Slashdot Mirror
New Star Trek Trailer
roelbj writes "The full trailer to the next Star Trek movie is now available at the movie's official web site. The upcoming J.J. Abrams-helmed installment represents a changing of the guard, a reboot of the franchise, and a return to the original-series crew. It should prove interesting to see how Abrams' writing staff (Cloverfield, Lost, Alias) tackles the Star Trek universe and all the continuity and baggage that comes with it."
Well, I don't know why I should sit through another 3 minutes of arc welding when a new Watchmen trailer with music from Philip Glass & Muse was released on Quantum of Solice.
Guess because it's Trek, it gets day to day duplicate coverage.
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
I fear something terrible has happened.
The problem I had after watching this trailer was that it looks like they're turning Star Trek into a mindless summer action flick. I like those movies as much as anyone else, but the franchise deserves something better than that.
I also still think Kirk looks like a preppy douche, not a skilled (if overly testosterone-driven) starship captain. Rest of the cast still looks fine.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
I seem to recall that the actors were fairly young looking (or actually were pretty young). Is that still the case?
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Episode I scale fail. Let's hope it doesn't evolve into Episode III scale fail.
How we know is more important than what we know.
...a change of underwear after seeing that. :-D
"It's dead, Jim."
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Let's hope Kirk teaches him a lesson with the business end of a federation light saber!
Could this be available in something other than requiring me a update in software to my machine?
There's no Freedom like UFP-dom
I don't think I can take 'Young Star Trek' seriously. In TOS, Kirk was already a youthful commander. What a joke.
Is it a reboot if the new version comes from a time traveler from the old version going back and changing the past?
Speaking of which, why did they bother to bring in J.J. Abrams if he's going to recycle all the old lame Bermanesque plot gimmicks?
I for one welcome the new movie. As a fan of the old as well, I think this refresh/reboot/prequal/timeline-warping/whatever it is has a lot of potential. The pacing of the trailer alone is very promising. And what's with those dudes skydiving from orbit - if you view frame by frame you can see the parachutes. It reminds me of the Kirk skydiving scene that was cut out of Generations / that I always wanted to see.
I know it cuts against the grain for slashdot, but are tits really the answer to Star Trek's woe's? Watching that trailer it seems like they've made an effort to sex-up trek. I don't have any issue with attractive women being on board, I'd think that by the time that we're launching warp-capable ships that it'll be fairly easy to have an attractive body. I just don't think that having bra-clad women(what, no better tech in THAT area yet?) or showing softcore porn on a bed is really the best way to make people take trek seriously.
meh, I suppose the old methods weren't working, might as well try something new eh?
What?
The next star trek film is going to be written by some of the very worst writers the TV industry has ever seen? Does this mean we should expect a dumb plot that makes no sense, and ridiculous dialogue?
Oh boy.
Which is impressive, considering the amount of crap the various creative teams have produced since the original series. I would day they should let the thing die with some dignity, but that time is long past.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
I still think the best continuation of the Star Trek Universe is Boston Legal. It's got Kirk and Odo and Quark and even Seven of Nine a couple of years back.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Too much whiz boom bang Bourne-style speedy action. I hope the movie is more cerebral, but I doubt it. The space combat scenes look straight out of Star Wars - figures since JJ Abrams is more of a Star Wars fan. I saw a lotta 'splosions, lasers, and some sex. But I still don't know what the hell the movie is about. The teasers for the original series usually left the audience with the beginning of a mystery or somesuch and was usually quite intriguing. I give the trailer two 'mehs'.
All I get is a blank screen.... Slashdotted? Microsoft must still be used 400 years from now....
It costs too much to check baggage these days.
I expect they'll just toss out all the old baggage and start over.
I hear that's all the rage with old movie franchises these days.
That Kirk, he's really something. He can put the top down on a Corvette at 70 mph so fast you won't even see it happening.
"The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
Isn't using a Star Wars quote in a Star Trek thread a hanging offense on Slashdot?
As both franchise got similarly raped by dubious quality prequels :
No.
It's just horribly deceived StarWars fan's way to share their pain with soon-to-be-wanting-to-"unsee" StarTrek fans.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I thought that the film's ---GO BACK--- slogan and logo (with the "zing" through it) was intriguing - but then I realised that it was just a site navigation button.
Eric Baird
With the rare exception (Data, the holographic Doctor), Star Trek usually stayed away from robots. What was with the Robo-Cop in the trailer?
Karma be damned, this has to be said.
Why the hell are almost ALL new movie trailers hosted by Apple, with each requiring Quicktime. And why does every new trailer seem to REQUIRE me to update to the latest version of that bloated, memory-gobbling, unwanted startup service inserting, file association stealing, iTunes pushing crap just to play a damned VIDEO? I'd rather have a larger filesize and get a standard-ish format like DivX than have to use this crap just to shave off some bits on the encode. I already have PROPER h.264 support on my system, so just let me download the damned trailer and watch it with something that's NOT QUICKTIME. The implementation Apple uses for that isn't even compatible with the standard, for crying out loud.
This story really needs to be tagged with "fuckquicktime"
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
I half expected Baby Kirk to shout "Yippee!" after jumping out of the 'Vette. Should 'ave just made it a podracer and got it over with.
I was disappointed out of my skull at this.
--riney
Poorly, I'll bet.
Also, that shitty site hijacks your browser window. You've been warned.
works nicely with VLC under linux too (that is with native linux opensource codecs as FFMPEG. No evil closed source QuickTime DLLs required).
mplayer also does a nice trick impersonating a quicktime plugin.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
So, there is something wrong with the movie, I think.
In the trailer, we see Kirk racing his motorbike and seeing the Enterprise being built.
Wasn't it built in Earth orbit, you ask?
Well, I think they got *that* part right. According to the Original Series Dedication Plaque, the Constitution Class Enterprise was constructed at San Francisco Fleet Yards on Earth and in Earth orbit. According to the Star Trek Encyclopedia, the orbital facility and starbase featured in ST: TMP was San Francisco Fleet Yards. According to the novelization of ST: A Flag Full of Stars, the San Francisco Fleet Yards also had facilities on Earth.
So, if Kirk was racing his bike in the San Francisco area, he *could* have seen the enterprise being built.
But.. I say, he still couldn't have!!
You see, Enterprise was built and launched in 2245
Kirk was born in 2233.
He would have been only 12 years old at the time they show him racing his bike and seeing the enterprise being built.
are Kirk's illegitimate children.
Work Safe Porn
Use Mplayer .
mplayer -fs -cache 1024 -cache-min 99 'http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h.640.mov'
works just fine on my crappy K7 system. ( Kubuntu 8.04 )
jdb2
Flash, javascript, quicktime, all to watch two crappy trailers?
Take a lesson from youtube. People like quick & easy video that doesn't make you install a lot of software & codecs.
