|
The following comments are owned by the user that posted them. BC Files is not responsible for their content.
Total comments: 71 | Last comment: 10-22-2008 at 16:38
Sylar as Spock is kinda weird to see.
The woman is short skirt is nice to see. Missed those uniforms in the sequel series.
Except in Trials and Tribbulations when we saw Dax in one of those.
The Actress portraying Notoya Uhura is very "appealing"
But when did Spock have "Anger Management" issues? And don't even get me started on that Bridge. The registry on that starship "U.S.S. Kelvin" font style looks like it came from the 2330-40's than the 2260's. This is a definite reboot of the TOS era to conform with TNG and I dare say ENT as well..
Is anyone else getting the feeling that it's gonna turn out like that little skit in the 200th episode of Stargate SG-1 where they replace the cast with "younger, edgier versions"?
Plus, that bridge is hidious.
I quite like it so far, though, the bridge does look like the bridges out of Stargate...
also, the USS Kelvin looks so much better if you turn it upside down, although, you then have inverted registries. The cast however look perfectly fine for the most part, especially Spock and McCoy, they look like theyve gotten into the characters very well
What, strangling Kirk? 
Also, BR, what ship is the Kelvin a rip off of?
* Moderator's Note: http://bridgecommander.filefront.com/file/Reptile_Fca_High_res;24638 -BR32
Is anyone else getting a feeling that this will be the WORST Trek Movie ever (maybe except ST5)?
i was looing forward to this, but the pics have let me down a little. perhaps the cast is a little to young. they def. look out of place on that poxy attempt of a bridge. however after seeing jja's other work i am still holding out hope that he will have remained loyal to us fans and give us something to be proud of.
Yes BR you're right. The chic playing Uhura is very cute...
So that's one thing Im not disappointed with.
What I AM suprised with is how EVERYONE looks like they're about my age! A bunch of 20-somethings running a starship?!
*TNG computer voice* WARNING: Raging-hormone sequences inevitable.
But on a positive note, I must say I'm very happy with what I see.
The bridge is NOT ugly. It does a good job of looking more modern than both its TOS counterpart and ENT predecessor, while remaining humble to the now antiquated TNG styling.
The crew doesn't seem as 'elite' and 'hard-nose', as ANY of their predecessors, and therefore come across as more... 'down-to-earth' and cool-headed (with the exception of Spock in screenshot 5 of course).
If the Starship Kelvin comes across as anything like we have here at the site, then you better believe that 'the powers that be in Star Trek' frequent this website... We should find that rather flattering... imo.
What I see is that we're uncomfortable with change. After being stuck in our TNG-rut for upwards of 30 YEARS, it's easy to feel that whatever's next for Star Trek will never come to par with what we're used to. We as fans, I would say, failed to back up ENT... and that's why we lost it... the ONLY Star Trek series to fail.
Remember, TOS and TNG were not instant hits, NO Star Trek ever was! We just need to allow Star Trek to evolve how it sees fit, and give it our support.... Why?
Because I feel that a lot more than just a few bucks are on the line with this Star Trek movie. Don't we want to see Enterprise-J fly across our television screens one day? The implication is. if we show them that Star Trek still has the full backing of its fans, then maybe... they will fund furthur projects past this movie. Fans of Trek CREATE more fans of Trek! When the movie comes out, invite your non-Trekkie friends to come see it with you! Star trek always grows on anyone that takes the time to sit and watch it! it worked with us, it will work again. I proselytize new Trekkies ALL the time, just by having some friends sit and watch the movies with me. After that they are curious about what's in the episodes, and they all ALWAYS ask me the same question at the end, "When's the next movie or series coming out?" People today have no problem enjoying Star Trek, they don't really know it so they have no extreme and biased-expectations of it like we, the Fans, do. But if they see Trekkies complaining about Trek, they're not going to even consider watchign the movie! Let's enjoy this one, and give positive feedback to the movie's creators!
Just like complainers stifle the growth of mods here on BCfiles, too much complaining will stifle the growth of Star Trek. Lets support the creators and especially the new crew!
The Bridge, the bridge.... oh man. to me it looks like they first wantet to do a Enterprise-F bridge and then said: "Ah, no lets do a Pre-TOS movie" 
Why is this a news item as opposed to be a thread in the forum?
* Moderators Note: Because We on The Staff can POST ANY news item related to the Genre that we wish. Since I'm taking your Off topic post as an attempt to Troll? Consider this Your One and ONLY WARNING. - BR32
What you have here is an example of how a studio mind works. Take the latest wiz-kid,(Abrams), and through big-picture money at anything he wants to do, which is why we have a pre TOS prequel. But everybody has to put their "vision" of a thing to the fore, and canon is out the window.
A real challenge would be to do a preTOS movie and have it fit perfectly into the design flow. Look at artwork of Trek ships in some of the books like Ships of the Line. Those are canon, but we get to see how they "really" must have looked.
This is not that. This looks like Dr. Who before the budget increase.
The bridge looks tacky as hell to me. I mean, look at the console that the chick in red is standing at... Are those SUPERMARKET BARCODE SCANNERS? They sure as sheet look like them!
