First Images from New Star Trek!

POSTED BY: CrevanReaver
UPDATED: Sunday, February 15, 2026 14:37
VIEWED: 27859
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

CREVANREAVER

Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:10 AM

CREVANREAVER

Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:11 AM

CREVANREAVER

Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:12 AM

CREVANREAVER

Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:12 AM

ASARIAN

Thursday, October 16, 2008 10:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:

LOL. That guy has the face and expression of Cylar! (Heroes)

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

LWAVES

Thursday, October 16, 2008 10:32 PM

That's because it is Sylar.
Well Zach Quinto who plays both roles.

The pics look good though.
Faithful in some ways. Different in others.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

SHINYSHIP

Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:28 PM

I have one tiny problem. How come the bad guys of the movie are Romulans. In "Balance of Terror" Spock specifically says that no one has ever seen a Romulan. The last time the Federation and the Romulans met was over a century before this in the Romulan/Federation war and that was before the advent of viewscreens so neither side knew what the other looked like. So I kind of have a problem with Romulans being the main villian.

CREVANREAVER

Friday, October 17, 2008 12:11 AM

CYBERSNARK

Friday, October 17, 2008 12:59 AM

The fact that we (the audience) can see the Romulan does NOT mean that the characters can see/identify the Romulan.

It's like those big-eared aliens on Enterprise that never gave their names. (The fact that, 200 years later, "Ferengi" is a household word, is irrelevant because it's 200 years later.)

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

THUNDAR

Friday, October 17, 2008 2:55 AM

The Bridge set looks Ghey, almost like a scene from Speed Racer.

ASARIAN

Friday, October 17, 2008 3:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by lwaves:

That's because it is Sylar.
Well Zach Quinto who plays both roles.

LOL. Well, that explains a lot! :)

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

STOWEAWAY

Friday, October 17, 2008 5:54 AM

I could have sworn I read that Sulu would be played by James Kyson Lee. 'Cause this looks more like a Harold & Kumar installment. Huh.
And I still think Fillion should be Kirk. That dude looks too young.
Quinto as Spock looks BADASS though.

I'm looking forward to this one. I miss having a Star Trek around.

------------------------------------------------
Check out http://www.americasfunniesttshirts.com for hilarious shirts at a great price.

SHINYSHIP

Friday, October 17, 2008 12:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cybersnark:
The fact that we (the audience) can see the Romulan does NOT mean that the characters can see/identify the Romulan.

It's like those big-eared aliens on Enterprise that never gave their names. (The fact that, 200 years later, "Ferengi" is a household word, is irrelevant because it's 200 years later.)

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

This is true. However, in "Balance of Terror" they also say no one had seen the Romulans in a century neither face to face nor ship to ship. They wern't even sure the ship that was attacking was Romulan it had been so long since they had seen each other. I find it hard for the Romulans to be the villian if the Enterprise never sees them or their ships.

CREVANREAVER

Friday, October 17, 2008 12:16 PM

BROWNCOAT1

Friday, October 17, 2008 1:19 PM

Pics look good so far, though I have to agree the bridge set is way overdone. That looks a heck of lot fancier than any set from previous movies. If this is a prequel shouldn't the set have been simplier, say along the lines of Enterprise the tv series or something?

__________________________________________
Holding the line since December '02!

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Fans:

http://www.richmondbrowncoats.org

Color Officer / X.O. Echo Company

http://76thbattalion.homestead.com/index.html

CYBERSNARK

Friday, October 17, 2008 1:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stoweaway:
And I still think Fillion should be Kirk. That dude looks too young.

Kirk is supposed to be young. Part of his cachet is that he was (and AFAIK, still is even by the 24th century) the youngest person to ever make Captain.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

MACBAKER

Friday, October 17, 2008 2:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cybersnark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Stoweaway:
And I still think Fillion should be Kirk. That dude looks too young.

Kirk is supposed to be young. Part of his cachet is that he was (and AFAIK, still is even by the 24th century) the youngest person to ever make Captain.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

If I remember the Kirk mythology right, he was 32 when he got his first command. True, Pine looks a bit younger, but Roddenberry said that Picard was a "youthful" 60yr old at the time TNG begins. Patrick Stewart was only 47 at that time. If humans live longer, a 32 year old man might look mid twenties by our standards.

As much as I love Fillion, I wouldn't want to see him as Kirk. Being the Captain on two different sci-fi series is weird type casting in my opinion.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Friday, October 17, 2008 2:10 PM

Of course I must see it being a sworn member of the Federation as I am, but I still say only Shatner could go to China.

