Jump to content

Star Trek


Guest

Recommended Posts

Photos popping up all over the web! Well, on something like six websites, at any rate.

The Enterprise bridge crew! (UGO.com)

Kirk emerging from the snow pod! (IGN.com)

Kirk in the command chair, with McCoy at his side! (MTV Movies Blog)

Spock pinching Kirk! (Ain't It Cool News)

The villainous Nero! (JoBlo.com)

The USS Kelvin under attack! (TrekMovie.com)

Oh, and lest we forget: the Entertainment Weekly cover! (TrekMovie.com)

In the meantime: will this reboot be only two hours long?

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 412
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Photos popping up all over the web! Well, on something like six websites, at any rate.

The Enterprise bridge crew! (UGO.com)

Kirk emerging from the snow pod! (IGN.com)

Kirk in the command chair, with McCoy at his side! (MTV Movies Blog)

Spock pinching Kirk! (Ain't It Cool News)

The villainous Nero! (JoBlo.com)

The USS Kelvin under attack! (TrekMovie.com)

Oh, and lest we forget: the Entertainment Weekly cover! (TrekMovie.com)

In the meantime: will this reboot be only two hours long?

A friend pointed me to those pictures last night, and I slept a joyful sleep. The uniforms are amazing, and the characters look awesome. The bridge - um - looks like an Apple Store. But there's a cool movie that's going to take place there, so I'm still optimistic. Happy, Happy Denes.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites

At least one picture at the Entertainment Weekly story that went up today. (Among its declarations: "More ambitiously, the movie subversively plays with Trek lore

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They also say that the introduction of the Enterprise is awe-inspiring. As it should be, laddie.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Empire magazine has new pictures.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool viewscreen shot, and Uhura pic.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

They have released a picture that gives us a complete look at the Enterprise, so naturally I had to do screen-caps of the four other versions of the original-series Enterprise that are out there (the 1964 pilot-episode version, the 1966-1969 series version, the 1996 Deep Space Nine time-travel episode version, and the 2007 "remastered" high-def version).

Suffice it to say that all those other versions have a fair bit more in common with each other, I think, than the new version has with any of them. I really don't understand how EW and Cinematical etc. can claim that the new ship looks JUST like the old one.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

enterprise579_l.jpg

Sigh. I'm not sure how I feel about it. I like the nacelles, and the primary hull saucer looks okay, but the secondary hull, the cylinder slung under the saucer, looks awkward and ungainly. I'll need to see it in motion and from more angles to know better.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think this film will suffer from Phantom Menace syndrome, meaning that even though it is set long before the previous installments in the series, it's plot will somehow include technology more advanced than that which supposedly "comes later"?

-"I... drink... your... milkshake! I drink it up!"

Daniel Plainview, There Will Be Blood

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think this film will suffer from Phantom Menace syndrome, meaning that even though it is set long before the previous installments in the series, it's plot will somehow include technology more advanced than that which supposedly "comes later"?

I am not sure this is really set fully in prior continuity. It is a reboot, is it not? If it is a reboot, it is not constricted by what came later.

"You know...not EVERY story has to be interesting." -Gibby

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not using the word reboot - in fact, they are avoiding and rejecting the word.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think this film will suffer from Phantom Menace syndrome, meaning that even though it is set long before the previous installments in the series, it's plot will somehow include technology more advanced than that which supposedly "comes later"?

Of course, whatever its faults, Phantom Menace was setting up what Obi-Wan called that "elegant...more civilized age", and the fall into ruin that the Clone Wars precipitated.

While this film seems to be retaking us to places we've already been, but through different eyes and different aesthetic sensibilities, so I don't think the comparison really holds.

"A director must live with the fact that his work will be called to judgment by someone who has never seen a film of Murnau's." - François Truffaut

Twitter.
Letterboxd.

Reviews and essays at Three Brothers Film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff wrote:

: Do you think this film will suffer from Phantom Menace syndrome, meaning that even though it is set long before the previous installments in the series, it's plot will somehow include technology more advanced than that which supposedly "comes later"?

I think the franchise has already had to deal with something like that when they produced the Star Trek: Enterprise series, which takes place about a hundred years prior to the original series.

Nezpop wrote:

: I am not sure this is really set fully in prior continuity. It is a reboot, is it not?

Well, that depends. If people from the 24th century go back in time and cause changes to the 23rd century (and/or earlier), then is that a "reboot", or is it "in continuity" with what has come before?

(Matters are complicated by the fact that certain things HAVE to happen in the future in order for the past to be what it was. I think, for example, of how, in Star Trek: First Contact, Picard and the Borg had to come back from the 24th century to the 21st century so that Zefram Cochrane's launch could happen the way that it did, and so that the Borg survivors who are thawed out in the 22nd century, in Star Trek: Enterprise, could send a signal across the galaxy that would lure the rest of the Borg towards the Federation in Picard's time. If the new movie changes the timeline so that the 24th century as we know it might never happen, then what becomes of the 24th century's effect on the 21st and 22nd centuries...?)

Supposedly, all the changes between the original-series ship and the new-movie ship can be explained within the existing "canon" -- but the exact nature of that explanation has not been revealed yet, of course.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just noticed the main villain of the movie is named Nero?

