@082076 Give me the same budget and access to the top sci-fi writers of all time and not only can I do better but my Star Trek will be the highest grousing movie of all time! Bigger then STAR WARS ever was!
@082076 I mean it! If you have the money and connections in Hollywood I have the talent to make the greatest Star Trek film of all time. I’m willing to put my ego out there are you willing to give me the chance?
@fmscribs Wrong person! I'm the one who asked you to finance a better Star Trek. Also if you don't have the money "to piss away" then stop challenging everyone to do a better job!
i enjoy watching fellow star trek fans argue because i am the different one i have no opinion of abrams version star trek is better than no star trek at all
@luigi19987 And this Star Trek IS no Star Trek! Forget the big corporations! True Star Trek is still available through wealthy talented fans who work on Star Trek New Voyages.
@Trekfreek but that is my opinion why should i take sides when i can sit on the fence and laugh at both sides because in a way the fans have created a nice little civil flamewar for themselves as for new voyages i consider it to be a well made (fan)series it does a decent job of coarse and i wish it well
@luigi19987 WHAT? There is no "civil flame war"! A civil war indicates that both sides originated from the same place. This is not so. Fans (fanatics) of Star Trek hate the new movie. None fans clamming to be new fans (false fans) love the new movie. Movie enthusiasts hate the new movie. Video game lovers love the new movie. It is that simple. Why is it this way? Simple, The movie sucks as both a movie and a Star Trek story.
@Trekfreek but i have been a fan for twenty one years i may not have had the luxury of watching star trek in 1966 whats going to happen in 4 decades when somebody else decides to reboot star trek it is the same thing that is happening now star trek fans trying to convince other star trek fans not to watch the film by flaming each other that is why it is a civil flame war not all fanatics hate the film i know a large number of people who loved it and they have been fans longer
@luigi19987 1st off 40 years is a long time and most of us older fans won't be watching new series any way because of our age. 2nd if they reboot it (hopefully for real instead of stupid time rewind & erase) how the fans react will depend on what they do with it. For all intense & purposes James Cawly had rebooted the show before Star Crap (XI) and most fans (who have seen it) love his show. It’s like the Batman films. When Batman was a movie serial it was loved by all the fans...
@luigi19987 ...When Batman came to TV it split the fans in half. Some liked the campy corny jokes of the series others hated what Bob Cane allowed done to Batman. When Batman 1986 came out it people who knew nothing about what makes a good movie (like me in those days) LOVED IT. The fans were again split. It wasn't until Batman Animated Series that the fans began to unite again. Batman Begins united all the Batman fans, including the 70 year old fans. The True Batman was back!
@luigi19987 My point is if they had done it right the 1st time fans would not have complained. A fan is a fanatic. Now yes, some fans are fanatics over anything with the Star Trek label on it. These are superficial fanatics. They are the same ones who dress like Klingons while doing the Vulcan salute. These are warmly known as "wanabe nerds" They want to be a fan because fans are having fun. They don't get that Trek is more than just entertainment to the fans, it's a philosophy.
For a good laugh try " The Star Trek Bible " parody thesis, read by scholar Robert M. Price on ' The Bible Geek ', 18th September. Are some Bible verses actually reporting sightings of UFO ? Did humans travel here from another galaxy ? Was Jesus a spaceman ? Was the sighting of Jesus going up in the sky [Acts 1v9] actually him being teleported ? Or just dreamed up ? Were the living dead people seen in Jerusalem [Matt 27v53] actually imperial guards beamed down to save Jesus? Or just fiction ?
@MrGrevy go fuck yourself you fucking racist bastard. i beleive i wasn't talking to you you stupid dumbass ! And no, i'm not negro or autistic, you stupid fuck !! :D
@MrGrevy *yawn* joke was intended towards the two nubblets have a troll of an argument on such a great trailer :). Looks as though your also one of those nubbies! Have fun with pointless arguments o/
@ghune putain c un gros con ce mec XD pas dvie ! haha serieux ! tkt c toi ki a raison et lui ki a tort ;)
@Trekfreek just shut the fuck up, watch the trailer, and stop ruining our lives with your stupid comments ! :) Live long and prosper you stupid ass !!! :D
We're discussing and that's fine, but you don't know me. I feel some arrogance and I don't like that. Double negative? I'm not passing an exam. I'm French. Do you want to have this conversation in French? I'll be happy to correct you.
Si tu veux débattre en français, c'est quand tu veux. Ça m'arrange, même...
As for the books you're talking about (I read most of them, especially Jules Verne's one in French, the original language), I prefer Victor Hugo or even Camus.
@ghune I saw Stephen King's IT again also I agree. But Star Trek (XI) Sucked. Low budget sets Bad camera work, bad pointless story, poor acting, bad directing, bad script, and over 100 plot holes. The only thing going for it was the Special FX and that was not any better than what we see on Eureka the TV series.
You must belong to the sect of the hardcore Star Trek fans who don't like this movie. I still don't understand : except "first contact", the other movies are not so good...
And sometimes, I feel that it 's like historical fans (from the beginning) can't accept that people like "their" movies. If it's a general success, it's a bed movie. But if nobody likes it (except fans), so it's THE movie.
And don't compare, it's the first movie, it has been restarted from scratch...
@ghune "it has been restarted from scratch" Are you talking about Star Trek by Jar Jar Abrams? It is not a “restart from scratch”. A restart is when you A don't include any of the old actors playing their old roles (except if they never mention the past adventures), B you don't tie it in to any of the other movies or shows, and C you keep the characters the same as they were originally. Casino Royal is a restart, Batman Begins is a restart Star Trek (XI) is a prequel sequel restart. AKA JUNK!
@ghune the movie was bad even as a standalone film, it had no focus. Ambassador Spock from TNG comes back in time; Archers Dog is killed by Scotty… There are tons & tons of lines stolen from Star Trek II, TOS, TNG & Star Wars. The Villain was a poor carbon copy of Kahn, Red Matter is magic goo (kind of like Godzilla’s Oxygen Destroyer) & new Kirk is a combination of Anakin & Luke Skywalker. McCoy's a quack, Sulu is incompetent, Chekov can't speak, Uhura is a slut, & Spock has anger problems.
@ghune The movie its self has massive amount of plot holes, the editing makes no sense, the acting does not fit the situations, the coincidences are totally unbelievable and the lens flares are downright blinding. And this is a good movie because…? Well? I’m waiting…
I think you have the old ST movies too much in your mind. You're talking about directing, shaking cam, that's not a pb, the camera is shaking during action scene, isn't that normal? Spielberg used that too in Saving Private Ryan.
Acting, come on, it's not bad at all. Ok, any of them is going to win an oscar but Spock was great. And I hope you won't tell me that William Shatner was a good actor!!! So many parodies have been made to joke about him.
You thinking is wrong! I don't judge movies by their predecessors The shaky camera was all through the movie not just the action shots. As far as Shatner is concerned, no one could imitate him so they slander his acting. Shatner is a good actor he is one of the few that won multiple Emmys crossed 4 decades.
They make fun of him out of envy (Jim Carry can’t act, Jason Alexander can’t act.) But mostly because no one can imitate his voice.
It's your opinion against mine. We won't never reach an agreement, I guess. But enjoy your movies, I'll enjoy mine. Instead of spending your time here, just comment the trailers of the movies you like. You know, I don't really want to go to the Transformers' trailer to bash them. I would have to much work to do. I just don't go.
About my channel, I changed nothing. I don't pay attention to my profile so it might not be activated for anybody.