Chrisisall

MACBAKER

Friday, October 17, 2008 3:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Of course I must see it being a sworn member of the Federation as I am, but I still say only Shatner could go to China.

Chrisisall

Denny Crane goes to China! Oh the diplomatic setbacks that could cause!

Sorry, but as much as I love the Shat!, I think it's time for new actors to play the best characters in Star Trek. Now, when I see William Shatner, I only see Denny Crane. Young Shat, Kirk. Old and fat Shat, DENNY CRANE!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Friday, October 17, 2008 3:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
Young Shat, Kirk. Old and fat Shat, DENNY CRANE!

Yes, definitely

TheShatisall

LWAVES

Friday, October 17, 2008 9:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
Young Shat, Kirk. Old and fat Shat, DENNY CRANE!

Yes, definitely

TheShatisall

Shatner will always be Kirk in so many ways, whoever plays him later on. But I hope this goes the route of the Bond actors were Connery will always be the original and best, but other good ones can follow.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

STORYMARK

Friday, October 17, 2008 10:00 PM

As to the question about the Romulans in that timeframe - all the Romulans, cheifly Eric Bana's character, are from the post TNG era, and go back in time to try and "Terminator" Kirk. The crux of the story is Old Spock going back to stop them, with the asistance of Young Spock.

So, assuming the Romulans don't do too much jumping around saying "We're here", and play it more through subterfuge, it should still gel, in terms of continuity.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

LERXST

Saturday, October 18, 2008 5:49 AM

DUDE! Spoiler warning??

______________________________________________________
"So, you're proposing that we go back in time, find some Humpback whales, bring them back here, and hope they can tell this "probe" what to go do with itself??"
"That's the general idea."
"THAT'S CRAZY!"

JOLLY

Saturday, October 18, 2008 6:24 AM

Mini-skirts!

DERANGEDMILK

Saturday, October 18, 2008 8:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
Pics look good so far, though I have to agree the bridge set is way overdone. That looks a heck of lot fancier than any set from previous movies. If this is a prequel shouldn't the set have been simplier, say along the lines of Enterprise the tv series or something?

Couldn't agree with you more. I don't know when people who make prequels are going to get it through their heads that we want good stories not special effects that so vastly outstrip the original that it doesn't make any sense. This is the main reason the Star Wars prequels blew chunks. Lucas focused solely on special effects and forgot to tell a story. So far, I have absolutely the lowest expectations for this Trek film. Since Nolan did such a good job with the new batman (actually making it way more realistic which with batman I figured was impossible) I had had some hope but, no more.
-e

-------
"Storms getting worse."
"We'll pass through it soon enough."

Vote for Firefly at http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

IMNOTHERE

Saturday, October 18, 2008 4:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
That looks a heck of lot fancier than any set from previous movies. If this is a prequel shouldn't the set have been simplier, say along the lines of Enterprise the tv series or something?

Remember, the events of First Contact changed the timeline in subtle ways (such as creating the entire Enterprise storyline). One of the more minor ripples was that, in this version of the universe, when NCC 1701 was ordered, Kirk obviously chose the "Deluxe Blue Crystal" trim pack instead of the "70s retro" kit. What the longterm effects of this will be is unknown, but I think that option came with the anti-lock warp nacelles, which might change the course of a few battles.

They could have gone for the "Apple Special" aluminium and black glass - but Uhura didn't want the glossy main viewscreen and Scotty needed Firewire to plug in his tricorder....

STORYMARK

Monday, October 20, 2008 5:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Lerxst:
DUDE! Spoiler warning??

______________________________________________________
"So, you're proposing that we go back in time, find some Humpback whales, bring them back here, and hope they can tell this "probe" what to go do with itself??"
"That's the general idea."
"THAT'S CRAZY!"

Didn't occur to me that the basic premise - which has been discussed publicly by those involved, and printed dozens of times, would be that much of a spoiler.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

STORYMARK

Monday, October 20, 2008 5:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
That looks a heck of lot fancier than any set from previous movies. If this is a prequel shouldn't the set have been simplier, say along the lines of Enterprise the tv series or something?

Remember, the events of First Contact changed the timeline in subtle ways (such as creating the entire Enterprise storyline). One of the more minor ripples was that, in this version of the universe, when NCC 1701 was ordered, Kirk obviously chose the "Deluxe Blue Crystal" trim pack instead of the "70s retro" kit. What the longterm effects of this will be is unknown, but I think that option came with the anti-lock warp nacelles, which might change the course of a few battles.

