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."
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 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?
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
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)
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.
Both franchises got similarly raped by dubious quality prequels.
The Star Trek franchise lost me a long time ago, but I'm genuinely intrigued by this new film. At this point in time, a project helmed by JJ Abrams has far more potential than any other overseen by Lucas.
Consider how Abrams has surrounded himself with hardcore trekkies and genuinely takes feedback from them, while Lucas insisted on being the sole "intellectual author" of his prequels, giving us the unsightly spectacles of lil' superboy Anakin, baby Greedo and that infamous Gungan.
Another great difference is dialogue and filming itself, Lucas "can write that shit but sure as hell can't say it" and puts acting on a secondary plane, too busy visualizing how to fill the green screen. In contrast, Abrams has a keener eye and ear for these things.
Better still, Abrams is aware that he has something to prove here, voluntarily put himself in an uncomfortable position as a creative challenge, and I can respect that.
Bottom line, I'll pay money to see this prequel (as most of us here will) and will reserve criticism for afterward.
Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
Agreed.
For comparison, I offer the trailer for Star Trek: First Contact, which has lots of fight-the-Borg action, and only a brief appearance by Zefram Cochrane.
If you want good Trek, watch Battlestar Galactica. What made Trek good in the first place was that it tackled issues of the day in a sci-fi environment. That was the only way they could even show something like the first interracial kiss, or having a Russian as a good guy alongside Americans. BSG does just that. It talks about modern problems through the sci-fi setting. The reason BSG is so good now is that they didn't worry about the canon from the original cheesy show. They just took the premise and ran with it.
Star Trek is outdated and needs a kick in the ass to be good sci-fi again. This movie probably won't be a resurgence of what made the original great, but neither would a movie based completely off of Star Trek canon.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
If you want good Trek, watch Battlestar Galactica.
Oh, I do :)
What made Trek good in the first place was that it tackled issues of the day in a sci-fi environment.
Agreed. There was a lot of that of TNG and DS9 too. The idea of "curing" homosexuality, the influence of religion in science classes, etc. You mentioned you consider Galactica to be "good trek" and that's no accident considering Ronald D. Moore's involvement.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.