New movie Kirk and Spock pic.

[AJJ]

I'm waiting to see the first non-teaser trailer before I decide if I want to see this movie.

As for the pictures they look very interesting.

[starsky]

did you guys know that the new kirk is the son of robert pine, the guy who played Sarge on CHIPS?

[johnmiic]

I have this link as well if it has not been posted yet:

New Star Trek Images! | Filmonic

I'll see this film when it comes out. I can't tell from stills if it will be good or not. I'll just try to avoid opening day crowds. I noticed the colors of the unforms are darker-more serious looking instead of the usual bright, cheerful colors.

[ctc]

>They want NEW fans to get hooked for the next 20 years.

Well.... sort of. They want new fans to be hooked, sure; but they want to do it by capitalizing on name recognition from the old. It's a self-defeating strategy: you want something new and shiney that'll appeal to the current audience, but to get there you mine the old for it's recognizability and invariably bring along a LOT of baggage.

"Old-fashioned but new!" Mylar was SUCH a weasel....

>People nowadays treat Star Trek as just another series (the first series) in a line of star trek television series'

Wow. You sure take this stuff seriously! I agree with you; but the sad fact is that audiences (as a collective) outgrow stuff. It'd be impossible for a new viewer to see the old show the same way we did when it was first aired. The templates and environment for the audience have changed. The reason the space hippie episode doesn't age so well is that there are no hippies any more. They seem like weirdos 'cos a new viewer doesn't have any context to take them from. (Now, make 'em whiney emo-kids and a younger viewer would probably get it. And, no I'm not suggesting Paramount redub the episode with CGI emo-kids....) Kirk kissing Uhura wouldn't even register with most people these days, even though it freaked a lot of folks out during the original run. Even Chekov was freaky to the original audience. A RUSSIAN?!?! Egads! Nowadays he seems really.... harmless.

There's nothing you can do about this; even though Paramount is desperately trying, what with all the re-edits and all. BUT you COULD do a COMPLETELY NEW story in that setting which would resonate with a new audience. IF you weren't so hung up with pandering to the fan base. Which Paramount IS. The Trek setting, in ANY of it's timelines, is detailed enough that you could do damned near anything. But nobody does.

"Show more Klingons! Kids like Klingons!!!"

>The Enterprise is as much of a character in the script as actors.

See; THAT'S part of the setting. The original established a certain look to things like the ships. Why change that? To make it conform with the current "correct" way of doing things of course; but story-wise there's no reason to bother. You can produce a much more detailed rendering of the ships WITHOUT modifying the designs. The Japanese do it all the time. (The RX-78 Gundam has looked EXACTLY THE SAME for almost 30 years, wether it's a model, cartoon, or super-real cgi feature....)

Don C.

[Nostalgiabuff]

I think Paramount is on the right track. They finally realized the fans don't want new characters and new ships. They want Kirk and Spock. But not geriatric versions. Their only hope of refreshing the franchise was to go back to basics....and that meant new actors taking over iconic roles. I am completely open minded about this. It is the only chance we have of ever getting new adventures on the screen with these classic characters. I believe the actors all signed contracts for 2 sequels so if this movie works they will be making more. There has not been any new Trek in several years, the last movie tanked(for good reason) and Enterprise was week at best. They need to get this right or Trek is dead.

[Mikey]

The classic series --- God I hate saying that ....

Star Trek is too big of an institution to play with.

People nowadays treat Star Trek as just another series (the first series) in a line of star trek television series'

It's not .... it's way bigger then that.. but still, they're blind and think there's money to be made off it.

First,
Let's make a cartoon of it.
Second,
Let's make movies based on the show.
Third,
Let's make a "new series" and call it Star Trek the Next Generation.
Fourth,
Let's "remaster" Star Trek for DVD release.
Fifth,
Let's make new special effects and music for the old show.
Sixth,
Let's make a new movie of the old show
Seventh,
Let's put the new movie actor's faces over the old show actor's faces.... while we're at it, let's put the new movie Enterprise in the old show.
Eighth,
Let's edit the old show -- perhaps we could make new stories.
Nineth,
Let's make a new-new movie of the newly edited old show.
Tenth,
See "seventh".

The old show is no more.
And us fans are the blame for letting it happen one step at a time.