They could have gone for the "Apple Special" aluminium and black glass - but Uhura didn't want the glossy main viewscreen and Scotty needed Firewire to plug in his tricorder....

Well, for one - did you really expect them to keep the cardboard and pastels style of the old show??

Besides, who's to say they won't refit it to look more like what we know later on? What we're seeing in these pictures is still from before "The Cage" pilot of the series. Maybe captian Pike has the bridge redesigned at some point?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

LWAVES

Monday, October 20, 2008 9:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Well, for one - did you really expect them to keep the cardboard and pastels style of the old show??

Besides, who's to say they won't refit it to look more like what we know later on? What we're seeing in these pictures is still from before "The Cage" pilot of the series. Maybe captian Pike has the bridge redesigned at some point?

The Extreme Makeover team have a cameo appearance.

As a side note does anyone know if Pike will be featured in the movie? Or is that another secret?

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

STORYMARK

Monday, October 20, 2008 9:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by lwaves:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Well, for one - did you really expect them to keep the cardboard and pastels style of the old show??

Besides, who's to say they won't refit it to look more like what we know later on? What we're seeing in these pictures is still from before "The Cage" pilot of the series. Maybe captian Pike has the bridge redesigned at some point?

The Extreme Makeover team have a cameo appearance.

As a side note does anyone know if Pike will be featured in the movie? Or is that another secret?

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

I don't know if it's considered a secret or not... but yeah. Pike will be played by Bruce Greenwood.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

PIRATENEWS

Monday, October 20, 2008 9:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:

Friends in Space?

Full episodes online:
www.thewb.com/shows/firefly

Firefly Music Video: Tangerine dream - Confrontation, Thief soundtrack
www.megavideo.com/?v=JVT35GR8

FIREFLY VERSE: Cedric of Bedlam Bards - Hush Little Citizen
Lyrics: www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=21027
Video by FireFlyGirl, remix by PirateNews
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7078278113681186118

LWAVES

Tuesday, October 21, 2008 8:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:

Friends in Space?

Hahahahaha!

I can see Chekov and McCoy as Chandler and Joey.
McCoy already has that confused Joey look.
Kirk could be Ross (maybe a stretch).
But the girls?

And thanks Storymark for letting me know about Pike. Wouldn't really do not to have him in it in some small way.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

LESTER

Saturday, October 25, 2008 7:24 PM

oh man, this is gonna be so cool. star trek is like my first sci-fi love. I grew up on it, and saw it self distruct when firefly came around.now it's like seeing an old friend, that you always hoped you'd meet again but never dreamed it'd be this much fun. hopefully, this get's trek back in order, because the old girl needs start over with a reboot.

Awesome as always,
Lester

CREVANREAVER

Wednesday, October 29, 2008 6:40 PM

CREVANREAVER

Wednesday, October 29, 2008 6:41 PM

CREVANREAVER

Wednesday, October 29, 2008 6:41 PM

CREVANREAVER

Wednesday, October 29, 2008 6:41 PM

Good comparison!

SIGNYM

Thursday, October 30, 2008 12:46 AM

Either I'm really old, or they're just babies!

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

CLJOHNSTON108

Tuesday, November 4, 2008 8:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:

But why is there a maître d' station on the bridge?

JAYNESMANE

Sunday, November 9, 2008 4:11 PM

Interesting.

I can't help but feel a bit betrayed by the way the actors look almost nothing like the original character they are portraying though.

---
http://surveysafari.x10hosting.com/redirect.html - Make money online filling out surveys!

ASARIAN

Sunday, November 9, 2008 4:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
Pics look good so far, though I have to agree the bridge set is way overdone. That looks a heck of lot fancier than any set from previous movies. If this is a prequel shouldn't the set have been simplier, say along the lines of Enterprise the tv series or something?

Well, I think that's where Enterprise failed, actually (that, and a story-line they could never decide on where it would go). People love fancy. Conceptually, yes, I agree, it should probably be more like Enterprise, the TV series, but folks just don't accept metal, sixties-like communicators and such any more.

--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

MACBAKER

Monday, November 10, 2008 12:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JaynesMane:
Interesting.

I can't help but feel a bit betrayed by the way the actors look almost nothing like the original character they are portraying though.

---
http://surveysafari.x10hosting.com/redirect.html - Make money online filling out surveys!

I have to disagree with you there. To a point.

It's spooky how much Karl Urban looks like Bones, and Quintano looks a lot like a young Leonard Nimoy. I would have never considered Urban for McCoy, but he is such a versatile character actor, that he'll probably pull it off well. He certainly has the look and posture of Bones in the pics!

