Star Trek - Preview

Comment on “Star Trek”

1. Eagle\'s Strength Says:
   August 11th, 2006 at 08:30

   Hi! A Trekker here from the Philippines... Haven't lost faith with the series yet. I have to agree that they have to make a good sci fi movie.
   
   I'm just wondering why there's much connection being made with Kirk and Spock with the Trek XI. If it's the Enterprise NCC-1701, then, there are actually 2 more captains that have to be considered - Captain Robert April and Captain Christopher Pike. The latter would have Spock in his team, which could be the connection. Why not set the movie during that era? The Enterprise NCC-1701 had a rich history prior to Kirk's captaincy and this I think would provide a rich background to make a movie from.
   
   I say, let's give it a shot and see where the new Trek offering would go. Afterwards, everybody can judge if it's been taken to richer grounds or needs to lie dormant for a while.

1. Alexx Says:
   August 11th, 2006 at 15:36

   As an avid trekkie, I am not interested in seeing more stories about Kirk and Spock. Star Trek is more than just Spock and Kirk. Give us a new starship a new vrew, this is the perfect opportunity to create something both new yet familiar. Star Trek TNG became a hit, Star Trek DS9 became a cult favorite and Voyager didn't do badly. For that matter Enterprise actually went up in the ratings when they started telling interesting stories instead of trying to show how great the human spirit is.
   
   Just give us a new crew a new ship and base it in the Star Trek universe of the Borg, the Breen, the Dominion. Go back and explore what happened to Tin Man and his kind, the traveler, what about the Doud, the Imps, who built the doomsday device, who created the Dyson sphere in Relics. you see there are so many stories that could be told and not necissarily by Kirk and Spock. Please Please give us something new.

1. Tony P Says:
   August 13th, 2006 at 22:53

   Excellent 'preview' Josh.
   
   By the way I wrote an 'editorial' this weekend about Roddenberry v Meyer and Abrams, and I quoted some of this preview (with attributions and links of course)
   
   http://stxi.blogspot.com/2006/08/jj-abrams-new-roddenberry-or-new-meyer_12.html
   
   say hi to Nick for me (or is it Harve)...my money is on Nick

1. Jay Smith Says:
   September 16th, 2006 at 10:10

   Little to near nothing is known about the new Star Trek movie. All we do know is that it will be set in the Original Series era. Will it have Kirk and Spock? Will it be set on the Enterprise? Nobody knows - (apart from Abram and co) So the best thing is to wait and see what they come up with. Then we can either love it or loathe it. Just lets wait and see.

1. rfan Says:
   September 16th, 2006 at 21:51

   Ray Liotta as Pike

1. Andre LaMothe Says:
   October 12th, 2006 at 10:52

   Josh, your movie preview kept me riveted! Personally, I love Trek but feel that it does need a revival of sorts. Going back to TOS era is a great opportunity to revitalize and change things a little, especially if a time travel story is involved. All of the Trek series dealt with time travel and in FIRST CONTACT the Borg cube that was destroyed was later found by Archer's crew. (Or is that earlier) I think this would be a great chance to use a time travel story where an event transpires that fundamentally changes the Trek Universe, resulting in a different TOS era.
   That would be radical, bold and exciting!

1. douglas vansuch Says:
   December 8th, 2006 at 16:02

   Iwas a Star Trek fan when it wasn't cool to be a Star Trek fan.(There's a song title inthere somewhere) I'd like to see another movie,but it needs to reflect Gene Roddenberry's original vision of the Star Trek universe.And it needs a few Klingons.(Need someone to hiss at!)

1. Bob Hart Says:
   December 18th, 2006 at 02:06

   There was a Star Trek paperback I read some years ago about the maiden voyage of the original Enterprise with Capt. Robert April, and get this, Commander SAMUEL KIRK (our Capt. Kirk's dad) as the first officer. It was a story involving the Romulans and how the Big E kicked butt against a Romulan carrier and 5 of it's cruisers. Of course, we know who won, right?? Now this would be a super plot for the next movie, going back to the "real" beginning.