@ghune "won't never"? Does that mean someday we will reach an agreement? Sorry but double negatives are a pet peeve of mine. As for the rest, one day you will understand what makes a good movie and what makes a bad movie, and why liking a movie does not make it good, or disliking a movie does not make it bad. Try reading Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Frankenstein, 20,000 Leagues Under the sea and Gulliver’s Travels, than you will understand what good Sci-fi is about.
What's so bad about this movie? The plot actually makes sense, I know because I have watched it many times and I understand the plot, and seriously, the acting is good, and watching a movie these days and expecting them not to use too many SFX is asking too much.
@jacksparrow20111 Again what part of the plot makes since? The Acting was good? Did you take acting lessons? It's not too much to ask the movie makers to tone it down a little. Real Star Trek is not about the SFX, it's about the human condition on an adult level. Who we are, what we are doing, where are we going, and why we are here. This movie is a Saturday morning cartoon.
@Trekfreek Do you bother every person who writes a comment on any video related to this movie? Leave intelligent people alone and just shut up! By the way I see you're in a similar conversation with everyone else who commented here...go get a life
@jacksparrow20111 "intelligent people" Don't get all bent out of shape and tell people to "just shut up!" just because someone gives an alternative point of view; especially when that point of view has facts that prove a movie is bad. Here is a piece of advice for you... GROW UP!
@Trekfreek What facts are you talking about? Just tell me one thing you didn't like about this movie...and don't say too many SFX, because I really don't see how that applies
@jacksparrow20111 Over use of FX is just one of many problems with the movie. 1) Inconsistencies with its own plot and science. 2) Over acting and under acting. 3) No focus on the story. 4) Character inconsistencies. 5) BAD dialog. 6) Bad camera movement. 7) Lens flares. 8) Bad editing. 9) Too Much Star Wars, Zero Star Trek. 10) No political or moral Statement. There is much more detail to my point so just watch "100 reasons why Star Trek XI Sucks."
@Trekfreek dude get over yourself and stop being a bitch ok. People are allowed to have opinions without pricks like you coming along and rating the movie like you're a fucking critic! No one gives a shit about you or what you say! Go fuck yourself you little whining bitch!
seriously?this movie was great and this trailer is probably one of the best i've ever seen.i usually don't agree with any critics i look at movies for what they are.escape from reality usually.this movie had a fast pace, a good plot, and good acting.nuff said
I watched this movie and I thought it rocked. I also thought Tron Legacy, True Grit and Inception rocked as well, if you are wondering about my movie evaluation skills.
@ghune "JJ ABRAMS is an excellent director."? Really? Up staging your actors with lens flares, letting them say the lines any way they please, and never including "traveled time" in his shots is excellent directing? Monkeys could do a better job.
@ghune You are either MAD or joking. MI III was the worst of the MI movies, not that any of them were good to begin with. Lost was the best title for that show, nothing made any lick of sense init and the camera shook so badly I thought it was being shot by a 8 year old kid high on caffeine and drugs. The acting on lost and MI III was so shallow and the dialog predictable. Everything Jar Jar does is just plane horrible! I have seen Fan films with more talent then JAR JAR Abrams.
@ghune Jar Jar Abrams' style of filming is so easy to do that it is copied with ease on Law and Order UK. A good director is hard to copy if not impossible. Alfred Hitchcock, Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, James Cameron, Sylvester Stallone and Jonathan Frakes all have unique styles that people have tried to copy and failed. The only reason TV copies something is because it's popular not because it is good.
MI III was the best. The first one was disappointing, De Palma (excellent director, but his work is uneven) could have done much better. The second one, forget it. One of the worst movies from Woo. But the third one had very good reviews. And Seymour-Hoffman is amazing, as always.
But you know, we say in french "goûts et couleurs ne se discutent pas" (don't argue about colors and tastes...) I respect what you think but to me, he has something.
@ghune. I don't give a rat's ass about reviews; All the MI movies are bad movies, Weak character development, 2 dimensional villains and totally unbelievable stunts. But they are still better then Star Trek (XI). The New Trek lacks any solid plot and the entire dialog is stolen from other movies; this movie out does President Reagan for most lines taken from movies. The acting was so bad I thought everyone was stoned out of their minds. We can conclude from these facts that ST:XI is a bad movie.
And the director you are talking about make different movies. Hitchcock? Come on. And why not Orson Welles?
Spielberg, yes, of course. Lucas ? Are you kidding me? This guy directed the first Star wars. The next 2 were directed by somebody else. And he decided to direct 3 others... my god. Horrible. Stallone, Frakes... I'm not convinced.
I don't say Abrams is the best (I much prefer David Fincher, Scorcese or Nolan) but he has something in this kind of movie. It's my humble opinion ;-)
@ghune You may not have liked the last 3 Star Wars films but they were well directed. Stallone is a fantastic director; He directed all of his Rocky movies, and many others. Frakes directed the best TNG movie and ST episodes, and several TV movies and shows, including Castle and White Collar. Abrams could not direct traffic even if you gave him an instructional video on his I phone.
@ghune Plots of Lost? What Plots? The director does not make the plots, he delivers the look and insures the correct performance of the actors. Abrams does not give a shit about how the actors behave, he lets the camera man do whatever and he covers up the scenes with lens flares. That's bad directing.
I think 2009 Trek is better than the original Motion Picture, and it's exactly what the Star Wars prequels should've been (fun and interesting characters as well as top notch F/X). If you want a truly mindless take on a franchise, try Michael Bay's Transformers movies.
Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan was a better movie, and Roddenberry was shut out of that and had little to do with it. Roddenberry didn't always know what was best for Trek, or what it needed to have his vision and what he created reach a broad audience, which is necessary if it's to continue to live on. Otherwise it will die.
The bottom line is that Star Trek needed something to revive it's commercial appeal, and adding some Star Wars into it worked. Maybe the sequel can add the moral dilemmas and big intelligent debates you love, but the audience needed to be rebuilt first.
Roddenberry had his most say on the first Trek picture, and it made for a boring film where the characters took a backseat to the F/X displays and it dragged.
@Andrewh313 Trek was DEAD before this movie came out, thinks to crappy episodes of Voyager and Enterprise. This movie brought it back to life, which was needed. I don't see how this movie is anymore brainless than Star Trek: First Contact.
The TNG movies were notoriously bad. I don't even think about them. Granted, the 2009 movie is a good action movie, just as first contact was a good action flick, but but they are ultimately mindless and leagues below Roddenberry's Trek.
I'm not the only one saying this. Google 'Red Letter Media' and watch their review for the film. They go in to how they had to dumb down the film to make it more like Star Wars so it would appeal to idiots and make lots of money.
@Andrewh313 i have to disagree man :) before i though star trek was crap .. i was more of a star wars kid but this movie changed my mind. shure they coulda done the story a lil bit better but all in all it was a good movie :)
I think you have failed to appreciate the philosophy and intellectual merit of Star Trek in favor of the explosions and lightsabers of Star Wars.
Google 'Red Letter Media' and watch their review of the 2009 Trek film. They talk about how the filmmakers went out of their way to make the film more like Star Wars so it would appeal to idiots. No offense.
I admit it is a good action movie... it's just not intelligent nor does it bring anything to our culture.
@Andrewh313 lol i think that the filmmakers did a good job cause star trek was kinda boring before so they changed it a BIT so they would make more money. + its totaly not like star wars.