Yeah, "Harold" doesn't looks much like Sulu, and the "Shawn of the Dead" guy doesn't look anything like Scotty, but the actors playing Kirk and Uhura do have some similar features.

Getting a actor like Shatner for Kirk is a once in a lifetime thing. J.J. had to find a new way to portray Kirk, and a new actor to interpret the role. Anything else, and it would have felt like a parody of Shatner. The key to making that work, is to find the perfect Bones and Spock to complement him. I think Pines will work as Kirk, because the director bookeneds Chris Pines with actors like Quintano and Urban.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CREVANREAVER

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:16 PM

Behold, the U.S.S. Enterprise:

MACBAKER

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:21 AM

This image bothers me.

The proportions seem off, and the nacelle arms are mounted awkwardly too far to the rear of the secondary hull. Why is the secondary hull moved so far forward? Just to be different? It doesn't have the balance of the original, or the sleek lines of the movie era version. Yeah, it's different, but it isn't better at all!

I have to say I prefer Gabe's version better. It's got the right balance and proportions, but looks modern.

Funny how a fanboy like us, designed a far better modernized version of the Enterprise, than the version Hollywoods best artists came up with. Someone paid good money for this mess? They should have saved a ton of wasted time and money, and paid for Gabe's design. He got it right!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

BROWNCOAT1

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
This image bothers me.

The proportions seem off, and the nacelle arms are mounted awkwardly too far to the rear of the secondary hull. Why is the secondary hull moved so far forward? Just to be different? It doesn't have the balance of the original, or the sleek lines of the movie era version. Yeah, it's different, but it isn't better at all!

Got to agree. Different, but definitely not better.

Is it just me, or do the nacelles remind anyone else of fins or something off of 50s car?

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
I have to say I prefer Gabe's version better. It's got the right balance and proportions, but looks modern.

Funny how a fanboy like us, designed a far better modernized version of the Enterprise, than the version Hollywoods best artists came up with. Someone paid good money for this mess? They should have saved a ton of wasted time and money, and paid for Gabe's design. He got it right!

I have to agree again. I like this version much better than the one aboce. This one seems much more the way I'd imagine the Enterprise.

__________________________________________
Holding the line since December '02!

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Fans:

http://www.richmondbrowncoats.org

Color Officer / X.O. Echo Company

http://76thbattalion.homestead.com/index.html

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:07 PM

Now now; young minds, fresh ideas- we must be tolerant.

Inapigseyeisall

MACBAKER

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Now now; young minds, fresh ideas- we must be tolerant.

I think I'm very tolerant!

I'm okay with a "young" "fresh" new cast playing my favorite Trek characters, but I still have issues with this "new" Enterprise. The engines look like they were taken off some 50's era caddy, the secondary hull is wayyyy too far forward, and the overall shape just seems awkward! Maybe it will look better from other angles, but from what I've seen, I still think the best version of the Enterprise was first seen in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. That one brought tears to my eyes! This one just makes me want to cry!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
I still think the best version of the Enterprise was first seen in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. That one brought tears to my eyes!

I'm with ya 100% here, Mac.
And all those flowing, aerodynamic lines they got goin' there in the new one remind me of the kinda lines you'd see on concept race cars...

@ JJ: no need for aerodynamic lines on a ship that only travels in space, yo.
Balance of design would be good, though.

Chrisisall

CANTTAKEMYSKY

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 8:22 PM

Could be a Remon...who knows. You know, from Nemisis. Looks kinda like one. I'm not totally up in the whole story line, but it could be.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CREATOR OF THE MOST RANDOM ACCIDENTAL THREAD IN THE 'VERSE, AND PREVIOUS OWNER OF A BILLBOARD SIZED SENTIENT KILLER BANNER!

STORYMARK

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:36 PM

I like the new design. Still clearly the enterprise, but it feels sturdier, more real to me.

I know fans have been going on about that fan-designed one for a while, but the nacells look like giant vibrators to me.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

LISSA

Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

but the nacells look like giant vibrators to me.

Not seeing the problem...;)

~lissa

KAREL

Thursday, November 13, 2008 5:19 AM

I'm looking forward to this Trek, me thinks. Wait a minute! What the...?

Quote:
Originally posted by lissa:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
but the nacells look like giant vibrators to me.
Not seeing the problem...;)

*takes away lissa's drink*
*drinks it*

There. That's better.

"Whatever is wrong with you is so right for me." -- Marillion.