1. Sam Says:
   January 13th, 2007 at 16:12

   When i googled 'star trek xi' and saw a page with a 'preview', i was expecting to read a lame yet hilariously incorrect interpretation by some devoted trekkie trying to create his idea of what the film should be in peoples minds and then sell it as fact, and as much as i would have enjoyed reading a 'matt damon fights the enterprise-e from the evil universe and is then caught in a temporal pre-destination paradox only to erase the timeline and be saved by daniels, just before defeating the borg, the Q continuum and also realising the secret to warp ten travel and thus becoming the next archer, kirk, picard, kozinski and anyone who has ever travelled through time in the whole of the star trek franchise simultaneously and then saving the universe from a group of trans-dimensional beings and also correcting the flow of the timeline just in time for tea', i do believe that Josh Tyler's preview was more interesting, and correct too. As you have probably gathered, I am quite the trekkie and I would love -- LOVE -- for this new film to appeal to the masses as much as the whole package appeals to myself -- but all things considered, I would be happy with anything so long as an interesting story is involved, with one or two references that only people like me will understand. I have never thought of the idea that making a 'sci-fi' movie as opposed to one that screams all the values of our federation and the final frontier, but now that i consider it I think its a great idea. So long as it doesnt become really generic or just terrible. Imagine if this film becomes the cornerstone to EVERYONE becoming trekkies! I'm REALLY hoping they choose bad guys that can be introduced in a mysterious / epic way, and if the films a little bit scary, all the better. And EVERYONE LOOOVES time travel!
   Anyway, I think i went off on a rant there a little, but great review, well done.
   If anyone wants to talk about the film / franchise to me, my email is Sam-1701@hotmail.com (ha 1701)
   
   Thanks, Sam

1. David Says:
   March 3rd, 2007 at 13:43

   For me, the appeal of Star Trek always lied with the speculation and anticipation of seeing what will happen. I knew the franchise was in trouble when tey announced Enterprise. I had no ambition to see prequils. Why go backwards? That topic is best explored by novels and omnipedias. Let the franchise grow instead of trying to fill in blank space (wiht the exception of the excellant job they are doing digitalizing TOS).
   Speaking for myself, if this movie is set in "past". It might as well be put on TV (give us something wiht a plot to watch unlike LOST - did I say that?) or go strait to DVD. Either way, I'll see it when its in the discount bin in the grocery store or free onDemand.
   

1. Summer Droit Says:
   April 27th, 2007 at 23:52

   Interesting how many views we trek fans do not share. Robert April was a name Gene Roddenberry used for himself and not sure there was ever supposed to be a Captain actually named that. Spock could easily have met Kirk at the Academy since frequent upgrades in training are necessary.
   The idea that there needs to be a new crew is preposterous, if anything Abrams needs to stick to established continuity but in a fresh and clever way. Enterprise failed because it was too slick, didnt look at all like the time of the NCC-1701 and the actors were cast because they were known instead of talented, save for the typecast Baccula.
   THE REASON DS9's Trials & Tribblations is the most popular episode ever? WE THE FANS LIKE THE GEL BUTTONS, THE SWIRLING PANELS and the MINIMALIST LOOK of the old Enterprise, with the new technology we have..we must realize that something does not have to LOOK complicated to do wonderous things..I do agree that less technobabble and bringing back the writers that made Trek great, Ira, Robert, ...since Rons busy and he likes killing characters off we'll let him play over at Battlestar Galactica for now, also with William Shatner winning an Emmy and his current new popularity on Boston Legal, it would be very VERY short sighted not to do a time-episode where we get to see Kirk in uniform one last time. . .also Paramount could actually fix one of the worst screw-ups in motion picture history and fix it where Kirk didnt die, but rides off into the starset like every good hero. The idea that the occasional happy ending is not in vogue just guts so many decent forms of entertainment.
   Let Trek do what it's meant to do, give us hope for the future that humanity will stop having wars over nonsense and grow up and get along. --Summer Droit

