I love that scene.

As this is a reboot surely any argument about what the ship looks like is irrelevant as it can look like anything. That's surely the point of a 'reboot' - anything goes. I'm certainly interested in seeing this, my flatmate is big on The Trek and I think I'll be accompanying him down the cinema to catch this next year.

I knew someone would call me up on that one, but do you know what I mean?

It's not a reboot though, and it's not a prequel either (according to JJ), so I guess that makes it something woolly in between.

The main gripes I've read about the Enterprise design are that the warp nacelles and the connection between the two hulls are too far back.

The real hardcore "fans" are probably sat in a room somewhere working our the geometry of the warp fields and how many Cochrane’s of power they require etc.

Might be a bit silly if the ship looked like a boot, though.


Although, that said, it might still be apt enough for the 'Trek' part.

I'm going to have to play the "Does it really matter?" card.

It's hardly movie-ruining, or even mildly important. It's a slightly different design, it's not like it has "Haha, eat shit all you old fans, this isn't for you!" written on the top instead of "NCC-1701".

True, the engines aren't in the exact same place as they were before, but it's still the Enterprise isn't it? Nobody, Trekk(ie/er) or otherwise could look at that picture and have any doubt in their minds as to that being that ship off of Star Trek.

I actually prefer the original movie version, but that doesn't mean I don't like this one, because it's the same fucking thing.

Oh, I think you will find that for some people it is very, very important indeed . . .

Now the professionals are getting involved!

Some interesting comments there.

Boo, I was hoping someone would run with the idea. I do know what you mean. This doesn't stop me watching them, and I the only time it annoys me is when the film turns out to be shit (read: Wanted) and you are sat back mentally ticking off each set-piece like a bingo card. If the film is good, you should be too swept up in the moment to remember the trailer OR you are excited about that scene coming up.


If they have different actors playing the precious roles they can have a slightly different ship. It looks more 'classic' Enterprise than the ship in 'Enterprise'! I'm not 100% convinced I even like the thing (it looks a little over-designed and organic if anything) but the fact it's wrong by Trek fandom's reckoning matters not a jot. There have already been several incarnations of it, so why is another one causing so many arguments?

I think the ship looks pretty cool.



Really made me laugh.

Ah, but they were different ships called Enterprise, not the NCC-1701 Enterprise (with the exception of the movie refit version).

There's no reason at all not to redesign the ship - I would have been very surprised if they had stuck with one of the earlier designs - but that won't stop some Trek "fans" bitching about it!

In my experience Trek fans are generally worse than Who fans for anal detail and continuity etc. I'm actually surprised no-one has fire-bombed Paramount.

The Italian space cruiser?

Me too. In fact the only incarnation that I've not been too keen on was the Enterprise D.

Bootleg trailer's up - it should be officially on the web later this week.

There's an awful lot of CGI there, why am I thinking about Lost on Space?!

I think that is just to be expected. I think it looks pretty damn good myself.

Looks exciting!

So far it looks like the okay sort of CGI though, as opposed to the Lucasfilm school of CGI where cups and stuff are drawn to make them "more real".

I like that trailer.

And as for the ship design i'm in the 'I don't carrrrrrre' camp.

Oooooh.


Although Kirk isn't Shatner enough.

Maybe he gets hit on the head at the end of the film, that kind be like his origin.

Oooh!

Simon's accent sounds pretty good (from the short clip you could see on there).

By golly, but that's looking good!

I forget the last time (or indeed if ever) I looked forward to a new Trek film quite as much as this.

Official versions here.

Looks a lot better bigger!

He sounds like an excited Tennant. That's a good thing.

I bet that's what you tell all the girls.

Lookss really exciting. And sexy.

Star Trek 90210.

Another parody/trailer mix-up: Star Trek A-Team.

Some ammusing captions there!

Shatner's Response to the new Trek Trailer.

Hmm, The OC in Space.

New version of the trailer, now with added Spock!

Squee.

I'm glad it's a spockier, but I'd be happier if it was peggier. Still, I think it looks really cool. I can't wait to see it. I'm kinda hoping that spock isn't all violent and Steven Segal-ish. He looks a little more brutal than the usual spock.

Pegg channelling Tennant I see. Splendid.

Even if Mr Pegg wasn't in this movie, I'd still be looking forward to seeing it. The trailer looks pretty awesome.

Feel the love.
dolfyn.

Superbowl Trailer - some interesting stuff there.

It looked great on my neighbour's 42" screen, but also quite frightening. More visual effects aren't what's needed to revive the franchise, and the trailer didn't deliver anything but.

If they make a kick-ass Science Fiction film, I'll be happy.

Hopefully they do, then. It didn't look too dissimilar from the Transformers 2 trailer they aired later in the evening, to my eyes.

Oh God. Just remember, it's not Michael Bay doing Trek...

*It's not Michael Bay, It's not Michael Bay, It's not Michael Bay*

I think I can see where you are coming from.

The attitude with the last few films - and Voyager and Enterprise for that matter - seemed to be to try and revive Trek's fortunes by having bigger explosions and more impressive action sequences, but I feel that approach is largely flawed because good Star Trek is about the characters, not the technology or the special effects.

How many episodes of Star Trek end with starships having shoot-out? Not many, so why do the films always have to?

Think of the best episodes of Star Trek.

To my mind the two best episodes are Measure of a Man and Darmok, both TNG episodes. Neither have any action, or even anything really to do with space. They're just drama, and I challenge anyone, Trek fan or otherwise, to not find them breathtaking.

Bingo.



I'll see your examples, and raise you The Inner Light.

'Next Gen' characters in 'Trek' movie?

TrekMovie says not, but it's an interesting idea . . .

Isn't TNG set a good 80 years after the 5th TOS movie?

So none of the cast were born by the end of TOS, let alone before the beginning. Unless there's time travel involved which, knowing Star Trek, there probably is.

I think what has sparked this rumour is that there is a 4-part comic that has been released to pave the way for the film. That comic is set largely in the TNG era, from what I understand, and there is speculation that the beginning of the film will pick up from where the comic leaves off. We'll just have to wait and see, but I would be surprised if Picard and Co. do feature.

The thing is, how many people are going to have read this comic?

They won't have any plot points that are anything more than minor nods to fans, because it's designed for a general movie-going public.

Very few, I suspect, but most people will have an idea who Picard is, even if they have never really watched TNG. As I say though, I don't believe he will be in it.

I meant more for the story aspect than the characters.

The comic is only a lead into the film, it's not required reading to be able to understand it, it just provides a little back-story.

A sequence at the beginning of the film that is set in the "future", that is tied into what happened in the past, may make sense depending on how it is handled.

Think Generations, but in reverse.