I'll try to keep this spoiler-free.
During the obvious homage, I laughed because I didn't see oil traces anywhere else. I envisioned a goon squad armed with carpet cleaners making sure the place is tidy after the crime.
That or a rather morally ambivalent cleaning crew working for the hotel.
It has run its course, move on.
Dude, have been to the theater lately? Everything is recycled. Old movies, old TV shows. foreign movies, comic books, video games... The biggest blockbuster last summer was the third installment in franchise that started out as a theme park ride. (Not a very good one, either.) Martin Scorsese not only recycled a Hong Kong action flick, he won an Oscar for doing it!
For some reason, it's much harder to get an expensive movie or TV production greenlighted if it's totally original. It has to be a copy of something else. The original doesn't even have been successful!
Look at Battlestar Galactica. The remake only caries over the barest elements of the premise and a lot of not very important details. Creatively, it would have made more sense to start from scratch. But no, in order to get made, the series had to be based on a older series by one of TV's most notorious hacks and ripoff artists that barely lasted a single season.
Like they say on the show, "It has happened before, it will happen again!"
I'm 38 and I've been watching Star Trek since I was five. The first text I remember reading and understanding were the credits to TOS. By the time I was seven I could tell you the entire plot of a TOS episode by watching the first ten seconds, max.
I thought the trailer was frikkin' awesome. I don't understand the bitterness and disappointment. And I'm not a trek fanboi, either. I stopped watching the series' about one season into Voyager and missed most of Enterprise.
All of this bitching about continuity being broken and stuff going against canon: jesus christ, who cares? It's fiction, people. It's not immutable.
You do realize that Abrams' "writing staff," in this case, consists entirely of Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci?
For the record, these guys had nothing to do with Lost or Cloverfield (for whatever that's worth), though they've certainly made a significant contribution to Alias and its wig-based story-lines. They cut their teeth on "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" (and later "Jack of All Trades", no less), and gave us such gems as The Island, Transformers, and currently The Fringe (where you have people going from embryo to adult in a matter of a few hours, gaining some 150lb of mass out of thin air, because someone fucked with some cell cycle regulators a bit - I hate it when that happens).
I'd like to say I'm surprised that these guys keep getting work, but I think it's just the idealist in me that wants to think I should be surprised. It's not that they are bad writers, really; they've just elevated "formulaic hackery" to such an art form that I'm pretty sure the whole process could be completely automated by now, and summer blockbusters could be cranked out with no human involvement whatsoever, with similar results to what we get now.
Still, I might have to see this just for the hilarious casting: Simon Pegg, Carl Urban, John Cho, and Sylar as Sylar - just, WTF?
sic transit gloria mundi
At a website that doesn't take forevers to load some kind of flash that I closed before it even finished. http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/
Wasn't that the plot of Starship Troopers 3?
I'm serious here. Go watch it and mentally replace the names of the characters with names from Star Trek.
I would have thought that a franchise would be more than the trademarked names of the characters and toys. But I guess that I'm wrong.
The needs of the many, oughtweigh...the ego of the Shatner
It's easy how he's handling continuity - he's blowing apart the timeline. Everything is on a different path, due to temporal interfearance. And - that's the way it should be.
Don't you watch heroes? DUH!
For fuck's sake... between the 'let it die already' and 'it's different it must suck' crowds, it seems like I'm the only one around who is actually looking forward to it.
That's fine, more room in the theater for my tush. :D
THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
So, we see an adolescent James T. Kirk illicitly driving a red sports car, and being chased by a gleaming alloy air machine. ... Why do I suddenly have this Rush tune stuck in my head?
HSJ$$*&#^!#+++ATH0
NO CARRIER
While the film does look action-flicky in it's trailer, it might be possible that it's not all action and no substance. Normally trailers are supposed to excite and entice - how should this movie be presented? What was different about trailers for all the other Trek films? If they all sucked, why are you watching?
When you look back at the best episodes of all time, both TOS and TNG, which are always rated highest? Yes, those with lots of action. Borg, Planet Crusher, Balance of Power, etc etc. All the less energizing character-building is done in the series, and the more 'epic' story lines are in the feature films.
If you want a more talkie and less guns and fire trucks thing you need a series to give the story breadth and depth. To 'reboot'/'re-imagine' the series and try to kindle anticipation in an audience other than the 'old guard' (like me, who will go see any Star Trek movie that comes out) they are obviously going to try to showboat the special effects in the trailer.
Would you rather see a trailer scene of Klingons drowning in purring pink powder-puffs?
Apple: Why do you have to make it hard to just download the file? I don't like watching video in my browser, and you obviuosly don't care too much if I download it.
Star Wars Episode III may suck massively. I can't say for sure, because I have yet to manage to sit through the whole thing. Maybe five minutes in or so I start thinking how much the chancellor reminds me of Joe Lieberman, or remembering how well Natalie Portman acted in Beautiful Girls. By ten minutes I'm reading whatever is lying around or playing with my phone. And then I kind of wander off to defrost the freezer or something.
--MarkusQ
In Aeonite's defense, he did try to find an alternative to using a reference from another space movie. Honest. I actually saw him out combing the desert.
From here.
As has already been mentioned this looks more like a Summer Blockbluster then anything else. I was expecting to see Will Smith strut into a scene with a cigar splutting a corney one-liner.
ST is old. We have had 18 YEARS of non-stop Trek (TNG aired in 1987, Enterprise ended in 2005) and reusing the same script for many of those shows. We were/are tired of seeing the same thing over and over again. You know what we are not tired of?
Hope, charisma, and a calm assurance of success.
TOS had this in spades, and we responded with resounding joy. The others all took a piece of that formula, but none had it the same.
This movie looks like it has nothing to offer but flash and CGI. The original Kirk could have just as easily been a pirate-ship captain; he was cunning, daring, full of guile, and a swashbuckler. This new Kirk looks like Prep-School prankster.
This reboot looks like it has lost the original intent. That is why it will fail.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
The group I was with, none of them Trekie fans, though basically, wow that looks cool, and the two chicas have the hots for the Spock dude. Personally I thought it rocked and can't wait to see it.
It might have been the Bond audience, or the location (downtown Seattle) as the crowd seemed full of Bond nerds and young urbanites...
Anyone who remembers sitting in front of a 15" RCA CT-100 and watching the original episodes, not the reruns, is definitely not the target demographic for this film. The past be damned, it is time to move on or be doomed to the sweet smell of nostalgia, not unlike chloroform in many ways.
I'm not a big fan of the series but even I figured this out. The opening chase scene isn't "flash" it's paramount to "character development" - granted, using the term loosely.
It shows him in close proximity to the site where the first ship is being built.
He's trespassing to get a better glimpse because it is his destiny.