LISSA

Thursday, November 13, 2008 5:59 AM

lol...of all people to see that comment, it would be you. :p

~lissa

KAREL

Thursday, November 13, 2008 6:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by lissa:
lol...of all people to see that comment, it would be you. :p

Just trying to protect you from yourself, my dear.

*snort*

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 14, 2008 10:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I like the new design. Still clearly the enterprise, but it feels sturdier, more real to me.

Oh? Then you'll LOVE this new re-design of Serenity for the next movie, if it gets made:

Chrisisall

LWAVES

Saturday, November 15, 2008 12:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:

Oh? Then you'll LOVE this new re-design of Serenity for the next movie, if it gets made:

Chrisisall

Aaaah, the Eagle Transporter. That brings back fond memories of Saturday morning sci-fi. A great looking ship that's up there with the best of them.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

TRAVELER

Saturday, November 15, 2008 2:58 AM

Before you guys get to critical of some of the designs for the new Star Trek you may want to consider other possibilities.

This is Gabrielle Drake as she appeared in the TV series UFO as Lt. Gay Ellis. Purple hair was part of the uniform for all female personel stationed on the moon. The tight silver outfits worked for me.

Damn-it Jim I won't wear purple hair!

Chrisisall reminded me of this show with his Space-1999 Eagle. Both UFO and Space-1999 were produced by the same people.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

RIVERLOVE

Saturday, November 15, 2008 12:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by traveler:
Before you guys get to critical of some of the designs for the new Star Trek you may want to consider other possibilities.

This is Gabrielle Drake as she appeared in the TV series UFO as Lt. Gay Ellis. Purple hair was part of the uniform for all female personel stationed on the moon. The tight silver outfits worked for me.

Damn-it Jim I won't wear purple hair!

There was a core group of these gals at SHADO Hdqtrs. and they all looked like sisters. It was very, very sexy for its day. The series had great potential, but it only lasted one season.

CREVANREAVER

Saturday, November 15, 2008 2:24 PM

MACBAKER

Saturday, November 15, 2008 5:47 PM

Anyone else see the trailer attached to "Quantum Of Solstice?"

It's made me feel better. They play a little fast and loose with canon, but it looks very interesting.

I hope the movie lives up to the trailer. This could be the first EPIC Star Trek movie!

Select to view spoiler:

I'm shocked that Kirk wasn't a model citizen as a child! LOL! From the looks of it, Kirk and Spock don't really seem to hit it off at first!

The brief shots of the BIG E in action, look better than she does in the promo shot.

Bruce Greenwood as Pike seems perfect, and Pegg's Scotty accent is dead on and hilarious.

Pines and Quinto are believable as Kirk and Spock, but Urban as Bones is perfect! His line, "Space is disease and danger, wrapped in darkness and silence!" is pure McCoy cynicism!

Select to view spoiler:

HELL'S KITTEN

Saturday, November 15, 2008 9:04 PM

Hee... I'm in love with Spock all over again.... <---((such a geek))

Thanks for posting all these images. ^^

--Fangrrl

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sara013

CHRISISALL

Saturday, November 15, 2008 9:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
Anyone else see the trailer attached to "Quantum Of Solstice?"

It's made me feel better.

Thanks for makin' me feel better by posting that, Mac.

I'llseeitisall

TRAVELER

Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:52 PM

Hello Riverlove:

Just like us Browncoats the "UFO" series has a following. They just didn't have internet back then and could not connect. There is a website with information on the series, but no forum. I remember watching it, but were talking a long time ago, so I don't remember much more then they were chasing aliens who were abducting humans. To bad it only lasted one season. It was followed by Space-1999, that lasted longer and without the wigs.

Great shots of the Star Trek crew. Hard to visualize them so young. Specially Kirk. I can't imagine such a young person as a commander.

I also prefer the Enterprise from the first films.
It was a nice clean design that remained very close to the original TV version.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

CREVANREAVER

Saturday, November 15, 2008 11:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
This could be the first EPIC Star Trek movie!

The Wrath of Khan WAS epic.

OPPYH

Sunday, November 16, 2008 7:14 AM

Not the best quality, but you'll kind of know what your in for. Interesting.

STORYMARK

Sunday, November 16, 2008 8:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
This could be the first EPIC Star Trek movie!

The Wrath of Khan WAS epic.

Emotionally epic, sure. But come on, it's a movie shot almost entirely in one room.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

CHRISISALL

Sunday, November 16, 2008 6:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Emotionally epic, sure. But come on, it's a movie shot almost entirely in one room.

LOL!