Ugh! Yes! Christ.... how much Trek have you watched? Do you know anything of Roddenberry's ideas of the future? Did you just watch some random episode with tribbles and bad special effects and say "Ugh, this is gay. I'm going to go watch the Star Wars prequels."
Star Trek is the thinking man's space opera. There is a lot to appreciate there if you have the mind for it.
@Andrewh313 I love TOS with a passion, but I don't think of this movie as a "perversion" of what was already made. I haven't been a fan for long, in fact I only got into Star Trek last year BECAUSE of this movie, and I think of it more as a setting of the stage. It's purpose is not to provide commentary on human nature or premonitions of an idealistic future, but to show the beginnings of the Enterprise crew in the new universe and, like the old movies, tell an exciting story. Just a thought.
I would have to disagree with you. I think the purpose of the films were to take a recognizable franchise and dumb it down to the extreme so it would appeal to as many people as possible and thus make lots of money... regardless of what the core fanbase would think.
And it's not the beginnings of the Enterprise crew... its an f'ed up alternative history... story makes no sense at all.
@Andrewh313 Alright, the story wasn't believable, flashy graphics were used to attract new audiences, and lacked high minded thinking. TOS often ignored canon and continuity, used sex appeal to increase audiences, and balanced it's introspection with ridiculousness. Not that different. Don't just dismiss it as less than TOS because it hasn't gotten it's fair turn at seriousness.
And yes it is the beginning of the Enterprise crew... in an f'ed up alternative history. That's kinda the premise.
@Andrewh313 Your comment made me chuckle. Not in a mean way of course, but I think you've basically summed up how I feel sometimes during an argument. That said, go ahead and write your essay, I'd read it! (Of course if the first part of you post was sarcasm, I would have to change my response)
@BackwardsO "TOS often ignored canon and continuity, used sex appeal to increase audiences" are you on DUGS? TOS did not ignore canon it was developing it. Sex appeal in the 60's more often than not killed a show. Mission Imposable was almost canceled after the first season because Cinnamon showed too much bear leg. Star Trek was pushing the boundaries of censorship in the 60's. The Crew in the movie has no resemblance to the crew in the series. Get a Clue. XI is in one eye out the other JUNK!
@BackwardsO "and lacked high minded thinking". you're confusing high-minded thinking with drool that I can see for free on C-Span. This movie is the only good version of anything related to Star Trek.
@rivmikant The drool your seeing is yours, only people who react like Ivan Petrovich Pavlov's dog to bright lights and pretty people like this movie and others like it. Good movies have a strong plot and moral points that apply to adults. This movie simply says that if you pick fights, disrespect authority, and have the luck of the Jedi you get rewarded by the very same authorities that you disrespected.
@Trekfreek Hehe, I LOVE how you keep saying "pretty people"! Just say sexy, you know you want to! And are you going to every ST video and bitching about it?! Stop being a douche-nozzle to Abrams and everyone else on here who happens to think this is a decent film
@Trekfreek *praising* I'll give you credit for effort but I doubt people are going to stop praising it soon. And it's only going to get worse for you because XII is coming out next summer WOOO
@TanjaLeopard I remember people said the same thing about Planet of the Apes 2 (never came out), and Spiderman 4 (never came out), and Ghost Rider 2 (never came out). Just because it's a hit does not mean there is going to be a sequel. Sometimes they just stop and sometimes they reboot again. It all depends on what is popular.
@Trekfreek Scripts finished, release date is June 29th 2012, and I really hope they dont change their minds...I assume you shall a have a freash wave of, quite frankly, impressive insults ready hehe!
@TanjaLeopard Insults? The only people that are insulted by my negative reviews of this film are people without lives. Second that release date is just a rumor; there is no official release date. Finally I really REALLY Hope they do change their minds, and get back to what makes Star Trek Star Trek.
@rivmikant If that's the case, I would like to direct you to Star Trek IV. The basic plot is this: The Enterprise crew go back in time to the mid '80's so that they bring whales back to the 23rd century to talk to aliens and save the Earth. It is ridiculous and hilarious, easily one of my favorite of the original movies.
What's your problem dude? So it's ok for men like Dante, Homer, and Shakespeare to shape our culture, but if I say Roddenberry did as well then that's just not right? Are you like 14 or something.
@Andrewh313 well, you don't get the spririt of time, sorry. THIS is a symbol of the new age. its full of effects that weren't needed back in time, but...youknow. just let it happen. ;-)
"You don't see Kirk going from cadet to commanding a starship in a few hours a plot hole? " No, I'd call it classic Star Trek!!!! It's exactly the kind of thing that Kirk could accomplish - that's why we like him so much. Open your mind.
@supashat yer just being picky. it's star trek a la reboot and dont be expectng schindlers list. have you SEEN the older star trek campyness? at least this wasnt batman & robin
I don't understand people who are so obsessed with the notion that the original versions of things can never be beaten. I mean honestly people, if you don't like it, just leave it. Your words won't change it.
I say this movie was well put together. Its emotional and deep and the story and script were strong. Its a GOOD movie. Yeah it may not be the Star Trek everyone knows and loves, but it still is a pretty darn good movie.
@istheshiz Personally, I felt the story and script were the weakest part of this film. It's a shame that with such a talented cast, the script wasn't better.
@SupaShat i can understand the script, it was pretty weak, but the story??? they handled the story fantastically!! not only was it a pretty creative and interesting story, but the main thing is that it set up the opportunity of a whole new star trek series (movie wise)!!
@jrodc123 The story was very weak. Kirk goes from cadet to Captain in a matter of hours... Nero is thrown back in time - where he COULD have done SOMETHING to prevent the future disaster, yet decides to blow up everyone instead. Yes, it was a somewhat creative idea to create a "new timeline" so they could start from scratch, but overall the story had way too many plotholes for my liking. This was an average popcorn flick. I wouldn't call it Star Trek though.
@SupaShat I don't really see how those can are major plot holes, I have a pretty logical explanation for both of them. I found it to be a very fun popcorn flick, and even from someone who grew up watching star trek (thanks to my dad who loved it) i think it deserves to be mentioned along the rest of the star trek franchise. but whatever, agree to disagree i guess.
You don't see Kirk going from cadet to commanding a starship in a few hours a plot hole? Wow.... and the "villain" - who has been given the opportunity to completely prevent the disaster that will destroy his home in the future - deciding to just blow everything up instead a plot hole? Don't even get me started on Scotty's "sidekick".
I'd agree this was an average popcorn flick, but I wouldn't categorize it as Star Trek.
@SupaShat, it's been known to happen in real life as well. We all know that in 1944, with 1st Lt. Meehan of Easy Company killed during the parachute jump, Richard Winters became Easy Company commander within a couple of days. Tho' he was already handling the responsibilities of a Captain, he was officially given the title within a month of landing in Normandy. It does happen.
Poor example. Winters completed basic training and was promoted several ranks. He didn't go from not completing basic training to company commander in a matter of hours.
Kirk wasn't even finished being a cadet at the academy and then jumps all the way to captain. It's weak writing.
@SupaShat, also, Kirk & the others shot up to promoted positions due to extenuating circumstances. It's like saying Clarice Starling nabbing Buffalo Bill in "Silence of the Lambs" is a huge plot hole. We're not talking about a bio-pic here, it's pure, crowd-pleasing fiction after all.
Again, poor example. Clarice Starling didn't get appointed section chief or head of the F.B.I. for "nabbing" Buffalo Bill. You'll note she completed her graduation and became an agent, just like her fellow students and wasn't promoted to some higher rank immediately.
Kirk's huge promotion here is poor writing no matter how you slice it.