He's only 12 but able to drive and bail from his car in a pretty ballsy (read: action star) fashion. Again, a connection to his destiny as the "driver" of the ship.
2c
The new James T. Kirk better be sleeping with ANY female in his vicinity just like the old one did!!!
NOT TO MENTION..... HIS... OVER.. ACTING.... SKILLS....
I remember Kirk seemingly slept with a new woman nearly every episode including that green alien chic... (Capt. Picard was far too celibate)
I want a Kirk character that leaves today's generation of 'sensitive' weenie men saying: "Wow, That's a man's man!" (Just look at what has sadly happened to Bond over the years...)
Shouldn't Spock already have been his adult self when he joined the Enterprise crew? Don't Vulcans live about twice as long as Humans? Do I know too much about this?
Also, I'm guessing there's a reason the top was dropped on the sting ray by the time the kid made it to that deep crevasse (the kind that one always finds in the middle of Iowa cornfields) or was that a continuity error?
Is it really too much to ask that a story in an established franchise stick to previously established material?
Otherwise, it is just a cynical attempt to cash in on an existing fan base by making a movie that is NOT Star Trek and then use the character names and a few items from that franchise to get them to pay to see it anyway.
Think about it. What is the MINIMUM number of changes that would have to be made in that trailer to make it a Battlestar Galactica movie? A Perry Rhodan movie? Another Star Wars movie? Another Starship Troopers movie?
THAT is why canon is important.
If Kirk has driven a car before, why is he so oblivious about them in Star Trek IV? Double dumb-ass on you!
In the episode one where Kirk and Spock went to the planet of gangsters, Kirk was mystified by cars, and had a tough time figuring out how to drive one. Now we see him handling a Corvette like Mario Andretti.
I suppose that can be overlooked; I'm still pretty excited about it. I really don't know how I feel about the car thing, though.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
Didn't I read something somewhere about spaceships being built in space? Atmospheric pressures and that stuff. How the hell is it going to get off the ground? Levitate for a bit while the impulse engines warm up?
Thank you for restoring my faith in science-fiction fans. I've recently realised that the obsession with 'canon' settings for stories is total rubbish. The whole point of stories is that you can do what you want with the characters, their setting, the storyline and our being entertained is the end goal.
Let's hope Spock doesn't go on a rampage, opening up aliens heads with his finger to steal their psychic powers.
I had to disable noscript in order to see anything. Honestly, how hard is it to display an error message to the effect of "We are sorry, this site is a festering heap of garbage..." Then I got to watch a 30-second "loading flash you don't want to see" status bar. The flash seems to be nothing more than an over-sized image that fades in. When I (eventually) made it to the trailer page I found that I had to let yet another domain (apple.com) have its way with me. So be it. Then I was informed that I had to have quicktime installed in order to view the trailers. I then closed the tab.
Isn't it great to be in the demographic that everyone feels can be completely discarded?
The upcoming J.J. Abrams-helmed installment represents [...] a reboot of the franchise, [...]
followed by
It should prove interesting to see how Abrams' writing staff (Cloverfield, Lost, Alias) tackles the Star Trek universe and all the continuity and baggage that comes with it.
If it were a reboot, then there would be no such baggage.
speak for yourself
i get distracted by good movies way more than hollywood garbage.
speaking for myself (though i bet many agree) hollywood garbage (like quantum of solace) just reminds me how shitty the world is.
good movies (like war, inc.) often give me hope and make me feel good. but alway more distracting than crap.
Hollywood is a mirror???
my god we're not that ugly
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
Direct links to trailers:
480p: http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h480p.mov
720p: http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h720p.mov
1080p: http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h1080p.mov
All play perfectly in VLC and mplayer.
Not if they're yours.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
But I laughed out loud at the shot of the bridge with two Symbol M2000 barcode scanners prominently displayed on top of the console.
Somebody in props on that film is being overpaid.
Note that the kid says his name is James *Cyberious* Kirk and *NOT* James Tiberius Kirk. Hope they aren't going with the old evil twin formula, or worse yet, changing the life of kirk himself so that its not too much of a departure from... the Kirk... we know... and love. More than likely tho, just poor editing. Also agree with the other poster earlier that the top auto-magically coming down during the chase broke continuity. I'd also love to see the math on how much force it would take to leap from a speeding car going at 70+ mph with sufficient force that you essentially nullify all momentum within a 10 foot skid as depicted in the trailer. As well as a little more to do with the actual PLOT would have been nice, thus far plot is juvenile offender handed expensive ship painted in shiny bright colors and then proceeds to pick a fight with the local bully as well as abuse his own crew. Nice family movie for next summer, great role models for the kids, lol.
Most anything done by J.J. Abrams is entertaining but ultimately just another action flick. I saw a big scary monster, some sort of racing thing going on. And oh yeah james kirk throwing cars off of enormous cliffs. Sometimes computer animation makes things so much worse, they try so hard to make it look real but you still can't take it seriously. At least the old series they had to budget so they never tried anything as outlandish as this is going to be. Was there a moment where kirk's face was not pounded in during the trailer btw?
I imagine everyone here knows New Voyages already. If you haven't seen it, you should watch some. James Cawley gets it.
My favorite of the TOS movies was 6 because the enemy overestimated Kirk's racism and underestimated his intelligence and dedication to duty. The turning point was when, instead of starting the war he was expected to start, he said "signal our surrender." In TOS, Kirk was never a warmonger or really prone to violence at all. Not a hothead. Maybe these people watched the old series and noticed all the fights and shit without noticing that Kirk didn't start hardly any of it. And when he did start a fight, it was more to prove a point or to keep someone else from having to fight. Kirk doesn't like losing. Anything. That's the fundamental truth of Kirk.
I don't expect this movie to show an old, wise, thoughtful Kirk, but let's not turn him into a stereotypic cocky youth.
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
So you think they just dragged the afore mentioned homage up through the elevator? I'm pretty sure there was some type of container involved here.
Then again, I like the cleaning crew idea. Its probably the same squad that keeps all those 1960s volcano lairs squeeky clean!
And IE will support it around 2015, which means web developers will be able to use it shortly after that!
Hooray!
I love Firefox. I use it almost exclusively myself. I live by Firebug.
But until you convince the rest of the planet to use it (or Safari, Opera, or anything that's not IE), then don't keep telling me what great things it supports. Because honestly, when 70% of my clients' userbase uses IE, it doesn't matter for damn what features Firefox supports because I can't use them.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
First we have the unfortunate case of James T. Kirk. As we all know, Kirk is the youngest ever graduate of Starfleet, and has been used, intensively, in all our promotional materials for the last three months. Unfortunately, it seems that our Mr Kirk was not all that he seemed. As you know, Kirk managed a perfect score in what was supposed to be an unwinnable simulation, by hacking the computer. What you don't know is that a subsequent investigation revealed that Mr Kirk also passed all his other assessments, including his psychological assessments, the same way. His actual scores show Kirk to be emotionally unstable, over-excitable, prone to megalomania and paranoia, and he appears to have an obsession with knives and "fucking green pontang". He even lied about his name, his middle name isn't Tiberius, it's Timothy. He's a fraud, and a complete liability to Starfleet.