[Gorn Captain]

I'm willing to give it a shot.
With the exception of the lead actor (not a convincing look to me), I kind of like the line-up. It'll seem weird, I know, but heck, it's more exciting to me than the last Indy movie. At least with this one, we're out of the geriatric ward....

[Gorn Captain]

Asking me to except a fake Kirk and Spock is like asking me to accept some stranger who replaces one of my family members.

I wish some of MY family members would be replaced by strangers.....

[megoscott]

I'll go, I loved this idea, but Kirk's hair looks bad and Spock is too pretty.

[ScottA]

I'm going to give it a chance.

But if Vulcans have no emotions why is Spock choking Kirk? He looks angry, which is an emotion as I recall.

[jaypiscopo]

In the final analysis- its all about making money- not art-
Paramount is thinking about the franchise- period.
They want NEW fans to get hooked for the next 20 years.
Sure Nimoy's in there---for us fogies--- but their eyes are on the future dollar.

Re-makes of tv shows as movies and endless sequels are just more examples of
a lack of imagination in the movie buisness.
Television seems to have more creativity now. im seing better stuff on HBO and ABC
than in theatres.

[Earth 2 Chris]

I want this to work, but that EW cover is horrible. They both look much better in the set photos though.

I am of the Kirk=Shat and Spock=Nimoy camp too, but eventually, Paramount was going to do this. They almost did it over 20 years ago. I just hope they do it right, and a new generation of Trek fans can enjoy it.

Chris

[UnderdogDJLSW]

I look at it two ways:

1) they can do this in the James Bond series, etc. change the times, actors, etc. and all seems OK. But the Bond a person likes, usually coincides with the first actor they saw play the part. (Well, maybe not one or two Bonds).

2) The actors who played the characters have made the part so iconic, it would be hard to see anyone else in the role. (looking elsewhere as an example: Caroll Channing in Hello, Dolly!) someone could play that character, but they will always be compared to the original.

My thoughts on this movie not being well done (to me, I'll point out. To someone else it may be what is needed) are the design changes to the clothing, ship, bridge, etc. The Enterprise is as much of a character in the script as actors. Change it too much, as it appears by the bridge photo and my mind has to accept not only new actors, but now their living space has changed. I've also seen unfortunately the more a "creator" decides to change an iconic element into their own vision, the more it veers from the thing a die-hard fan loved about the original piece.

Hopefully it is the alternate timeline approach. Maybe Leonard Nimoy is at the beginning of the movie surrounded by all of the familiar trek and then something happens to the timeline that shows us that "we are not in Kansas" anymore.

I know it was just a show in the late 60's, but it was a show that I obsessively liked

[The Bat]

My view,

Kirk and Spock is Shat and Nimoy.

They MADE these characters

I totally understand how You feel...it's the Characters that they created that made the show so GREAT! And what J.J. is doing...is attempting the impossible! But I can't help hoping beyond hope, that He actually pulls it off...because I desperately want to see more Kirk & Spock adventures!

[ctc]

>but the "Trek creative collective" (excuse the Borg implication!) is helming this

Are those the same folks responisble for Voyager, and Enterprise changing 35 years of back story in the first 5 minutes of the first episode?

I dunno.... I still think a lot of what made the original what it was came from WHEN it was made and accordingly it's impossible to recapture that. (Well.... not IMPOSSIBLE; but very unlikely.) Using the old crew in the old setting seems like a marketing thing more than a good idea. (Kirk and Spock are the names Trekkies respond to with Pavlovian obsessiveness. Which may end up sinking them, since the original actors are also closely tied to those names.) I would be MUCH more excited about a story in the original setting with a new crew. And a ship NOT called "Enterprise."

>TNG and the rest happen in an alternate Trek reality

I'd bet this is how the producers see it too; but they may not say it this way. It's a shame though; 35 years of back story is an awesome resource when creating a series. But NOBODY uses it! Every new series or movie seems to work really hard to distance itself from the old shows.

>an all new, original bridge design is way more interesting than the cast

That seems like a shame too; sinc eit's the characters that MAKE the story. Or SHOULD, anyhoo. Can't really dispute this point after the last couple of series. But it IS a shame. The crew should be more than the organic parts of the ship. (Interesting maybe; but it's hard to empathise with a control panel.)

Don C.