No, I'm just looking for story elements that make some sense. :) Kirk getting promoted from non-graduated cadet to Captain goes beyond the suspension of disbelief IMO.
@jemimakahn Any good writer knows, or is trained to know, that even in a fantasy non-fictional universe, it must adhere to it's own rules and rules that we generally associate with real life. Otherwise it's just a bunch of BS and nobody will care. Since the real beginning, Starfleet is intensely military-like and follows hardened military tradition. In that context, being promoted from Cadet to Captain is 100% implausible and ridiculous.
@SupaShat I agree. Abrams has always been a very sensational individual with his stories.. and John Logan hasn't written anything good since Gladiator. Some 20-something year old going from Cadet to Captain is absolutely ludicrous, even in the Star Trek universe. Half the movie didn't make sense to me, it was just trying to be really sleek and young. Still was a good flick, but didn't deserve any awards.
@SupaShat he did just save earth from being pulled into a black hole and saving billions of lives...but, you're right, I'm sure just giving him an A would have been a suitable reward...?
Also, Romulans were the EXACT opposite of Vulcans. They were very emotional so it's not surprising that Nero went to extreme measures to get revenge. Romulan's don't do the logical thing like Vulcans. They're very passionate, brash, and do things stir of the moment. Star Trek 101.
Reward? Why not just give Kirk command of a ship then? Why not make him ruler of the Federation? Why not? Because that would have been even dumber than the what happened in the film.
You may also want to go back and watch all the episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager that featured Romulans again and refresh yourself on Romulan culture. Not all of them were poorly written, shallow characters like Nero though, so you may not enjoy it. ;-)
@istheshiz I totally agree. I love the original Star Trek but I also love the film. It opened a door to a whole new franchise and renewed the series for the younger generation in a rather brilliant way. People need to stop comparing films to their original piece because they're always going to be disappointed. The film was wonderful in a completely different way then the series. SupaShat is just being picky. A film snob? lol.
i find it amazing how 9 out of 10 times today the teaser/trailer is way better and more dramatic than the movie itself ... as a fan of the original crew and TNG i find this movie entertaining because it was a "sort of" trek-movie but in many aspects its even worse than "the final frontier" and thats really hard to beat ...
William Shatner was a great man! Still he is!!
tore28 3 days ago
Anyone who hates this movie, I dare you to do better.
082076 2 weeks ago
@082076
It was a cool summer flick, I pretty much enjoyed it, but dude you have to admit it had little to do with the overall star trek franchise...
DrZoid99 1 week ago
@082076 Give me the same budget and access to the top sci-fi writers of all time and not only can I do better but my Star Trek will be the highest grousing movie of all time! Bigger then STAR WARS ever was!
Trekfreek 1 week ago
@082076 I mean it! If you have the money and connections in Hollywood I have the talent to make the greatest Star Trek film of all time. I’m willing to put my ego out there are you willing to give me the chance?
Trekfreek 1 week ago
@082076
I don't have 100 million to piss away.
fmscribs 6 days ago
@fmscribs Wrong person! I'm the one who asked you to finance a better Star Trek. Also if you don't have the money "to piss away" then stop challenging everyone to do a better job!
Trekfreek 6 days ago
I just wish they would have included this epic music somewhere in the movie.
Newenlightenmentnow 3 weeks ago
James T. Kirk was a great man ..... But that was another life!!!
tore28 3 weeks ago
@tore28 The line should say. ....But that was with other writers!!!
Trekfreek 1 week ago
Beautiful!
S1nSey 3 weeks ago 3
i enjoy watching fellow star trek fans argue because i am the different one i have no opinion of abrams version star trek is better than no star trek at all
luigi19987 4 weeks ago
@luigi19987 And this Star Trek IS no Star Trek! Forget the big corporations! True Star Trek is still available through wealthy talented fans who work on Star Trek New Voyages.
Trekfreek 1 week ago
@Trekfreek but that is my opinion why should i take sides when i can sit on the fence and laugh at both sides because in a way the fans have created a nice little civil flamewar for themselves as for new voyages i consider it to be a well made (fan)series it does a decent job of coarse and i wish it well
luigi19987 1 week ago
@luigi19987 WHAT? There is no "civil flame war"! A civil war indicates that both sides originated from the same place. This is not so. Fans (fanatics) of Star Trek hate the new movie. None fans clamming to be new fans (false fans) love the new movie. Movie enthusiasts hate the new movie. Video game lovers love the new movie. It is that simple. Why is it this way? Simple, The movie sucks as both a movie and a Star Trek story.
Trekfreek 6 days ago
@Trekfreek but i have been a fan for twenty one years i may not have had the luxury of watching star trek in 1966 whats going to happen in 4 decades when somebody else decides to reboot star trek it is the same thing that is happening now star trek fans trying to convince other star trek fans not to watch the film by flaming each other that is why it is a civil flame war not all fanatics hate the film i know a large number of people who loved it and they have been fans longer
luigi19987 6 days ago
@luigi19987 1st off 40 years is a long time and most of us older fans won't be watching new series any way because of our age. 2nd if they reboot it (hopefully for real instead of stupid time rewind & erase) how the fans react will depend on what they do with it. For all intense & purposes James Cawly had rebooted the show before Star Crap (XI) and most fans (who have seen it) love his show. It’s like the Batman films. When Batman was a movie serial it was loved by all the fans...
Trekfreek 6 days ago
@luigi19987 ...When Batman came to TV it split the fans in half. Some liked the campy corny jokes of the series others hated what Bob Cane allowed done to Batman. When Batman 1986 came out it people who knew nothing about what makes a good movie (like me in those days) LOVED IT. The fans were again split. It wasn't until Batman Animated Series that the fans began to unite again. Batman Begins united all the Batman fans, including the 70 year old fans. The True Batman was back!
Trekfreek 6 days ago
@luigi19987 My point is if they had done it right the 1st time fans would not have complained. A fan is a fanatic. Now yes, some fans are fanatics over anything with the Star Trek label on it. These are superficial fanatics. They are the same ones who dress like Klingons while doing the Vulcan salute. These are warmly known as "wanabe nerds" They want to be a fan because fans are having fun. They don't get that Trek is more than just entertainment to the fans, it's a philosophy.
Trekfreek 6 days ago
this movie is craptacular....
RaynaKapek 1 month ago
For a good laugh try " The Star Trek Bible " parody thesis, read by scholar Robert M. Price on ' The Bible Geek ', 18th September. Are some Bible verses actually reporting sightings of UFO ? Did humans travel here from another galaxy ? Was Jesus a spaceman ? Was the sighting of Jesus going up in the sky [Acts 1v9] actually him being teleported ? Or just dreamed up ? Were the living dead people seen in Jerusalem [Matt 27v53] actually imperial guards beamed down to save Jesus? Or just fiction ?
zytigon 1 month ago
Awesome movie J.J. Abrams did a great job and can't wait till the next one
jdmcivicek98 1 month ago
legal
TheNarutomatheus 1 month ago
Damn nerds arguing during an excellent trailer!
king1Malik 2 months ago
@king1Malik what do you mean
56457824 1 month ago
@MrGrevy go fuck yourself you fucking racist bastard. i beleive i wasn't talking to you you stupid dumbass ! And no, i'm not negro or autistic, you stupid fuck !! :D
migothehero 3 months ago
retarded noise fest
MrGrevy 3 months ago
"your father was a great man"..."he won a youtube arguement and lived to tell the tale"
MultiSteve20 3 months ago
@MultiSteve20 stfu idiot
MrGrevy 3 months ago
@MrGrevy *yawn* joke was intended towards the two nubblets have a troll of an argument on such a great trailer :). Looks as though your also one of those nubbies! Have fun with pointless arguments o/
Live long and prosper
MultiSteve20 3 months ago
@MultiSteve20 You're a disgrace. Shut your disgusting mouth.