Kohlinarisall

CREVANREAVER

Monday, November 17, 2008 6:45 PM

Here is a pic from the new trailer:

MACBAKER

Monday, November 17, 2008 7:14 PM

The actor in this shot is Ben Cross, and he looks like a good choice for Sarek! Not sure who the woman is. I heard Winona Ryder was playing Spock's mother Amanda, but this woman looks like Madeleine Stowe.

[/

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

PIZMOBEACH

Monday, November 17, 2008 7:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by traveler:
Before you guys get to critical of some of the designs for the new Star Trek you may want to consider other possibilities.

This is Gabrielle Drake as she appeared in the TV series UFO as Lt. Gay Ellis. Purple hair was part of the uniform for all female personel stationed on the moon. The tight silver outfits worked for me.

I completely missed this one.

For any one else:

The Brits always have such a groovy future. How did Mystery Science Theatre miss this one?!

Thx for the Star Trek pics - Quinto sure looks the part, sounding the part is pretty big too.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

CREVANREAVER

Monday, November 17, 2008 8:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
Not sure who the woman is. I heard Winona Ryder was playing Spock's mother Amanda, but this woman looks like Madeleine Stowe.

That IS Winona Ryder!

CREVANREAVER

Monday, November 17, 2008 8:45 PM

http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=295

TRAVELER

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 3:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=295]

Just saw this add for Star Trek while warching Terminator tonight. Looks like a lot of action and bruised egos.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

RIVERLOVE

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:07 PM

That commercial said the release is May, 2009.

I thought it was coming out this Christmas. What happened?

RIVERLOVE

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by traveler:
Hello Riverlove:

Just like us Browncoats the "UFO" series has a following. They just didn't have internet back then and could not connect. There is a website with information on the series, but no forum. I remember watching it, but were talking a long time ago, so I don't remember much more then they were chasing aliens who were abducting humans. To bad it only lasted one season. It was followed by Space-1999, that lasted longer and without the wigs.

Hey Traveller.... I was 11 when UFO aired. Even at age 11 I knew this show was a bit lame, but I still watched it because there really wasn't anything else after Star Trek for a long time. I remember the "alien" ships were like upside-down spinning tops with colorful lights. They were either landing on Earth or submerging into the sea. SHADO had underwater ships that would track these things down. Like Space 1999, many episodes were incoherant and un-resolved even from an 11-year old's un-sophisticated perpective. The hot gals were definitely the show's best asset, because Ed Bishop and the rest were rather dull. You can buy the entire DVD set (26 episodes) for $37 on Amazon.

MACBAKER

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 4:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
Not sure who the woman is. I heard Winona Ryder was playing Spock's mother Amanda, but this woman looks like Madeleine Stowe.

That IS Winona Ryder!

Okay, it IS Winona Ryder! She's listed in the credits, so DUH!

It still doesn't look like her! Maybe it's a bad angle of something, but even in the trailer it doesn't look like her.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

MACBAKER

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 4:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
That commercial said the release is May, 2009.

I thought it was coming out this Christmas. What happened?

It's old news now, but Paramount was evidently so impressed with the rough cut of this film, they decided to move it to the bigger summer movie season. They seem to think it's going to be a blockbuster with summer legs.

Too bad Universal didn't feel the same with Serenity. It was originally to be released the same way (early summer) and they second guessed it, and moved it back to the dumping ground period between the summer and holiday movie seasons. Universal also blew the advertising. Paramount obviously isn't, since they are already advertising Star Trek, six months before it comes out!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

PIZMOBEACH

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:04 PM

I don't think that looks like W. Ryder either...

Trailers:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

STORYMARK

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 11:24 PM

How did Universal "blow the advertising" on Serenity? I was seeing trailers 6-8 months before release, and saw literally dozens of commercials for it.

I know that when something fails, folks like to blame the marketing, but it seemed like they marketed the hell out of Serenity.

It was never going to get a super-mega marketing push like something as big as Trek, anyway.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

OPPYH

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 5:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I know that when something fails, folks like to blame the marketing, but it seemed like they marketed the hell out of Serenity.

Mainly because the trailers and tv spots were more confusing to non-fans than helpful. Sometimes making a trailer to confuse an audience can work.
My point: Cloverfield. That piece of Shit is getting a sequel because of the high numbers it pulled. Maybe if Serenity had a giant monster blowing stuff up, it may have done better!

TRAVELER

Thursday, November 20, 2008 1:13 AM

Hello Riverlove:

Yea! I watched for the women mostly and the fact it was about the only science fiction around. The women stationed on the moon also wore a lot of make-up. Soom people speculated it was because of radiation. But the producer said it was just a matter of style. I guess they wanted them to look exotic and they came out looking like hookers. Not that I am complaining.