1. Don Says:
   June 25th, 2007 at 06:28

   I am to young to remember the TOS, however, I love the movies. I became a full-fledged fan of TNG. My favorite series is Voyager, the only series I watched from series beginning to end. I liked Voyager because it showed a group of people working together experiencing a common problem, and even though their situation was tough, they maintained their principles. It reminds me of my military career, sometimes in warfare you want to turn your back on what’s right, however, its your duty to do the right thing. In addition, Voyager did something new, by putting a woman in charge. The Janeway character was great. I have a daughter and I like her to see more characters like that on TV. My point is ST is a show that should move forward not backwards; J.J Abrams is making a mistake. Let ST rest for a little while, then bring it back, say maybe 10 years, grow that demand, then offer something new.

1. Kyle Alzado Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 18:13

   I heard that they may cast the son of James Doohan (Chris Doohan) in the role of Scotty, or a minor role for the publicity. True??

1. freddyfox Says:
   July 24th, 2007 at 22:20

   Im not a huge Star Trek fan. Im 32 so and I never really got into the original series through reruns, or any of the spinoffs. However, Ive see all the movies and Im totally stoked to see a re-vision of the whole thing. I remember seeing Wrath of Kahn in the theater and those things that climbed in your ear...Yikes. So I mustve been young but it made an impression on me as a great movie even though im far from a "trekkie". I bet it will be great but the only problem i see is `who the hell can play Capt. Kirk!???? Ive heard Matt Damon rumors and that might work but if hes too old, I cant think of one person to pull that off. And If the Kirk Character fails, the whole movies a bust, guarantee. Shia Lebeouff is a good young actor..maybe too young looking though. If Damons too old than i guess Marky Mark is too huh? I always kinda thought of Spock as "older" than kirk and if they are casting the guy from heroes as Spock, It will jhave to be young, probably somewhat unknown actor for Kirk. Thats alot to put on some kid dont ya think. And with all the rabid fans they have to please, this is one project that might have more to lose than gain??? I guess its not like the rabid fans are gonna stop liking Star Trek for one bad movie but this might just sound better on paper than when its done.
   

1. striderdemme Says:
   July 26th, 2007 at 21:39

   My cast reactions (I know most of them are rumored at this point):
   
   Zachary Quinto (Spock) I think he could pull it off nicely.
   Leonard Nimoy (Spock) It would be great to see as Spock again. IF this does happen, how would it go down? Cameo? Time travel?
   Matt Damon (Captain Kirk) The idea is growing on me, but it still doesn't seem right.
   Gary Sinise (Dr. McCoy) Yes, he would be an excellent choice. Just watch Forrest Gump and you'll see.
   Daniel Dae Kim (Sulu) Absolutely. If not Chewbacca, who else? ;-)
   James McAvoy (Scotty) NO
   

1. hawkeye Says:
   August 28th, 2007 at 16:30

   Here's an Idea, how about a movie about Sulu And his ship,I liked the lay out of it, it was a sleek ship and had a nice look, jut a thought.

1. Ivo Capurso Says:
   September 5th, 2007 at 12:14

   Hi Everybody,
   
   I am from Croatia and I grew up watching the Trek movies and I am proud to say that I own all of them on DVD today. I have to say that I am a big fan of Lost and I think J.J. did a great job with M:I:III so when I learned that the next Star Trek movie will be signed by Kurtzman, Orci and Abrams, I grabbed my head and said: this will blow our minds! I like to get into the ''fantasy'' part of it all so I'll imagine that Tom Cruise is ''Pike'', Russell Crowe is the ''bad guy'', we already know that Nimoy is in, and then I can only dream of who will play Bones and Kirk. Come on guys isn't this MINDBLOWING!!! So just because this movie is a prequel my personal goal is to get all the original series by Christmas 2008, so when I walk into -XI- I am ready. J.J. Good Luck and don't be afraid to take us where no man has gone before.