MrGrevy 3 months ago
@ghune putain c un gros con ce mec XD pas dvie ! haha serieux ! tkt c toi ki a raison et lui ki a tort ;)
@Trekfreek just shut the fuck up, watch the trailer, and stop ruining our lives with your stupid comments ! :) Live long and prosper you stupid ass !!! :D
migothehero 4 months ago
@migothehero Are you autistic or a negro or something?? STFU
MrGrevy 3 months ago
Comment removed
migothehero 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Two nerds bickering back and forth on make believe stuff just makes my day!
dennnis2781 4 months ago
Two nerds bickering back and forth on make believe stuff just makes my day!
dennnis2781 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I LOVE this movie! <3
Aurifere 4 months ago
YOU LOT-fuk grow UP
terryjohn 4 months ago
i had more fun reading your argument than watching the trailer!!!!!
susyblackrose 6 months ago 10
you guys are awesome! i've never seen a whole page filled up with two people arguing.
tiberiius 6 months ago 5
@Trekfreek
We're discussing and that's fine, but you don't know me. I feel some arrogance and I don't like that. Double negative? I'm not passing an exam. I'm French. Do you want to have this conversation in French? I'll be happy to correct you.
Si tu veux débattre en français, c'est quand tu veux. Ça m'arrange, même...
As for the books you're talking about (I read most of them, especially Jules Verne's one in French, the original language), I prefer Victor Hugo or even Camus.
ghune 6 months ago
I saw it again, still excellent.
ghune 7 months ago
@ghune I saw Stephen King's IT again also I agree. But Star Trek (XI) Sucked. Low budget sets Bad camera work, bad pointless story, poor acting, bad directing, bad script, and over 100 plot holes. The only thing going for it was the Special FX and that was not any better than what we see on Eureka the TV series.
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@Trekfreek
You must belong to the sect of the hardcore Star Trek fans who don't like this movie. I still don't understand : except "first contact", the other movies are not so good...
And sometimes, I feel that it 's like historical fans (from the beginning) can't accept that people like "their" movies. If it's a general success, it's a bed movie. But if nobody likes it (except fans), so it's THE movie.
And don't compare, it's the first movie, it has been restarted from scratch...
ghune 6 months ago
@ghune "it has been restarted from scratch" Are you talking about Star Trek by Jar Jar Abrams? It is not a “restart from scratch”. A restart is when you A don't include any of the old actors playing their old roles (except if they never mention the past adventures), B you don't tie it in to any of the other movies or shows, and C you keep the characters the same as they were originally. Casino Royal is a restart, Batman Begins is a restart Star Trek (XI) is a prequel sequel restart. AKA JUNK!
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@ghune the movie was bad even as a standalone film, it had no focus. Ambassador Spock from TNG comes back in time; Archers Dog is killed by Scotty… There are tons & tons of lines stolen from Star Trek II, TOS, TNG & Star Wars. The Villain was a poor carbon copy of Kahn, Red Matter is magic goo (kind of like Godzilla’s Oxygen Destroyer) & new Kirk is a combination of Anakin & Luke Skywalker. McCoy's a quack, Sulu is incompetent, Chekov can't speak, Uhura is a slut, & Spock has anger problems.
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@Trekfreek "Uhura is a slut LMFAO!!!
alexkmoore 6 months ago
@ghune The movie its self has massive amount of plot holes, the editing makes no sense, the acting does not fit the situations, the coincidences are totally unbelievable and the lens flares are downright blinding. And this is a good movie because…? Well? I’m waiting…
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@ghune Now that's just downright chicken of you. You removed your channel. And people accuse me of being a Troll.
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@Trekfreek
?!? I removed nothing...
I think you have the old ST movies too much in your mind. You're talking about directing, shaking cam, that's not a pb, the camera is shaking during action scene, isn't that normal? Spielberg used that too in Saving Private Ryan.
Acting, come on, it's not bad at all. Ok, any of them is going to win an oscar but Spock was great. And I hope you won't tell me that William Shatner was a good actor!!! So many parodies have been made to joke about him.
ghune 6 months ago
@ghune Than Why can't I see your channel?
You thinking is wrong! I don't judge movies by their predecessors The shaky camera was all through the movie not just the action shots. As far as Shatner is concerned, no one could imitate him so they slander his acting. Shatner is a good actor he is one of the few that won multiple Emmys crossed 4 decades.
They make fun of him out of envy (Jim Carry can’t act, Jason Alexander can’t act.) But mostly because no one can imitate his voice.
Trekfreek 6 months ago
@Trekfreek
It's your opinion against mine. We won't never reach an agreement, I guess. But enjoy your movies, I'll enjoy mine. Instead of spending your time here, just comment the trailers of the movies you like. You know, I don't really want to go to the Transformers' trailer to bash them. I would have to much work to do. I just don't go.
About my channel, I changed nothing. I don't pay attention to my profile so it might not be activated for anybody.
ghune 6 months ago
@ghune "won't never"? Does that mean someday we will reach an agreement? Sorry but double negatives are a pet peeve of mine. As for the rest, one day you will understand what makes a good movie and what makes a bad movie, and why liking a movie does not make it good, or disliking a movie does not make it bad. Try reading Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Frankenstein, 20,000 Leagues Under the sea and Gulliver’s Travels, than you will understand what good Sci-fi is about.
Trekfreek 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i loved this movie
livelongandprosper66 7 months ago
Worth watching.
TheForestWanderer 8 months ago
Comment removed
boatman1245 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Best Star Trek Movie EVER MADE ! JUST EPIC !
wickedcircle 9 months ago
Yuri!!!
Jazzrad 10 months ago
Best Trailer Ever.
ermakina 10 months ago
this is from star trek not star trek 2
TH3SP4RT4N2997 10 months ago
@TH3SP4RT4N2997 No Dude it's Star Trek, Trailer 2. Missing a comma.
Linkjoy123 9 months ago
What's so bad about this movie? The plot actually makes sense, I know because I have watched it many times and I understand the plot, and seriously, the acting is good, and watching a movie these days and expecting them not to use too many SFX is asking too much.
jacksparrow20111 10 months ago
@jacksparrow20111 Again what part of the plot makes since? The Acting was good? Did you take acting lessons? It's not too much to ask the movie makers to tone it down a little. Real Star Trek is not about the SFX, it's about the human condition on an adult level. Who we are, what we are doing, where are we going, and why we are here. This movie is a Saturday morning cartoon.
Trekfreek 9 months ago
@Trekfreek Do you bother every person who writes a comment on any video related to this movie? Leave intelligent people alone and just shut up! By the way I see you're in a similar conversation with everyone else who commented here...go get a life
jacksparrow20111 9 months ago
@jacksparrow20111 "intelligent people" Don't get all bent out of shape and tell people to "just shut up!" just because someone gives an alternative point of view; especially when that point of view has facts that prove a movie is bad. Here is a piece of advice for you... GROW UP!