Even the original Star Trek made their women look hot with those short shirts and high top boots. I used to sweat a lot in high school when those short skirts were the fashion. The reach a point where they may as well just worn a belt and just forget the skirt.

That reminds me. I wonder if they are going to bring back that female yeomen who would lean over Captain Kirk and hand him some entry log to sign.
I bet William Shatner liked those scenes.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

MACBAKER

Friday, November 21, 2008 4:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
How did Universal "blow the advertising" on Serenity? I was seeing trailers 6-8 months before release, and saw literally dozens of commercials for it.

I know that when something fails, folks like to blame the marketing, but it seemed like they marketed the hell out of Serenity.

It was never going to get a super-mega marketing push like something as big as Trek, anyway.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

Yeah, I DO blame the marketing! They had the next "Star Wars" on their hands, and they failed because they targeted a audience that had already decided if they were going to see this movie or not. The trailer's were shown during episodes of SG-1, Battlestar, and other "fanboy" type shows. The trailer should have been broader, and focused at people that didn't already know about Firefly.

Like OPPYH said: "the trailers and tv spots were more confusing to non-fans than helpful."

It quickly became obvious that "The Suits" at Universal, didn't understand the movie, and didn't have a clue how to promote it. That, and the fact that they moved the premiere to the after summer, before holiday season void, killed any chances Serenity had.

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 21, 2008 4:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
The trailer should have been broader, and focused at people that didn't already know about Firefly.

Yep.

Just saw the Trek trailer- I'm in.

Treknogeekisall

SHINYGOODGUY

Monday, November 24, 2008 8:35 AM

Agreed. TV spots were confusing to the non-fan.
Still say that they should have had the cast do the press junkets on all the major talk shows, that certainly could have helped. They could have given folks the heads-up about the series FF.

________________________________________________
It quickly became obvious that "The Suits" at Universal, didn't understand the movie, and didn't have a clue how to promote it. That, and the fact that they moved the premiere to the after summer, before holiday season void, killed any chances Serenity had.
_________________________________________________

Things will go better for the BDS.

Shiny! Let's be bad guys!

CREVANREAVER

Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:30 PM

Behold Leonard Nimoy:

MACBAKER

Wednesday, November 26, 2008 8:00 PM

That shot of Leonard Nimoy is awesome!

Check out the new trailer, with shiny classic Spock goodness added: http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/25/new-version-of-star-trek-trailer-now-w
ith-two-spocks/

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

MACBAKER

Saturday, November 29, 2008 4:58 AM

New pics and info on the starship "Kelvin" and it's crew, are available at the Intel Starfleet Shipyard site.

Here's a review of the new stuff:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/11/28/intel-launches-new-star-trek-contest-s
ite/

And here's a direct link to the Intel site:
https://boldlygo.intel.com/content/index.html

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, November 29, 2008 3:57 PM

It's weird, and definitely refreshing, to see a Star Trek trailer that looks like a science fiction movie for once. I'm extremely happy that they're not bending over backwards to slavishly keep continuity with a 40 year old TV show, particularly in terms of the technology. I like the new design of the Enterprise, particularly the interiors--all very Apple computery and bright and optimistic--that's what TOS was all about and, at least in terms of design, they've captured that in these trailers as far as I'm concerned.

I just saw the latest James Bond movie and in a lot of ways this new Bond is for people who never really liked the old Bond, or at least people who have become utterly bored with the old formula--people like me. Sure, I liked--or should I say, comfortably submitted myself to--the old Bond preposterousness when I was 10, but the world has actually changed in 30 or 40 years and Bond and Star Trek need to mean different things now. So far, this Star Trek looks promising--and it's been way too long since I thought that about a Star Trek movie!

If they can get the primal relationships between Kirk/Spock/McCoy down, everything else will fall into place. Quinto and Urban seem to have the chops for it, but who knows about this noobie they got playing Kirk? Here's hoping he's not Hayden Christensen, part 2.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

MACBAKER

Monday, December 1, 2008 1:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
If they can get the primal relationships between Kirk/Spock/McCoy down, everything else will fall into place. Quinto and Urban seem to have the chops for it, but who knows about this noobie they got playing Kirk? Here's hoping he's not Hayden Christensen, part 2.