This brings us to problem number two. Spock. As we all know, Mr's Spock's mixed-blood heritage is regarded as an affront both to conservative Vulcan society and to right-wing Earthers. He doesn't "fit in" in either society, which is why his father decided to put him into Starfleet in the first place. Spock has limited social skills that make him a liability as a crew member. He was befriended by Kirk for his computer expertise, and now he ought to be facing criminal charges alongside Kirk. Needless to say, the prosecution of the "mixed-species" son of the Vulcan Ambassador would be deeply embarrassing, and would play into the hands of separatist elements on both sides. We can't afford to let this happen.
This brings us to problem number three, the USS Enterprise. ... detritus was discovered at the bottom of a Jeffries tube. Broken glassware. Specifically, broken whisky bottles. It now appears that the Supervising Engineer originally in charge of the Enterprise's construction, Scott, was suffering from intermittent alcoholic blackouts during construction, and was systematically falsifying the engineering certification paperwork. I'm afraid that the Enterprise cannot now be considered safe for further deployment.
Four weeks ago, in EarthDock, in a standard post-mission checkup, a pile of
Along with these three disasters, we also have a number of more minor personnel problems, for example, one Doctor McCoy, who killed fourteen people in Starfleet Medical last year. McCoy had a breakdown a few weeks after disconnecting his father's life-support systems, and ran amok in the intensive care ward, screaming "I'm a murderer not a doctor!", and pulled twenty plugs before someone stopped him. Only six survived. Do I see some murmurs of recognition? Yes, we managed to keep the "Killer McCoy" episode out of the press, but I see that some rumours have managed to spread through the ranks, nevertheless. McCoy has responded to therapy, and is declared fully rehabilitated, but he still has a tendency to repeat his psychologist's assigned mantra "I'm a doctor, not a murderer" under times of stress, and we don't quite know where to put him. Too many people have heard the rumours. We also have a certain Officer Uhura, who ... I see some of us around the table are blushing ... seems to have taken her training as "communications specialist" rather too much to heart, and seems to have been "communicating" with rather too many higher members of the command structure, with the obvious attendant security implications. We've also scraped together a list of other minor "problem" personnel. You each have a copy in the folder in front of you. None of those folders will leave this room.
Now, my proposed solution is to solve all these
Eric Baird
Numerical consistency does not exist in Star Trek.
From Stardates, to warp speeds / travel times / distances, to chronologies from series to series, they just don't add up and never have.
If you let go of that, grasshopper, and enjoy the stories (instead of the numbers), you will be happier.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
Is there somewhere else this video is shown, *without* all the wait? And doesn't need the latest/greatest tech to view? Like using FLV, not Quickbloat? Inquiring minds would like to know. - Kc
-- Kevin C. Redden kcredden@ gmail 392992
Isn't using a Star Wars quote in a Star Trek thread a hanging offense on Slashdot?
Feel better now???
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
In the trailer, we see Kirk racing his motorbike and seeing the Enterprise being built.
I guess I missed some detail here. It looked like a new version of the Constitution class, but did you see any 'Enterprise' markings?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
You would think they'd have a bit more imagination than this. Then again, if their like me, their probably a little long in the tooth and a bit set in their ways I suppose. They've seen a total of 3 minutes of preview footage, and many of them are already spamming the net with hate speech. Granted, it could turn into a Jar Jar disco party..(sorry, had to pause there to throw up a little), but it could turn out to be pretty damned good. I for one immediately got flashbacks of TOS while watching the new trailer. It has that nice retro feel to it already. Give it a chance and don't be so judgmental. Besides, why in the world would you want to see all of the same series you've been seeing for the last 40 years?
Can't get there from work, but I saw the trailer attached to Quantum of Solace. It's really not a full trailer, just "teaser number 2". Looks nice, though. Interesting how the dark woods and subdued lighting of the 1960's have given way to the Macintosh and Ikea look of this century.
I'd like to point out that "reboot" (if it's a true reboot) and "baggage" are mutually exclusive. It's a whole new timeline due to some standard trekish hand-waving, and everything that has happened doesn't necessarily need to happen again. This isn't just a prequel that sets up TOS. If the franchise continues, it can go in completely different directions, if the powers-that-be allow it.
My opinion: Trek has been done to death and I'm sick of it. If they're going to bother bringing it back at all, they needed to (a) dump every bit of Trek baggage and start fresh, and (b) for Fudd's Sake, get some younger actors. They've done (b). It looks like they've made a stab at (a), but we won't know until the film comes out.
I haven't been excited about Star Trek in a very long time. I'm still not excited per se, but I am curious.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
The third and fourth seasons were both good. Especially the latter part of the third.
+++ATH0
So unless this is 100 years before TOS why the hell are there romulans? Weren't they not seen again till Balance of Terror? Why is spock so pissed? This is not any star trek I know.
They play the mindless action stuff because they know that's what'll sell tickets. It still seems to me from what I know of it that there will be plenty of substance. Don't try to pretend that Trek doesn't pepper its substance liberally with action.
+++ATH0
Hmmmmm, Scotty, Kirk, McCoy, Spock, Uhuru, Sulu and Checkov all at the academy at the same time despite the differences in age. Yeah, this is gonna' suck.
Yup, it's becoming more and more apparent that Abrams has no regard whatsoever for the history of the series. McCoy was older than both Kirk and Spock (so was Scotty, but not by much), and Sulu, Uhura, and especially Chekov were all younger than Kirk... Chekov was a freakin' ensign, and didn't even join the series until year two. Now Abrams has them all at the academy at the same time?
This isn't Star Trek. It's Starfleet 90210.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Posting anonymously to avoid being the Karma whore -
Star Trek Trailer
Now flame on about Flash support! Oh, and the crap that this will be.
You can clearly see futuristic looking barcode scanners (Symbol M2004) on the bridge, used as props.
http://4msu.com/symbolenterprise.jpg
Gives a whole new meaning to 'scanning for lifeforms?'
*smacks his forehead* Ok what makes this movie suck. Mr. Abrams needs to go hang himself since he "promised" it would stay in cannon. Well first off no cars are in Star Trek unless you're on the Gangster Planet from the TOS episode "A piece of the action." Secondly: Kirk and Spock never served together on the Enterprise until AFTER the episode "The Cage" according to cannon which was 13 years ago from the point of the episode "The Menagerie". I'm unsure when Kirk began his command on the Enterprise. I would assume at the beginning of the five year mission but I seriously can't remember, anyway. Robert April was the first Captain of the Enterprise, Christopher Pike was the second captain of the Enterprise and Captain James Tiberius Kirk was the Third Captain of the Enterprise. Spock was serving on the Enterprise with Captain Pike. While Kirk was on the Farragut if you recall the episode "Court Martial". So Brannon Braga ruined Star Trek with that evil third season of Enterprise and now we have Abrams to finish the job and finally kill the franchise. Braga and Abrams need to both do the world a favor and hang themselves and keep their filthy paws off of Star Trek.