Trekfreek 9 months ago
@Trekfreek What facts are you talking about? Just tell me one thing you didn't like about this movie...and don't say too many SFX, because I really don't see how that applies
jacksparrow20111 9 months ago
@jacksparrow20111 Over use of FX is just one of many problems with the movie. 1) Inconsistencies with its own plot and science. 2) Over acting and under acting. 3) No focus on the story. 4) Character inconsistencies. 5) BAD dialog. 6) Bad camera movement. 7) Lens flares. 8) Bad editing. 9) Too Much Star Wars, Zero Star Trek. 10) No political or moral Statement. There is much more detail to my point so just watch "100 reasons why Star Trek XI Sucks."
Trekfreek 9 months ago
@Trekfreek I hear you describing many movies these days :( But compared to other recent movies of its type, I think this movie is better
jacksparrow20111 9 months ago
Tremendous movie. I have the privilege of having it in DVD.
latgrapew 10 months ago
@latgrapew OH "PRIVILEGE" like in the company of royalty? WOW! LOL GAL!
Trekfreek 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Trekfreek I am sorry, but I do not understand your language.
latgrapew 9 months ago
1:14 Epic
BigAdude75 10 months ago
Comment removed
BigAdude75 10 months ago
Better than Avatar... I'm just saying.
king1Malik 10 months ago
im jus glad no ones hating starwars or star trek theyre both awsome to me
RedGun15 10 months ago
@Trekfreek dude get over yourself and stop being a bitch ok. People are allowed to have opinions without pricks like you coming along and rating the movie like you're a fucking critic! No one gives a shit about you or what you say! Go fuck yourself you little whining bitch!
gangsterfied1 10 months ago
You know, I've grown to hate the word and the over-use of it in recent times. But for this, the word "EPIC", I wouldn't mind using at all.
Great movie, but absolutely insanely good trailer. Even after the millionth time after watching it, I still get goosebumps.
To the rest of the film industry buffs out there, you better start taking notes. It's trailers like THIS that gets people into the theaters.
ApexIXMR 11 months ago
AWESOME trailer!!!!!!
kevabc1 11 months ago
FIRE EVERYTHING !!!!!!!!!
SGH28N 11 months ago
@SGH28N. Why? Things need jobs too.
Trekfreek 11 months ago
...TOO...MUCH...AWESOME!!!!!!!
TanjaLeopard 11 months ago
@Kodemann
composed by "Two steps from hell"great albums go look them up. Ttile you already know, Freedom Fighters.
PraetoriaxNL 11 months ago
seriously?this movie was great and this trailer is probably one of the best i've ever seen.i usually don't agree with any critics i look at movies for what they are.escape from reality usually.this movie had a fast pace, a good plot, and good acting.nuff said
MrSdw35 11 months ago
I watched this movie and I thought it rocked. I also thought Tron Legacy, True Grit and Inception rocked as well, if you are wondering about my movie evaluation skills.
deathfalk 1 year ago
JJ ABRAMS is an excellent director.
ghune 1 year ago
@ghune "JJ ABRAMS is an excellent director."? Really? Up staging your actors with lens flares, letting them say the lines any way they please, and never including "traveled time" in his shots is excellent directing? Monkeys could do a better job.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@Trekfreek
The pilots of the series Lost were the best. MI III is probably the best, this movie was quite good. Yes, he's a good Director. Excellent.
ghune 1 year ago
@ghune You are either MAD or joking. MI III was the worst of the MI movies, not that any of them were good to begin with. Lost was the best title for that show, nothing made any lick of sense init and the camera shook so badly I thought it was being shot by a 8 year old kid high on caffeine and drugs. The acting on lost and MI III was so shallow and the dialog predictable. Everything Jar Jar does is just plane horrible! I have seen Fan films with more talent then JAR JAR Abrams.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@ghune Jar Jar Abrams' style of filming is so easy to do that it is copied with ease on Law and Order UK. A good director is hard to copy if not impossible. Alfred Hitchcock, Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, James Cameron, Sylvester Stallone and Jonathan Frakes all have unique styles that people have tried to copy and failed. The only reason TV copies something is because it's popular not because it is good.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@Trekfreek
MI III was the best. The first one was disappointing, De Palma (excellent director, but his work is uneven) could have done much better. The second one, forget it. One of the worst movies from Woo. But the third one had very good reviews. And Seymour-Hoffman is amazing, as always.
But you know, we say in french "goûts et couleurs ne se discutent pas" (don't argue about colors and tastes...) I respect what you think but to me, he has something.
ghune 1 year ago
@ghune. I don't give a rat's ass about reviews; All the MI movies are bad movies, Weak character development, 2 dimensional villains and totally unbelievable stunts. But they are still better then Star Trek (XI). The New Trek lacks any solid plot and the entire dialog is stolen from other movies; this movie out does President Reagan for most lines taken from movies. The acting was so bad I thought everyone was stoned out of their minds. We can conclude from these facts that ST:XI is a bad movie.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@Trekfreek
This is Star Trek for a new generation
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@Johnlindsey289 No it's not,, it's Star Trek for Pin heads.
Trekfreek 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Trekfreek
Why do you trekkies hate this movie so much? it's for a new audience and today's kids
Johnlindsey289 9 months ago
@ghune
And the director you are talking about make different movies. Hitchcock? Come on. And why not Orson Welles?
Spielberg, yes, of course. Lucas ? Are you kidding me? This guy directed the first Star wars. The next 2 were directed by somebody else. And he decided to direct 3 others... my god. Horrible. Stallone, Frakes... I'm not convinced.
I don't say Abrams is the best (I much prefer David Fincher, Scorcese or Nolan) but he has something in this kind of movie. It's my humble opinion ;-)
ghune 1 year ago
@ghune You may not have liked the last 3 Star Wars films but they were well directed. Stallone is a fantastic director; He directed all of his Rocky movies, and many others. Frakes directed the best TNG movie and ST episodes, and several TV movies and shows, including Castle and White Collar. Abrams could not direct traffic even if you gave him an instructional video on his I phone.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@ghune Plots of Lost? What Plots? The director does not make the plots, he delivers the look and insures the correct performance of the actors. Abrams does not give a shit about how the actors behave, he lets the camera man do whatever and he covers up the scenes with lens flares. That's bad directing.
Trekfreek 1 year ago
the best film
brydzia344 1 year ago
@Andrewh313
I think 2009 Trek is better than the original Motion Picture, and it's exactly what the Star Wars prequels should've been (fun and interesting characters as well as top notch F/X). If you want a truly mindless take on a franchise, try Michael Bay's Transformers movies.
AndrewGilkison 1 year ago
@Andrewh313
Star Trek 2: Wrath of Khan was a better movie, and Roddenberry was shut out of that and had little to do with it. Roddenberry didn't always know what was best for Trek, or what it needed to have his vision and what he created reach a broad audience, which is necessary if it's to continue to live on. Otherwise it will die.
AndrewGilkison 1 year ago
@Andrewh313
The bottom line is that Star Trek needed something to revive it's commercial appeal, and adding some Star Wars into it worked. Maybe the sequel can add the moral dilemmas and big intelligent debates you love, but the audience needed to be rebuilt first.
Roddenberry had his most say on the first Trek picture, and it made for a boring film where the characters took a backseat to the F/X displays and it dragged.
AndrewGilkison 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 Trek was DEAD before this movie came out, thinks to crappy episodes of Voyager and Enterprise. This movie brought it back to life, which was needed. I don't see how this movie is anymore brainless than Star Trek: First Contact.
AndrewGilkison 1 year ago
@AndrewGilkison
The TNG movies were notoriously bad. I don't even think about them. Granted, the 2009 movie is a good action movie, just as first contact was a good action flick, but but they are ultimately mindless and leagues below Roddenberry's Trek.