Chris Pine is hardly a noobie, he's just not been in anything you may have seen. Just from what little I've seen from the trailer and other roles he's played, I can say with confidence that he's no Hayden! He ain't Shatner either!, but then who else is?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1517976/

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Monday, December 1, 2008 2:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:

I just saw the latest James Bond movie and in a lot of ways this new Bond is for people who never really liked the old Bond, or at least people who have become utterly bored with the old formula--people like me. Sure, I liked--or should I say, comfortably submitted myself to--the old Bond preposterousness when I was 10

Whoah right there, buckaroo. A spy movie is inherently preposterous, unless you're going the Smiley's peeps route. Realism & Bond just don't mix, and when you try, you get stuff like Casino Royale where Bond feels the pain of his torture, yet has inconsistent superhuman qualities that allow him NOT to be killed on rooftops where real-life trained Navy Seals would be. Too much applied realism is antithetical to the concept.
On the other hand, not enough realism leads to junk like Moonraker or invisible cars.
IMO Bond is an adult comic book, and I like me my comics shaken, not stirred, thank you very much.

The formulaic Chrisisall

HKCAVALIER

Monday, December 1, 2008 4:19 PM

Jiminy, Chris, so you didn't like Casino Royale???

And thing is, the first half of Quantum of Solace was straight out of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy with M playing Smiley and Bond one of Smiley's knock-abouts. The ending was a sort of inverse Constant Gardener. The thing was as close to le Carré as Bond is likely to get. Did you not like that either? You don't think Daniel Craig is the best thing to happen to Bond since Moneypenny? What gives? And real life Navy SEALs survive all kinds of crazy shit--just not necessarily the same Navy SEAL surviving all the crazy shit, like incorrigible James here. For me, Bond is a dream of astonishing competence, extraordinary luck and grit. The less cartoonish, the better.

You didn't LIKE Casino Royale???

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

CHRISISALL

Monday, December 1, 2008 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
You don't think Daniel Craig is the best thing to happen to Bond since Moneypenny?

Get ready to shoot me politely, but I liked Lazenby better. Craig is a fine actor, but not MY idea of Bond- but I'm glad so many appreciate him where I cannot.

Quote:
For me, Bond is a dream of astonishing competence, extraordinary luck and grit.

You're just a closet authoritarian Empire-lackey, aren't ya?

Quote:
The less cartoonish, the better.

I agree.

Quote:

You didn't LIKE Casino Royale???

I tried, I'm still trying, after a few more, maybe I'll get with the program, but right now, I feel Bond absolutely peaked with Brosnan's first three outings. These new ones feel like the Bourne flicks, right down to the shaky-cam.
Sorry old boy.

The Remington-Steeley Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Monday, December 1, 2008 4:52 PM

Double double toil & troubled
Got impatient & my post doubled

MACBAKER

Monday, December 1, 2008 11:34 PM

I'm not a big fan of Craig's Bond movies either. Seems like the producer's are trying to copy the Bourne Movies too much. Yeah, I prefer my Bond far less tongue in cheek, and will never miss Roger Moore, but a short blonde Bond?

Lazenby wasn't really ready to play Bond when he got the role, but he might have grown into it, if given the chance.

I would have preferred to see either Clive Owen or Gerard Butler in the role after Brosnan. I've always been a Connery fan, so Butler would be my first choice, but Owen is closer to Fleming's description of Bond!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, December 2, 2008 12:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:

I would have preferred to see either Clive Owen or Gerard Butler in the role after Brosnan.

Mac, you read my mind.
*cries*

The double D'oh Chrisisall

JAYNEZTOWN

Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:22 PM

Sneak peek fuels Star Trek film fever

http://www.thestar.com/Entertainment/article/575153

CITIZEN

Sunday, January 25, 2009 1:48 PM

The new Enterprise is a pile of festering Targ crap. I've not heard a good word said about it.

Gabriel Koerner's is much supirior:
http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/3d-wips/24059-reimagined-enterprise
-further-progress.html

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, January 25, 2009 5:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
The new Enterprise is a pile of festering Targ crap. I've not heard a good word said about it.

Gabriel Koerner's is much supirior:
http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/3d-wips/24059-reimagined-enterprise
-further-progress.html

*Absolute agreement*

The Starfleet Chrisisall

JAYNEZTOWN

Saturday, January 4, 2025 12:15 AM

another one

Star Trek: Section 31 Trailer Previews Michelle Yeoh-Led Movie
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/star-trek-section-31-trailer-17183
5684.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, December 23, 2025 6:22 PM

Star Trek’s Most Beloved Show Being Erased From Streaming In 2026, You Can’t Watch It
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/star-trek-most-beloved
-show-170350057.html

Star Trek: Lower Decks - Another Trash Show Nobody Wanted

Star Trek Lower Decks is AWFUL | Episode 1 Review

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE