high-minded sort of way.
As a lifetime fan (been watching since NBC carried ToS), I am interested in seeing some of the intrigue pan out.
Specifically:
What about the Crystalline Entity? Other members of this species. Where is it now?
Speaking of species, how about Species 8472?
What ever happened to Wesley and the traveller? Where are they now?
Data/Lore? Dare I mention the Borg?
Q? I sure have missed John de Lancie.
What about Warp 10 and Tom Paris' ground-breaking work there?
What about the time-traveling Federation that gave 'The Doctor' his portable holo-emitter? I sure would like to see THAT Federation!!
The point is that there is so much fodder for a good story - something that could easily by filled in for newcomers, that I don't understand why all this is being ignored (example: Nemesis and this new one which I don't think I even want to see).
What I've seen since 'First Contact' has been just plain depressing.
Vortran out
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
I think you were being funny however you were sorta correct. All the Enterprise ships had the ability to separate the saucer section and land on a planet, however I believe it was not until the Galaxy class that the saucer section had enough power to take off again (that did not work in Generations because the ship crash landed due to damage).
The film finishes with black smoke chasing a polar bear chasing the crew,
which will have no choice but to hide in the Enterprise's mysterious "hatch".
Sneak Peek for sequel:
Turns out the hatch is where the only toilet is.
"Reporters were treated to cupcakes bearing the Starfleet insignia" ... not the Starfleet insignia.
From the article: "The audience also saw Leonard Nimoy reprise his role as the older Mr Spock in one of four excerpts from the film. .... In his scene, meanwhile, Nimoy's Mr Spock is seen delivering the Star Trek legend: "Live long and prosper."
Lets just hope that this scene refers to what our heros will become and not they are talking to Spock in the future.
This reminds me of Asimov's Foundation novels.
In the original Foundation Trilogy, starships were essentially modeled after naval ships. They were big, and had crews of hundreds or thousands, full of heavy machinery. When he started the new Foundation stories, after 500 years of Foundation progress, they discovered (Queue Dr. Evil) "miniaturization." The new ship where most of the action took place was automated to the point where one person could run it, though it could carry a few passengers. In addition, this new small ship could out-run and out-shoot the 500 year old battleship of the original Foundation Trilogy. 500 years of Foundation progress managed to mimic 40 years of Earth progress. It seems that the future is always ahead of the present, and as the present moves, so does the future. Kind of obvious, but it seems to even work that way even when the fictional future is 1000 years from now.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
after all the bugs got worked out of the prototype
Sony and Toshiba Corp are issuing a recall for all warp drives produced between June 2149 and March 2151. The drives are defective and may explode, even when the ship is running under impulse power. All ships equipped with such warp drives are encouraged to dock at their nearest Federation spacedock for a free refit.
instead of having to rewrite cannon, you can create new cannon
So, are we talking photon cannons or did you mean the kind of canon that doesn't blow things up? ;)
:)
I don't like playing Grammar Gestapo, but you used it twice and while it probably won't impact your life in any significant way... you never know.
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
"reboot the franchise"
"re-imagine"
Terms like this mean that what they are after is not doing fan service but rather attempting to expand the appeal of the franchise to new audiences.
I agree, it will probably suck but I believe it is obvious that there intention is to grow the audience rather than appeal to hardcore fans who are notorious for being hard to please.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
After his panel at the New York Times' 6th Annual Arts & Leisure Weekend, EW sat down with Mission: Impossible III helmer and Lost creator J.J. Abrams to get an inside look at his new enterprise: a Star Trek movie. While it isn't clear when we can expect to see the film, which will be the 11th in the series, he confirmed a draft of the script is done, and it will be trimmed sometime soon.
So what, exactly, will be the plot? Early reports (like this one in Variety) said that it will focus on the young, post-Starfleet Academy days of James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock, but Abrams wouldn't specify. Still, he assured us it's a story that even non-Trekkers can enjoy. ''On the one hand, for people who love Star Trek, the fix that they will get will be really satisfying,'' he says. ''For people who've never seen it or know it vaguely, I think they will enjoy it equally, because the movie does not require you to know anything about Star Trek. I would actually prefer [that] people don't know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind.''
Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
The "Titan" books have been pretty good, if too infrequent for my tastes. I wonder if Frakes, Sirtis, Russ, etc, would be willing to reprise their characters? http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Star_Trek:_Titan
Spekkio Master of War
True. According to all of the tech manuals, the older Enterprises could separate. The Constitution class could use either the saucer section or the engineering section as a lifeboat, depending on what was damaged. On the Enterprise and later classes, it was determined that the engineering hull was never used as a lifeboat, and had the largest possibility of being damaged, so that capability was taken out during the refit. This also allowed for additional stores spaces, the botany section, and an expanded shuttle deck and engineering deck. This design stuck on all ships afterwards. Once separated, it took a spacedock to put the parts back together. That was, until the Galaxy class. I don't know if the Sovereign class has this capability or not, as no tech manuals, official blueprints, etc. have been released. The "Okudagram" in the sketch book from Generations and First Contact don't show anything in the way of the separation mechanics.
Logic is the beginning of reason, not the end of it.
I really hope he doesn't "JJ up" Star Trek. Honestly, Alias was one of the worst spy-genre series ever, and Fringe is simply atrocious. I have nothing against taking liberties with what is scientifically possible, but there's a vast difference between taking liberties, and completely making shit up that has no basis in either fact or logical speculation. Every single episode of the above series has left me in a catatonic state, rocking back and forth like an Autistic child who can't reconcile what he's just seen with any version of reality that he knows. God only knows how the actors can get "in character" for his roles, because the characters themselves bear no resemblance to anyone with a personality, let alone someone with a brain. They make stupid mistakes left and right, and in the end of each episode, make some huge leap of logic which is itself a complete non-sequitur -- just one that happens to be right in the context of the show. "Computers are powered by magic and explosions only leave scratches, therefore my fiancee is not really dead, but he is an alien, and there is a shadow government controlling everything."
His choice of actors leaves much to be desired as well. From the Mick Jagger look-alike, Jennifer Garner, supposedly playing the role of a femme fatale, to placing the Muppet known as Janice in the leading role in Fringe, it's as if he's actually challenging the audience to believe anything on the screen.
Honestly, his best work is "Lost," and even that only worked when he refrained from trying to explain anything whatsoever. Now even Lost has lost its way, and as much as I'd like to like it, I have a feeling JJ will work his anti-magic on the last 2 seasons to bring it to a screeching train wreck of an ending. I would've much rather seen someone like Joss Whedon on Star Trek, but I guess compelling characters and congruent plot lines are out of style these days.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I thought, "Oh please. How can they screw it up. It's the Enterprise."
Aieee! That thing stinks of Hollywood's idea of cool; non-creative execs trying to cash in on the latest trend rather than allowing the real creative team to follow its natural instincts. That design has subtle alien qualities about it which spook me. And in any other film, that'd be fine. Sure. Whatever. But we already KNOW what the Enterprise looks like. That's why people want to watch it.
Abrams is a first-rate ass. "Lost" is messed up broken garbage which teaches viewers the poorest social imperatives, illustrating reality as a place where you can't trust anybody and communication must always be choked down to the barest minimum channel needed for survival. And "Alias" was just one big apologist's argument for torture. --That they put this J.J. clown in charge of Star Trek is nothing short of evil. Star Trek is supposed to stand for communication and human dignity. Abrams is nothing but a flashy pimp intent on the degradation of the human spirit.
Abrams, I hope you die very, very soon. Seriously. And I'm not saying that in passion. I just think the world would be better off without your presence and influence.
-FL
Put your phasers on. I have a feeling this is going to be good enough to revive the franchise. I remember submitting a speck script for the Next Generation called, "Boat Of Souls". They supposedly didn't do it, and hopefully didn't rip any of my story elements for a later show, as I had given up watching the series, after it began to fall apart. Anyway, this new one is probably going to be good. I don't know much about it, but have seen the trailer. Apple will probably be coming out with a new iphone called the Trekker.
...Because all you Trek fans who a screaming blue murder will STILL go out and spend your 6 quid to watch the film, despite you knowing you won't enjoy it.
If you're so sure that it's going to be an afront to all you hold holy then just ignore it; don't support the people making it by handing over your cash. don't even bother downloading it, just pretend it doesn't exist.
I get sick and tired of people who moan incessantly about things like this and yet STILL bow down to the almighty Marketing God because they're addicted, or weak minded or just plain stupid. It's the same with computer games. All those people complaining about Spore's DRM and yet the STILL go out and buy it, or download it, whatever. If it offends you that much, just IGNORE it. don't even give them the numbers for pirated downloads.
I don't care about the new look enterprise because this new movie is just a rehash of the same old thing. It's YET ANOTHER Remake. What's the point in a remake? It's a chance for a bunch of people to rake in cash without actually doing anything original. I mean god forbid anyone should take a risk on something NEW for once. And don't bother telling me "there's only 5 basic storylines" I don't care. I'd rather have a fresh new take on one of the 5 than a stale boring take on something that already came out however many years ago.
So in summary: "Double Dumb-ass on YOU!"