Yet we have year after year of cop shows on TV. And crime drama movies. All set in present day.
And they never seem to run out of material. One one planet. With one species. In one genre. WITHOUT TIME TRAVEL.
What limits the writers of the Star Trek movies is their self-imposed requirement that every movie MUST feature the crew of a previous TV series. And their skill as writers.
And the reason they do that is because they're depending upon the existing fan base to drive ticket sales.
Other writers are not so limited.
http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/booklist.html
There's enough material there for a hundred movies.
"Is it a reboot if the new version comes from a time traveler from the old version going back and changing the past?"
I don't know if it's a reboot, but it's certainly lame.
"Speaking of which, why did they bother to bring in J.J. Abrams if he's going to recycle all the old lame Bermanesque plot gimmicks?"
I think JJ Abrams may be ready to knock M. Knight Shymalan off his throne as the most overhyped writer in Hollywood. Shymalan and Abrams both share a similar trait... they're both one-trick ponies. Shymalan does one thing only... plot twist movies. Abrams also does one thing only... take an interesting idea that's good for maybe a single TV episode, and stretch an entire TV series or feature film out of it. Lost has stretched that small, interesting idea into 3 seasons of repetitive television, and Cloverfield was supposed to bring a revolutionary approach to the giant-monster genre. The monster wasn't even interesting. Hell, the speculative giant-whale-beast fan art was actually more interesting than the real monster in the movie.
Abrams took an intriguing concept... Kirk and Spock when they were young... and turned it into a teenaged soap opera aimed at the MTV crowd more than actual Star Trek fans.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Our friend was raped in Peru.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
" even TNG had commander "horndog" riker."
Riker one-upped Kirk in one regard... not only did he horndog real women, he horndogged virtual women as well. Whenever he was aroused by a woman and couldn't have her, what did he do? "Bridge, Riker; I'll be in Holodeck Seven". You knew what he was doing.... going for a holosex spank-session with a hologram of the woman he was just lusting after.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
The single reason I'm going to go see this.
Simon Pegg
How the hell are they gonna know we are boycotting? And why should they care?
SOMEONE will pay for the tickets. SOMEONE payed to see "The Hottie & the Nottie" for fuck's sake.
And since actually gathering money to pay for more of what fans like (Remember Enterprise donation gathering?) does not work - maybe a more pro-active approach is required?
I propose packages of dead cats and live cockroaches.
Second batch should have an additional payload of microwave popcorn and small metal objects - for when they start microwaving their mail.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Not to mention "A Piece of the Action" showed us that even years later, Kirk hadn't learned to drive a car like that (and why would he?). I fear the makers of this movie haven't done their homework on Trek nearly as much as they promised they would.
I think it's become apparent to everyone that Abrams doesn't give a rat's ass about the history of the Star Trek universe, and just made it up as he went along.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
And he grew up in Iowa.
Yes he did. So either Abrams suddenly has the Enterprise so damn massive that you can see it from Iowa, or he has Kirk growing up in San Franciso. Except that in the trailer, San Francisco sure looks like the midwest.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
For an Anonymous Coward.
Do you also steal lunch money from elementary school kids in your spare time?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
So that's where the katrina disaster relief trailers ended up. I heard they were toxic.
What's the point of using the original crew names if the film's casting is targeted toward teens?
Always someone has power over you. The thing to consider is this: Is the power good, or bad?
Star Trek is finished so quit kicking a dead horse as it's almost dust by now. Come up with some originality and stop with the Sequels, Prequels and reboots.
Ok here's my nerd card...
But I thought the trailer looked really cool. I've been watching trek my whole life and I used to dress up in a uniform at conventions.
What is the MINIMUM number of changes that would have to be made in that trailer to make it a Battlestar Galactica movie
17.
17 changes.
Doesn't some of the technology look a lot more advanced than even the Original Series? Enterprise (series) had some of the same things like that that bothered me.
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
*WHOOOOOSH*
That was the sound of the point of my post going over your head.
Here is the point again:
There have been dozens of cop show TV series made.
There have been hundreds of crime drama movies made.
Yet the writers never seem to run out of material as you claim the Star Trek writers have.
I watched the pilot and decided to skip it after that. Why do guys need to take off their shirts to get the decon gel on them ... but the female did not? Right then I could tell that it would be about titillation and really bad stories.
Here's a site for you on that very subject:
http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/index.php3
And the "canon" for crime drama is even larger and more restrictive.
Yet series after series and movie after movie continue to be produced. And some of them are very good.
And that's just crime drama. Medical dramas are an entirely different genre that keeps being produced as well.
On one planet. With one intelligent species. Without time travel. Etc.
And that is the kind of thinking that ruins Star Trek. Why do you need ANOTHER alien race in ANOTHER empire?
Why would you NEED Romulans for that story?
And ... ? Given that point of view, no current day crime dramas would ever be produced because we aren't fighting the Japanese.
It makes no sense.
Again, why do you NEED another alien species? Crime dramas turn out story after story after story using only humans.
Star Trek has over a dozen major species. And you want more?
Yeah, maybe someone could do that and maybe call it "Firefly". Or maybe "Babylon 5". Or "Stargate". Or BSG or Dr. Who or Farscape or .......
It's been done. It has been done.
The question, as I originally stated, is:
Is it really too much to ask that a story in an established franchise stick to previously established material?
No, it is not too much to ask. All it requires is a few TALENTED WRITERS. And that is where the problem is with Star Trek. The current writers seem to be encouraged by people with your viewpoint to just skip the canon and write a "sci-fi movie" with available slots to plug in some basic Star Trek items / names so that it will bring in the fan base. They are mediocre writers. They are NOT good writers.
*smacks his forehead* Ok what makes this movie suck. Mr. Abrams needs to go hang himself since he "promised" it would stay in cannon.
A pulse, phase, or phased polaron cannon?
you've got to be kidding me, modding this 5 insightful.
So we throw a bunch of cast members together, make a bunch of stereotyped caricatures out of them so that we can all find at least one to identify with, and then send them off to wreck bloody vengance on the world because we're so sick of feeling powerless that the idea of fighting some righteous battle is very appealing. And of course they'll reward us in this fantasy world with sex, power, and a grand adventure.