I'm not the only one saying this. Google 'Red Letter Media' and watch their review for the film. They go in to how they had to dumb down the film to make it more like Star Wars so it would appeal to idiots and make lots of money.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 i have to disagree man :) before i though star trek was crap .. i was more of a star wars kid but this movie changed my mind. shure they coulda done the story a lil bit better but all in all it was a good movie :)
kinda a matter of taste so no offence :D
DJ3G3T5 1 year ago
@DJ3G3T5
I think you have failed to appreciate the philosophy and intellectual merit of Star Trek in favor of the explosions and lightsabers of Star Wars.
Google 'Red Letter Media' and watch their review of the 2009 Trek film. They talk about how the filmmakers went out of their way to make the film more like Star Wars so it would appeal to idiots. No offense.
I admit it is a good action movie... it's just not intelligent nor does it bring anything to our culture.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 lol i think that the filmmakers did a good job cause star trek was kinda boring before so they changed it a BIT so they would make more money. + its totaly not like star wars.
DJ3G3T5 1 year ago
@DJ3G3T5
Ugh.... whatever dude. You make me sad.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 lmao are you getting upset over a movie ????
DJ3G3T5 1 year ago
@DJ3G3T5
No, I'm getting upset over the perversion of an important piece of human culture....
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 are you saying that star trek was an important piece of human culture ?
DJ3G3T5 1 year ago
@DJ3G3T5
Ugh! Yes! Christ.... how much Trek have you watched? Do you know anything of Roddenberry's ideas of the future? Did you just watch some random episode with tribbles and bad special effects and say "Ugh, this is gay. I'm going to go watch the Star Wars prequels."
Star Trek is the thinking man's space opera. There is a lot to appreciate there if you have the mind for it.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 I love TOS with a passion, but I don't think of this movie as a "perversion" of what was already made. I haven't been a fan for long, in fact I only got into Star Trek last year BECAUSE of this movie, and I think of it more as a setting of the stage. It's purpose is not to provide commentary on human nature or premonitions of an idealistic future, but to show the beginnings of the Enterprise crew in the new universe and, like the old movies, tell an exciting story. Just a thought.
BackwardsO 1 year ago
@BackwardsO
I would have to disagree with you. I think the purpose of the films were to take a recognizable franchise and dumb it down to the extreme so it would appeal to as many people as possible and thus make lots of money... regardless of what the core fanbase would think.
And it's not the beginnings of the Enterprise crew... its an f'ed up alternative history... story makes no sense at all.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 Alright, the story wasn't believable, flashy graphics were used to attract new audiences, and lacked high minded thinking. TOS often ignored canon and continuity, used sex appeal to increase audiences, and balanced it's introspection with ridiculousness. Not that different. Don't just dismiss it as less than TOS because it hasn't gotten it's fair turn at seriousness.
And yes it is the beginning of the Enterprise crew... in an f'ed up alternative history. That's kinda the premise.
BackwardsO 1 year ago
@BackwardsO
Wow! What a thoughtful, balanced reply.
But you're still wrong!!!!
>:(
I could go on and on about this... maybe I'll write an essay....
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 Your comment made me chuckle. Not in a mean way of course, but I think you've basically summed up how I feel sometimes during an argument. That said, go ahead and write your essay, I'd read it! (Of course if the first part of you post was sarcasm, I would have to change my response)
BackwardsO 11 months ago
@BackwardsO "TOS often ignored canon and continuity, used sex appeal to increase audiences" are you on DUGS? TOS did not ignore canon it was developing it. Sex appeal in the 60's more often than not killed a show. Mission Imposable was almost canceled after the first season because Cinnamon showed too much bear leg. Star Trek was pushing the boundaries of censorship in the 60's. The Crew in the movie has no resemblance to the crew in the series. Get a Clue. XI is in one eye out the other JUNK!
Trekfreek 1 year ago
@BackwardsO "and lacked high minded thinking". you're confusing high-minded thinking with drool that I can see for free on C-Span. This movie is the only good version of anything related to Star Trek.
rivmikant 1 year ago
@rivmikant The drool your seeing is yours, only people who react like Ivan Petrovich Pavlov's dog to bright lights and pretty people like this movie and others like it. Good movies have a strong plot and moral points that apply to adults. This movie simply says that if you pick fights, disrespect authority, and have the luck of the Jedi you get rewarded by the very same authorities that you disrespected.
Trekfreek 11 months ago
@Trekfreek Hehe, I LOVE how you keep saying "pretty people"! Just say sexy, you know you want to! And are you going to every ST video and bitching about it?! Stop being a douche-nozzle to Abrams and everyone else on here who happens to think this is a decent film
TanjaLeopard 11 months ago
@TanjaLeopard I'll stop when people stop prasing it. Remember fair and balanced?
Trekfreek 11 months ago
@Trekfreek *praising* I'll give you credit for effort but I doubt people are going to stop praising it soon. And it's only going to get worse for you because XII is coming out next summer WOOO
TanjaLeopard 11 months ago
@TanjaLeopard I remember people said the same thing about Planet of the Apes 2 (never came out), and Spiderman 4 (never came out), and Ghost Rider 2 (never came out). Just because it's a hit does not mean there is going to be a sequel. Sometimes they just stop and sometimes they reboot again. It all depends on what is popular.
Trekfreek 11 months ago
@Trekfreek Scripts finished, release date is June 29th 2012, and I really hope they dont change their minds...I assume you shall a have a freash wave of, quite frankly, impressive insults ready hehe!
TanjaLeopard 10 months ago
@TanjaLeopard Insults? The only people that are insulted by my negative reviews of this film are people without lives. Second that release date is just a rumor; there is no official release date. Finally I really REALLY Hope they do change their minds, and get back to what makes Star Trek Star Trek.
Trekfreek 10 months ago
@rivmikant If that's the case, I would like to direct you to Star Trek IV. The basic plot is this: The Enterprise crew go back in time to the mid '80's so that they bring whales back to the 23rd century to talk to aliens and save the Earth. It is ridiculous and hilarious, easily one of my favorite of the original movies.
BackwardsO 11 months ago
@Andrewh313 our culture?!? are u in the right universe? i love all this but please, do not take it to a spiritual level 2 high...greetings
Wampor 1 year ago
@Wampor
What's your problem dude? So it's ok for men like Dante, Homer, and Shakespeare to shape our culture, but if I say Roddenberry did as well then that's just not right? Are you like 14 or something.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
This was an idiot's action movie and brought nothing to our culture like canon Star Trek.
Roddenberry is rolling over in his grave.
Andrewh313 1 year ago
@Andrewh313 well, you don't get the spririt of time, sorry. THIS is a symbol of the new age. its full of effects that weren't needed back in time, but...youknow. just let it happen. ;-)
Wampor 1 year ago
@Andrewh313
BULLSHIT
movieartman 1 year ago
When his father looked the age of 21 I laughed.
insaneapples 1 year ago
Your father was captain of a starship for twelve minutes. He saved 800 lives, including yours.
joelvis72 1 year ago
one of the best trailers ever made
MikeBannShow 1 year ago
This trailer is fucking epic and amazingly they topped it with the film. That's a pretty rare occurring. You've really gotta respect JJ Abrams.
axis462 1 year ago
@axis462 yay :-)
Wampor 1 year ago
im a star wars FREAK but i must admit this movie is EPIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
imperial3232 1 year ago 15
awesome trailer all around, esp the song, great choice
thefinalcountdown82 1 year ago 6
@Kodemann
Use the program "Free Studio Manager" to directly convert any YouTube Video into an MP3. Hope that helps.
deopatri 1 year ago
This trailer is so epic. now whenever I'm boning a chick, right when I'm about to finish, I yell FIRE EVERYYYTHING!
MrNoodlemantra 1 year ago
Seriously, one of the best movie trailers I have ever seen.
dr1250 1 year ago
Who did more to ruin Star Trek - Scott Bakula or J J Abrams?
GBart 1 year ago
Brilliant trailer and music - everything timed so well for emotional impact-- better than the regular trailers. Damn.
danno6466 1 year ago
the best star strek movie ever!!!
shermanshecapio2008 1 year ago
"You don't see Kirk going from cadet to commanding a starship in a few hours a plot hole? " No, I'd call it classic Star Trek!!!! It's exactly the kind of thing that Kirk could accomplish - that's why we like him so much. Open your mind.
jimjimmyjames59 1 year ago
@jimjimmyjames59
To each their own and if you enjoyed it, good for you. I didn't care for the script and obvious plot holes/poor writing.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@supashat yer just being picky. it's star trek a la reboot and dont be expectng schindlers list. have you SEEN the older star trek campyness? at least this wasnt batman & robin
hmagana 1 year ago
@Kodemann I found it on Limewire.
WoWRiful 1 year ago
@istheshiz
thanks
banananer16 1 year ago
I don't understand people who are so obsessed with the notion that the original versions of things can never be beaten. I mean honestly people, if you don't like it, just leave it. Your words won't change it.
I say this movie was well put together. Its emotional and deep and the story and script were strong. Its a GOOD movie. Yeah it may not be the Star Trek everyone knows and loves, but it still is a pretty darn good movie.
istheshiz 1 year ago 2
@istheshiz Personally, I felt the story and script were the weakest part of this film. It's a shame that with such a talented cast, the script wasn't better.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@SupaShat i can understand the script, it was pretty weak, but the story??? they handled the story fantastically!! not only was it a pretty creative and interesting story, but the main thing is that it set up the opportunity of a whole new star trek series (movie wise)!!
jrodc123 1 year ago
@jrodc123 The story was very weak. Kirk goes from cadet to Captain in a matter of hours... Nero is thrown back in time - where he COULD have done SOMETHING to prevent the future disaster, yet decides to blow up everyone instead. Yes, it was a somewhat creative idea to create a "new timeline" so they could start from scratch, but overall the story had way too many plotholes for my liking. This was an average popcorn flick. I wouldn't call it Star Trek though.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@SupaShat I don't really see how those can are major plot holes, I have a pretty logical explanation for both of them. I found it to be a very fun popcorn flick, and even from someone who grew up watching star trek (thanks to my dad who loved it) i think it deserves to be mentioned along the rest of the star trek franchise. but whatever, agree to disagree i guess.
jrodc123 1 year ago
@jrodc123
You don't see Kirk going from cadet to commanding a starship in a few hours a plot hole? Wow.... and the "villain" - who has been given the opportunity to completely prevent the disaster that will destroy his home in the future - deciding to just blow everything up instead a plot hole? Don't even get me started on Scotty's "sidekick".
I'd agree this was an average popcorn flick, but I wouldn't categorize it as Star Trek.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@SupaShat, it's been known to happen in real life as well. We all know that in 1944, with 1st Lt. Meehan of Easy Company killed during the parachute jump, Richard Winters became Easy Company commander within a couple of days. Tho' he was already handling the responsibilities of a Captain, he was officially given the title within a month of landing in Normandy. It does happen.
ShoMojo2 1 year ago
@ShoMojo2
Poor example. Winters completed basic training and was promoted several ranks. He didn't go from not completing basic training to company commander in a matter of hours.
Kirk wasn't even finished being a cadet at the academy and then jumps all the way to captain. It's weak writing.
SupaShat 1 year ago
Comment removed
jemimakahn 1 year ago
@SupaShat, also, Kirk & the others shot up to promoted positions due to extenuating circumstances. It's like saying Clarice Starling nabbing Buffalo Bill in "Silence of the Lambs" is a huge plot hole. We're not talking about a bio-pic here, it's pure, crowd-pleasing fiction after all.
jemimakahn 1 year ago
@jemimakahn
Again, poor example. Clarice Starling didn't get appointed section chief or head of the F.B.I. for "nabbing" Buffalo Bill. You'll note she completed her graduation and became an agent, just like her fellow students and wasn't promoted to some higher rank immediately.
Kirk's huge promotion here is poor writing no matter how you slice it.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@SupaShat, you're looking for the literal in a fantasy. I'm not.
jemimakahn 1 year ago
@jemimakahn
No, I'm just looking for story elements that make some sense. :) Kirk getting promoted from non-graduated cadet to Captain goes beyond the suspension of disbelief IMO.
SupaShat 1 year ago
@jemimakahn Any good writer knows, or is trained to know, that even in a fantasy non-fictional universe, it must adhere to it's own rules and rules that we generally associate with real life. Otherwise it's just a bunch of BS and nobody will care. Since the real beginning, Starfleet is intensely military-like and follows hardened military tradition. In that context, being promoted from Cadet to Captain is 100% implausible and ridiculous.
insaneapples 1 year ago
@SupaShat I agree. Abrams has always been a very sensational individual with his stories.. and John Logan hasn't written anything good since Gladiator. Some 20-something year old going from Cadet to Captain is absolutely ludicrous, even in the Star Trek universe. Half the movie didn't make sense to me, it was just trying to be really sleek and young. Still was a good flick, but didn't deserve any awards.
insaneapples 1 year ago
@SupaShat he did just save earth from being pulled into a black hole and saving billions of lives...but, you're right, I'm sure just giving him an A would have been a suitable reward...?
Also, Romulans were the EXACT opposite of Vulcans. They were very emotional so it's not surprising that Nero went to extreme measures to get revenge. Romulan's don't do the logical thing like Vulcans. They're very passionate, brash, and do things stir of the moment. Star Trek 101.
Kittycat918 1 year ago
@Kittycat918
Reward? Why not just give Kirk command of a ship then? Why not make him ruler of the Federation? Why not? Because that would have been even dumber than the what happened in the film.
You may also want to go back and watch all the episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager that featured Romulans again and refresh yourself on Romulan culture. Not all of them were poorly written, shallow characters like Nero though, so you may not enjoy it. ;-)
SupaShat 1 year ago
@istheshiz I totally agree. I love the original Star Trek but I also love the film. It opened a door to a whole new franchise and renewed the series for the younger generation in a rather brilliant way. People need to stop comparing films to their original piece because they're always going to be disappointed. The film was wonderful in a completely different way then the series. SupaShat is just being picky. A film snob? lol.
Kittycat918 1 year ago
1:50 FIRE EVERYTHING!
badcompanyization 1 year ago
movie of the year: hands down
movie of the decade: heck yes!!!
movie of the century: it's a good bet
banananer16 1 year ago
@banananer16 ....just no.
crapmaster5000 1 year ago
this movie kicked ass!!!
SpyBreak101 1 year ago
one of the best trailers in years
chrisfischerxxx 1 year ago 10
i find it amazing how 9 out of 10 times today the teaser/trailer is way better and more dramatic than the movie itself ... as a fan of the original crew and TNG i find this movie entertaining because it was a "sort of" trek-movie but in many aspects its even worse than "the final frontier" and thats really hard to beat ...
Medhiv83 1 year ago