1. Lewis Says:
   November 13th, 2007 at 16:59

   BS"D
   I am discouraged whenever ideas for any trek come from picking at the bones of previous movies or shows. Certainly Gene did not do that in the 60's what happened to trek?? Why does everything have to be a retread of ideas hashed out before?
   If you're going to "reboot" trek you must be fearless and really explore new ideas situations people etc that have never been done or thought about. Don't keep digging up coffins

1. howard riell Says:
   November 14th, 2007 at 13:04

   Star Trek II was great, but NOT the best Trek movie. That would be Generations.
   
   HR

1. Deagle Says:
   December 28th, 2007 at 02:39

   Pardon,?.....Well it most certainly was the best (Wrath of Con)
   it is the only movie that actually followed TOS right out of the box...it was the perfect Trek movie..........anyone who really doesnt feel that.........should be watching mystery science theater or something candy coated like that

1. Turgenev Says:
   January 11th, 2008 at 15:29

   My preference would be something new set after TNG… going back to the original just seems unimiginative. But- what’s done is done. I certainly look forward to the new film.
   
   And it will work- we are familiar with the characters and are intrigued by how they will be different and how thye will be the same; attracting die-hards, casual fans and the non-fans but curious alike.
   
   So much internet buzz can attest to the marketing draw of going back to what is familiar rather than dazzling us with some fresh, clever, brand new Star Trek incarnation:
   
   Star Trek - The Undiscovered Canon
   wherin Captain Ka-Blarrrg (a three legged, sulfur breathing packmule) and his valient crew of the Enterprise Z (EnterpriZe?) must battle the natural forces of the universe to prevent the big bang from running out of intertia and reversing thus wiping out everything… oh and dramatic tension ensues as crewmembers use the transporter to expel bodily waste (that’s why they never use the potty)
   
   And Carrot Top is in there somewhere… maybe a pivotal scene where he points at a Native American little person and yells “A red dwarf!”
   
   

1. kevin Says:
   January 20th, 2008 at 02:33

   Ye of little faith, we will all be there, period. I think the idea of "just another movie" in a franchise, has been left to the superhero and comedy movies. Many classic stories are being re-invented and personally I have been waiting for this one. Everyone will feel the tug of concern as the things they have become certain with, take on a different light. But to watch the birth of a ground breaking series may enhance our passion. There will be a sense of realism brought to the Star Trek world, not just in theory but physically. With a raw edge in the idea of space travel, alien beings, technology and our role in this new world it will embrace the idea of "To boldly go where no one has gone before". Many believed and still do, that to explore the universe in that fasion is humanly impossible, the Star trek world made us imagine we could. Through scientific theories introduced in the series, we learned the possibility of space travel as well what our social interactions might be like, and the things we might encounter. We also know the future of Star Trek, deeper theories and understandings where we might be headed for in our own infant-like world. But it whats between our world now, and the Trekkish future, thats missing. The first steps, the beginnings, how did it all start? That is where it lies, and that is what this movie will bring to life, the realism, of what man has dreamed of since dawn.The greatest adventure of mankind, To boldly go where no one has gone before, safely given to the hands of a familiar name...STAR TREK. I am so stoked I can't wait.

1. Mark Says:
   January 27th, 2008 at 02:55

   I would prefer to see a movie going forward in the franchise timeline...not backwards. I am not at all thrilled with what I've read about the plot of this latest Trek film. I will pass on seeing it at the box office and wait for the dvd. Also..little point in fans saying what they would like to see for a movie at this point. JJ Abrahms went and filmed a movie HE wanted to see. Better hope he had some of the same ideas that a lot of fans do or theres going to be a lot of disappointed viewers out there. I predict this movie will open big...because its STAR TREK after all...but fizzle thereafter. I predict overall...it will be a disappointment. But hey...we'll see.

Leave a Reply