So, a recipe for a bad movie will make a good movie?? Have you got any examples?
think of firefly/serenity. The characters are not stereotypical. that's one of the main reasons firefly /serenity is good. walking out of the theater after watching some predictable crap (like you have described as somehow good) is why most people want their $10 back. Same garbage, different day. (though it would be new to children)
It's only because we're too afraid to dream of Utopia. We're too afraid to think that our neighbors aren't our enemies but could be our allies, our friends. We're scared of people who are differently colored than us, who think differently than us, and we know deep down inside that the world is not beautiful anymore and we'd better start picking sides now before everything falls apart.
who are you describing? seriously.
really annoying when people use "we" when describing their own baggage. should be "I" keep your silly self deprecation to yourself.
And now that he's dead, nobody's got the guts to dream big anymore. So we fall back on what we know... The same old conflicts, the same old prejudices... And it's so much easier to identify with feeling righteous and wanting to be violent than it is to take the high road and endure conflict and tension to create mutually empowering relationships.
You're talking about a terrible hollywood "movie" that's designed to make money, little else.
_lots_ of people have guts and dream big these days. You're talking about garbage like it's the only show in town. (and so dramatic) my god there's sooo many good real movies being made these days. obviously way more than back then. You watch hollywood garbage and think it's a reflection of the people? what planet are you on?
Linky
Yes, I am a smart ass; it's better than the alternative.
Why does it matter if they take a few liberties on things like dates and such, as long as it's good content?
Look at BSG. I think, like many others, that BSG is excellent Sci-Fi and excellent TV and it barely has a resemblance to the original.
I was never into the Batman comic book, but I would bet that The Dark Knight took some liberties with that content also and still produced a fantastic flick.
It's no secret that this is an attempt at a franchise reboot and we can expect JJ Abrahams and the writers to make it their own. As long as they produce good content, I'm fine with them making those changes.
That being said the trailer does have me a little bit worried.
In the deleted scenes, will we get to see Spock shave off the top of a random crew member's skull by pointing his fingers at him?
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
That "Whoosh" sound you heard...
Ok, one more time, this time slowly.
Go back and watch the trailer. At the beginning of the trailer the Corvette top is up but by the time the car gets to the cliff, the top is down.
That's a major Fail, C'est Nes Pas?
"The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
Bah, they go to the length of filming the trailer only to screw up Kirk's middle name? Sheesh.
That complaint aside, I think this stands a chance of being a decent movie, but the trailer doesn't make me feel any more confident in my stance...
Or just download the actual .mov and play in Media Player Classic (mpc, not wmp).
http://movies.apple.com/movies/paramount/star_trek/startrek-tlr2_h640w.mov
Batman Begins was hailed as a the best Batman film ever made (until The Dark Knight came out, that is).
Casino Royale was a box office smash (even if lightening has failed to strike twice).
The second Battlestar Galactica has been a much larger success than the original series.
Even Baz Luhrman's Romeo + Juliet was a radical new take on a classic.
So why is Star Trek so special? Why is it trekkies won't let someone take the characters and put them in a new environment?
Star Trek was always about the stories, not about the universe. The people who get too hung up on "canon" and hate retconning are missing the point of speculative fiction: to entertain, and to explore concepts about human nature that can't be as easily told in other genres.
This film looks like it's going to be fun, and maybe it'll open the possibility of telling other stories with characters we've grown to know, and give us a chance to know them in a different way.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
I put it in quotes for a reason. I even spelled it out earlier in this thread.
And they never seem to run out of material. One one planet. With one species. In one genre. WITHOUT TIME TRAVEL.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1032403&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=25795391#25795635
Now, do you agree that the crime drama TV series have that in common? You don't have to. And yet the people who write crime dramas do not seem to run out of material. Despite being limited to only Earth, only humans and no time travel.
Yeah, and CSI doesn't have a lot of viewers.
You might want to work on that thought.
Hmmm, that seems to contradict your other statement about "bookkeeping".
Despite not including Japanese attacks on New York, the crime dramas continue to be produced and they continue to draw large audiences. Despite the lack of alien races.
I've already posted this but why not post it again?
http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/booklist.html
There are a LOT of books out there, published, that pretty much conform to existing canon.
Yet people like you keep saying that doing so is damn near impossible.
Well, what you consider to be impossible has been done over and over and over again for decades.
I'm as old as NASA, 50 years, 1958.
And I look at the first Star Trek XI Movie preview, it makes the hair on my arms stand up. Because it's the real memories, and the real heroes.
Do these mere movie-makers know what they're playing with here? I fear not.
These are the hopes and dreams of a whole generation of engineers. We watched Star Trek. "2001: A Space Odyssey" looked downright likely from 1965. We shot Estes rockets into the sky. And all of us wanted, so badly, to experience free-fall, to see the curve of the Earth, as Burt Rutan's vehicle finally did in a Right-Stuff climb ... sort of, "What the hell, the instrument panel just lost all power and blacked out; let's just keep going and judge our angle out the window, and if the panel doesn't light back up, well, that'll be interesting..."
These movie-makers have already annoyed a bunch of us, judging from the posts on the second preview.
These ... mere movie-makers ... they're playing with oxidizers they do not understand. And people who play with oxidizers often only learn when they get their hands burned. (I will mention I was silly enough to play with a mixture potassium chlorate and sugar. As a result I do not recommend this mixture to anyone.)
No? You disagree? How far back does your memory go?
This preview starts...
(Spock welding on the Enterprise ...)
Voiceover: "30 seconds and counting, astronauts reporting fuel good. T minus 25 seconds..."
John F. Kennedy: "The eyes of the world now look into space..."
And of course Kennedy made the brash promise, and goal, that we'd go to the Moon "by the end of this decade". And we did it!
(first views of the Enterprise being assembled)
Scott Carpenter: "Godspeed, John Glenn", as Glenn went up on the Atlas rocket, which had a habit, no, more like a positive track record, of exploding. In a tiny Mercury capsule.
"The Eagle has landed." Neil Armstrong showing The Right Stuff.
(various views of the saucer section and the V from engineering to the warp drives being assembled)
"That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind." -- Neil Armstrong on 11, taking his first step.
And then that one quintessential, defining voice from Star Trek, Leonard Nimoy's voice: "Space ... The Final Frontier ...", which first showed up on "The Wrath of Khan" after they really did kill Spock off. And many of us left that movie in tears.
As we move up the saucer section and the word "Enterprise" comes into view...
And with the music from the original series, not that awful score from the first movie, we close that preview with a date in 2009.
I remember.
'Star Trek' came out when the Gemini missions were going, to practice rendezvous, which was necessary to go to the Moon. And we were going to the Moon! In those days anything was possible.
(Oh, there were a few jerk congressmen that wanted to stop it all and waste NASA's money for political gain, notably Walter Mondale, who tried to kill things after the Apollo 1 fire, but they didn't get their way until after Apollo 17. They did manage to kill Apollo 18, 19, and 20, and throw half a million aerospace people directly out of a job. I gotta tell you, I dislike those people most strongly. The 'Great Society' did nothing but spend a lot of money proving government doesn't work. And that money could have gone into getting us off this planet.)