And Kirk's middle name is Tiberius.

Tiberius was considered one of Rome's greatest generals, and Nero of course was one Rome's most depraved rulers. I wonder if that was intentional.

It had a face like Robert Tilton's -- without the horns.

- Steve Taylor, "Cash Cow"

Link to post
Share on other sites
They are not using the word reboot - in fact, they are avoiding and rejecting the word.

Rationale? What distinction do they mean to cut?

See Peter's explanation. It involves time travel.

Personally, from what I've seen and heard, I think it's best to think of this as a reboot. It involves fewer headaches or heartburns for Star Trek canon fanatics like - oh, like me. But the filmmakers are saying that it firmly honors all canon, to the minutest detail.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Baptist Death Ray wrote:

: I just noticed the main villain of the movie is named Nero?

: And Kirk's middle name is Tiberius.

: Tiberius was considered one of Rome's greatest generals, and Nero of course was one Rome's most depraved rulers. I wonder if that was intentional.

I think Nero's name owes more to the fact that he's a Romulan, from the twin-planet system of Romulus and Remus.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
They are not using the word reboot - in fact, they are avoiding and rejecting the word.
Rationale? What distinction do they mean to cut?
See Peter's explanation. It involves time travel.

Personally, from what I've seen and heard, I think it's best to think of this as a reboot. It involves fewer headaches or heartburns for Star Trek canon fanatics like - oh, like me. But the filmmakers are saying that it firmly honors all canon, to the minutest detail.

Bah. I'm with you. Dramaturgically, it sounds like a reboot.

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites

This'll probably get yanked soon, but the "official" version goes online Monday, so anyhoo. I'll probably have more to say after I've been able to look at it in high-def, frame-by-frame. :)

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SDG wrote:

: Why the sexual explicitness? Why not keep it at least as kid-friendly as most of the previous movies?

Because the characters aren't middle-aged any more. ;)

It's interesting, actually, how Kirk had a well-earned reputation as a ladies' man during the original series, but there's barely any trace of that in the movies. ST2:TWOK and ST:G both contain allusions to PREVIOUS relationships, and ST4:TVH might sort of include some flirting between Kirk and Dr. Gillian Taylor, but if that IS supposed to be flirting, it's incredibly subtle, and in any case, it never gets beyond a farewell kiss on the cheek. Only ST6:TUC shows Kirk getting frisky with anyone, and again, all he gets is as far as a kiss -- but when I first saw that film, and McCoy said to Kirk, "What IS it with you?", I suddenly realized just how ABSENT that side of Kirk had been from all the other films.

(Side note: In ST:TMP, the Decker-Ilia relationship is basically a test run for the Riker-Troi relationship that we will see in The Next Generation, but again, as with the movies' version of Kirk, even though Ilia talks about "oaths of celibacy" and humans being "a sexually immature species", her relationship with Decker within the movie itself consists essentially of verbal allusions to a PAST affair.)

The Next Generation-era series and movies have been more explicit about the sexuality, and have moved things along for the franchise as a whole: Riker and Troi sharing a bath in ST:I, Riker and Troi making love (and then the villain psychically projecting himself into Troi's mind so that the sex becomes a virtual rape) in ST:N. The Borg Queen's come-ons to Data in ST:FC are also somewhere in that ballpark, and probably go further than anything we saw in the original-series movies.

On top of all that, there is the fact that one of the whole points of J.J. Abrams' Star Trek is that "it won't be your daddy's Star Trek." The sexuality stands out just as much as the old-style speeding car, and just as much as what looks like a swooping hand-held shot on the bridge, etc. The aesthetic is all different now, and that's as true of the depiction of sex as anything else.

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind also this quote from Mark Harris, which I quoted at my blog back in June:

Here's a genuinely surprising piece of news about the summer of 2008: In a season expressly designed to appeal to the hordes of kids who are out of school, two of the kiddiest movies so far,

Speed Racer

and

Prince Caspian

, have fizzled. And next summer, and for several summers to come, there'll be fewer kids going to the movies, because there'll be fewer kids, period. Apparently (this is the U.S. Census talking), we had a mini-baby boom between about 1981 and 1995. And then came a dip

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trailer is now available on Apple's site, along with an HD version. And here's a shot-by-shot breakdown, if you're feeling particularly nitpicky.

"I feel a nostalgia for an age yet to come..."
Opus, Twitter, Facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, that shot-by-shot walkthrough of the Trailer is so wrong, it's kind of laughable. It mis-identifies characters, ships, and locations pretty badly. The trailer itself is pretty doggone awesome.

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."
Link to post
Share on other sites
Keep in mind also this quote from Mark Harris, which I quoted at my blog back in June:

Here's a genuinely surprising piece of news about the summer of 2008: In a season expressly designed to appeal to the hordes of kids who are out of school, two of the kiddiest movies so far,

Speed Racer

and

Prince Caspian

, have fizzled. And next summer, and for several summers to come, there'll be fewer kids going to the movies, because there'll be fewer kids, period. Apparently (this is the U.S. Census talking), we had a mini-baby boom between about 1981 and 1995. And then came a dip

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...