Neil Armstrong saved one of those Gemini missions (with Dave Scott). Buzz Aldrin saved another when the rendezvous computer whacked out; he'd brought along a manual way of doing it (his advanced degree was on this subject). NASA picked those two because they were proven troubleshooters, and man, was Apollo 11 almost an abort. Neil overrode the computer when he saw it was bringing him down into a bunch of big rocks. Balancing training, practice, and an indefinable something, Neil hopped a crater, and touched down with seconds of
There are several versions of various Shakespeare plays that emphasize different of aspect of things. And critics then go on about comparing it to other versions of it. Why cant there be different versions of ST as well? Does it have to be 400 years old before you are allowed to do something different with it? Why can you not update it after 40 years?
Interesting to note that James Cawley will appear in this new Trek film as an undisclosed Enterprise crew member. See the story at Cawley Set to Appear in J.J. Abrams' Star Trek.
A perhaps telling quote from Cawley: "Early on, I was concerned about the look of the Enterprise, but after meeting and getting to know J.J. and his perspective on this film, I'm no longer concerned with little details like that. J.J. knows what he likes about Star Trek and that is Gene's original vision-preserving that message is his primary concern."
Maybe all the grinches here should come down off the chimney and give the thing a chance - you've barely seen a few teaser action scenes.
So basically, what I'm seeing here is that MTV canceled TRL, to replace it with Paramount's new project TRL: The Next Generation.
I think Viacom's got s^Ha hit on their hands.
-- ;^)
Toro
...but it looks like this story has proved me wrong :-)
that the thing Quicktime was best at was telling you needed to upgrade to a newer version.
Amazing how QT/iTunes require a restart on my iMac.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Nah. Zachary Quinto will do fine as a Vulcan.
But they need to cast Hayden Christensen as one too. Since he shows no emotions on screen anyway, he's a natural! See Jumper. It's still true.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
"what is your name", vin diesel?
no GPS that shows canyons in the future?
looks like the opening of the disney cartoon "treasure planet", lame ...
All Hollywood has been doing is taking old concepts and making them darker.
Superman, Batman, Battlestar Galactica, Star Wars hell even Knight Rider and the Bionc Woman. There's nothing new here it's the same swill.
But I must admit that the CGI looks very good.
I know it's sci-fi, but not a single one of those actors looks old enough to be put in charge of a starship. Kind of ruins the realism.
Popisms.com - Connecting pop culture
I call bullshit on the first scene. It was clearly demonstrated in "A Piece of the Action" that Kirk can't drive a stick shift without riding the clutch and lurching all over the road. Seriously, though, the real implausibility here is what Museum of Obsolete Technology in the 23rd century would let a kid drive and wreck a nearly 300-year-old classic car?
JJ Abrams needs to watch all of TOS before putting together a movie. The biggest problem I see so far is that The new Trek Trailer shows a young JTK driving a 1960's era car. Not a bad looking ride for being what, 300+ years old? But in season 2 of TOS (A piece of the action), Kirk barely got a car started and even worse probably destroyed the clutch trying to drive it.
The truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination.
"didn't just deserted it" ???
Ok guys, let's back off this guy. His BP is so high he can't even think straight. Oh and by the way....that show sucked.
Star Trek has stunk for a very long time and I lost interest in it long ago. Yes, I loved the original series, but I have absolutely no problem with a refresh that re-imagines the original, indeed I think it's a great idea. For one thing, if they tried to make the new Star Trek be like the old Star Trek, it would forever seem like a lesser imitation and that's not a formula for success - trekkies would hate it for not being as good as the original and further tear it apart with every tiny inconsistency from the original storylines, and non-trekkies would hate it for being too much like the original. Mind you, the trailer doesn't make it look like they've succeeded, mainly because it's yet another "origin story", but perhaps good things will come of it later. Moreover I'm more interested in it now then I was before, which is to say that it had been completely off my radar, and now I'm intrigued enough to keep my eye on it and see what it ends up as.
--- What?
Obligatory complaint about the irrelevance of the article.
Oh, wait, this is Star Trek. Set Phasers to +1 Intriguing!
Just remember you clowns took this seriously next time you want to gripe about what passes for content around here.
Looks intriguing, but:
* You don't arc-weld with those round oxy-acetylene goggles, at least not for long. You'll get sunburn on your face and blow out your retinas.
* If you want the outer panels to stay on, you weld them to the supporting framework, like from the INSIDE. There's nothing you can do from the outer side.
* If we assume the Enterprise is made of something better than mild steel, the welding would probably be done in an inert gas atmosphere.
* There's only one guy working on the ship at a time? That would take like 1073 years. Oh....
Much as the client sucks in windows, the format works across major OS's, and on popular devices such as the iPhone and iPod, etc.
So probably they're looking for a format that gives smallish files, but has good penetration.
You are dead on; and, I thought that this thing was built in space, right?
[Star Trek Encyclopedia]
"Launched in 2245 from the San Francisco Yards orbiting Earth, the Enterprise..."
[/Star Trek Encyclopedia]
I avoided watching this trailer for about a day. Then I got bored and, after avoiding the QT update virus. . .
Thank-you J.J. for living down to my expectations.
Remember when Star Trek was about clever sci-fi, charisma and high story tension? --Oh yeah, and about humans at least trying to be positive and socially advanced?
Compare this fluff to the first Star Trek movie. --Yes, many thought it was boring, the 2001 of ST, but whenever I watch it, I always forget the ending which makes me tingle in that nice sci-fi way. Wrath of Khan was a real blockbuster film; fun and dramatic and smart and NOT about mindless special effects. Sure, the third film was the fanboyish Spock back from the dead thing, but the next one about the whales was great fun; a real crowd pleaser which managed this without being stupid. Remember when Trek didn't suck?
For science fiction, the characters were wonderful. Sure they weren't Shakespeare, and sure, there were dumb episodes of TOS, but they weren't completely two-dimensional. They were human! Abrams, however, has the fantastic ability to suck the soul out of any character, flattening them out, plasticizing them, making them into idiot caricatures of themselves. --One of the things which drove me nuts about "Lost" was the way any character could be expected to do a 180 degree reversal of motivation and intentions for no reason other than the soapy plot needed a twist. Does he have no understanding of what it means to be human? This idiot was put in charge of Star Trek?
Sometimes I think that there's a concerted effort taking place to squash all the life and light out of Star Trek. --After the public rejected the crapfest "Enterprise" (with it's entire second season made dedicated to torture apologia and thinly veiled war-on-terrorism propaganda), it finally started to get both heartfelt and interesting. And that's when they canceled it. Oh really?
And they put Abrams, the freeking antichrist of script-writing, in charge of Star Trek? Bah. Hollywood sucks.
-FL
I agree whole heartedly. I find Mplayer to be quick and responsive on avi files that VLC chokes on or states that they have broken indexes. Mplayer is a sweet video/audio player.
The only thing with more wrong predictions of death than Star Trek is Microsoft.
Star Trek was supposed to die because Star Trek II killed off Spock.
TNG was not going to make it because their was no vulcan in the regular crew.
The TNG movies weren't going to make it because they didn't have Kirk and Spock (even Paramount believed that so we ended up with the silly plot of Generations).
This new movie isn't going to kill it either.
Yeah but he shows no brains, either.
> "It should prove interesting to see how Abrams' writing staff (Cloverfield,
> Lost, Alias) tackles the Star Trek universe and all the continuity and baggage that comes with it."
Not so interesting so far. Apparently 36 year old Kirk, 42 year old Scotty, and 55 year old Bones all gradumicated at about the same time from Star Fleet Academy because some doof wrote a story in 1986 to "helpfully" explain why they're such close buddies, without explaining why the actors are obviously wildly different ages. And we won't even get into 70-something Spock being retconned into yet another magical mid-20's academy student.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
They should just make it a cartoon and give them all cigar-butt style body/heads and name it Star Trek Kids.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Its Lost in Space, Thunderbirds, and Transformers all over again.
Spock is easy to deal with... You could say he went through the academy as a matter of propriety.
It is only logical he would learn the methods of which the organization he has sworn to operates.
Vulcan live a long time, I can buy a 70 year old Vulcan looking like he is in his late 20's.
Bottom line: This is a 'reboot'* of the series, so they can change the mythos. If the movie is enjoyable, I'm all for it. And the great thing is it doesn't have to be Canon, so anyone who whines about breaking canon should be laughed at.
*Yeah, I hate that term when it comes to rethinking a series, but like everything else, computer culture effects terminology. Meh, what you gonna do?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Reboot Cannon!
Aim it at any series and watch the backstory vanish into dust!
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
"I recorded the trailer with my lapel video-cam and posted it to TrekTorrents.cx. I got a nasty letter from those MPAA bastards but I called a mutual lawyer friend of mine & Lawrence Lessig who told their counsel to go back to playing poker with Faust.
Chase scene, 6. Flashes of sex, without Aliens Flashing, 4. Spock getting all mad, 9! It really seems like they're pumping it so it can pump Box Iron. Speaking of Humpin' & Pumpin', when will we see a Fergengi Pimp? Where's Quentin Tarrantino when you need him?"
Reimagined for you.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
It went into service in 2233. Assuming that didn't reverse the tachyons through the warp coils, it probably took a few year to build.
Also, 2233 is from a pre-production shot from Enterprise.
Hardly Canon.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"Launched" being the key word you can't seem to get your head around.
Ships are not built in the water.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Did you notice that clever thing that Apple did with overlays, to trip up other people's video players? Hmm.
Apple want Quicktime to be the default video player, so they're using their industry influence to get video content that people want to watch (like this trailer) rejigged to include recent features that "choke" competing players.
If video playback works reliably for everyone and is a "generic" task, then it's more difficult for Apple to persuade people to use their particular video player (especially if it comes with unwanted "extra features" like site-tracking). So what they're doing is trying to "spoil" the generic market, and induce new customer uncertainty over whether a given file can actually be played on a given player. If the main company encouraging the release of "spoiler" files is Apple, and "problem" files are more likely to run successfully on Apple software than the competition, then this gives Apple the advantage they want.
Apple are using old Microsoft tactics - break consumer confidence in competing products by generating content that customers might expect to run everywhere, but in practice, won't work reliably on non-MS er, non-Apple platforms.
If video playback "simply works" on everybody's systems without any wrinkles, then Apple have no competitive advantage. In order to get a reputation for being more compatible with content, they have to find clever ways of engineering incompatibilities into popular content, and that seems to be what they're doing with this trailer-hosting scheme.
Eric Baird
The trailer doesn't play on my PC running VLC, even after VLC spotted the problem and downloaded an update.
'vlc --version' yields :
VLC media player 1.0.0-git Goldeneye
I don't compile my own VLC anymore (I'm too lazy for it). For everything multimedia on my openSUSE, I use package from Packman. :
FFmpeg (which handles MPEG4 and variation of it such as the weird "Sorenson" used by quicktime - and whose library "lavcodec" is used by lots of Linux players) gives
FFmpeg version SVN-r15866, Copyright (c) 2000-2008 Fabrice Bellard, et al.
configuration: --shlibdir=/usr/lib64 --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --libdir=/usr/lib64 --enable-shared --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libvorbis --enable-libtheora --enable-libfaad --enable-libfaac --enable-libxvid --enable-swscale --enable-postproc --enable-gpl --enable-vhook --enable-x11grab --enable-libschroedinger --enable-libdirac --enable-libnut --enable-libgsm --enable-libx264 --enable-libamr-nb --enable-libamr-wb --enable-libdc1394 --enable-nonfree --enable-pthreads
libavutil 49.12. 0 / 49.12. 0
libavcodec 52. 3. 0 / 52. 3. 0
libavformat 52.23. 1 / 52.23. 1
libavdevice 52. 1. 0 / 52. 1. 0
libswscale 0. 6. 1 / 0. 6. 1
libpostproc 51. 2. 0 / 51. 2. 0
(Package obtain from the same source).
These combination play the mov file without any problem.
Also note that, in typical Apple fashion : this mov file is only a small URL pointing to the streaming source. For downloading the actual file, I have used the mplayer firefox plugin. My currently installed version is 3.55. The associated Mplayer is :
MPlayer dev-SVN-r27637-4.3-openSUSE Linux 11.0 (x86_64)-Packman (C) 2000-2008 MPlayer Team
The plugin manage to both play the stream (as VLC does) and also download the stream to the harddisk.
I hope this information may help you.
BTW: I agree with you - Apple's behaviour sucks.
To quote a friend of mine (which is beside a great Apple fan) :
Apple is the new Microsoft. Except it is a lot less ugly.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
It looks as though ~350,000 other people had the same idea.
Eric Baird
Hey guys i know most of your are fighting over star trek but heres the trailer http://www.startrektrailer.com/
Hey, I'm excited about the new movie and I don't really care about canon and all that (it's hard to as an Anime fan) but I'm pretty sure that the Enterprise was built in space...
And you are correct, ships are not built in the water - but they are generally built in a dry dock that can then just be flooded, rather then being built somewhere on shore and then shipped to a dock to be launched. I thought that the atmospheric capabilities of the Voyager were a big part of what made that ship unique - I don't think the Enterprise's were designed to be able to land on a planet (and then take off again).