Other than that, I'm reasonably satisfied.
Are they not on the enterprise then? or have they created a new ship called enterprise??
limey98 you took the words right out of my mouth...
I hope someone mods that ship there..
how come no one has said anythink about the 1st picture, is this a bad guy or has some one put a pic up from lord of the ring on.
And no offense to anyone, looking at the bridge, I hope this isn't a aweful movie.
I think it looks great, and i cant see anything wrong with what they have done, and i have to agree with MJAY on the rest.
Gonna have to join the ranks of people who hate the bridge. That thing is terrible! It just doesn't look like a Star Trek bridge AT ALL. Thank you, Paramount and Abrams for befouling the Star Trek name.
As far as Spock's anger management issues, we all know he was not a robot and always on guard of letting his emotions out from the very beginning (the smile on Talos IV). Even though there were outside influences that were in play (spores, gods, pon'far, etc,) they did not create the emotions Spock experienced, only pop the cork on them. A good collage can be found on You Tube (search "Star Trek-Spock Has No Emotions" and you'll see Spock whoopin' up on Kirk a couple of times.
As far as the movie, they're reaching a new generation so it has to be, different. Yeah, the picture of the bridge appears to be a little too Buck Rogers for me. But, I'll still go watch it when it comes out and like it for what it is...different. (How can it not be?) But, I'll know deep down, Shat, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan, Nichols, Takei, and Koenig with Roddenberry at the helm  will always be the heart and soul Star Trek for me. But that won't get in the way of wanting to enjoy another take on it
I don't think we can really tell anything from these photos without taking things horribly out of context. I've actually heard non Trekkie friends saying "Hey, Star Trek looks kind of cool." A girl I know who has never seen the franchise showed me the pictures in Entertainment Weekly and said she'd be interested in seeing it with me.
I've even heard some Trekkies who have been opposed to the movie so far say "that isn't so bad" and not being so worried about the film.
I think the movie is going to be great, make a lot of money, and make Trek a little nicer to TV execs. Think how amazing it would be to have a proper Trek show on CBS instead of getting relegated to the now defunct UPN network. Exciting prospects indeed.
And apologies if I offended you, Blackrook32. I never meant for that to be hostile in any way.
You guys have to understand that JJ isn't going for the standard Trek feel. The shows and movies we watch are all based on a 1960's future. Even Tng, because it was just logical next step for the TOS universe. JJ is making a 2008 23rd century, where the technology isn't like we've seen before.
I can't wait to see this movie, and I'm not going to go into the theater thinking it's going to be really bad, or really good. I'm going into it with an open mind, and maybe it'll spark a new generation of Trek fans. Only time will tell...
The parts of the bridge shown bear absolutely no similarity/familiarity to that of the real TOS. Is it me or does it look just a bit too shiny for any Federation bridge? And what's with all the lights?! Sure it needed to be brought up to date for the movie but this looks more like a variation of an Excelsior bridge! Got to admit though that I'm liking the updates to the uniform and also the exterior styling of the ships. Maybe they're toying with us and this isn't the actual bridge - maybe a training facility, might explain why Kirk isn't in captains uniform plus we know part of the movie take place at the academy...I think I'm grasping at straws.
You might be
According to the MTV article that scene takes place after one of the big fight scenes on that ice planet. Note how Kirk and Sulu are someone bruised and beat up.
That's your bridge, ladies and gents. I must admit I was a slight bit disappointed at the brightness of it but in the long run it's not going to kill me.
Although I agree that the ships and uniforms are amazing. The uniform's only major difference is that they seem to be breathable fabrics now and Uhura's skirt is longer. The Calvin shot looks great, and shows a nice TOS style with a visual update. The shape of the ship is spot on TOS with wonderful new visual styles.
I like the touch with the weapons, has a nice crossover of showing what torpedo (or phaser) turrets might look like as a cross between Enterprise and TMP when they got armored coverings on them.
I think JJ is being very true to ship design, just the bridge that really changed. And that's not too bad, is it?
Oh my god! They have released 7 pictures! I know everything about this movie and it is going to be horrible! I don't even need to watch it, I know it will be awful!
...seriously, give it a shot. Judging a movie based on 7 frames is pretty silly.
Exactly! Just like how some of our mods may not look so grand in screenshots but look great ingame. You have to see it for yourself before you can truly judge it .
also, as for the people saying the cast look young, in there early 20s are whatever, renember, they are only just graduating fromt he Acadamy, so really, there at the right age
yes but, the ds9 episode about the red squad and the valiant comes to mind. they're kids running a starship...i'm not making any judgments till i see it of course...buuut they do look a little young. it's unlikely a new graduate would be assigned to the same ship as his fellow classmates anyway...i'm wondering if they're coming straight out of the academy into the same assignment as a group? what i do know is, i like the other movies jja has put out, i too, hope he stays true to the vision with keeping it modern but canon. another point is...there's too many stories to tell with star trek to be writing failures. keep in mind even if this movie does suck...we don't want this to be the end of the franchise..i will support the film
Hey hey, I'd recognise that evil look anywhere - you gotta love it combined with the pointy ears
I don't mind too much how "cannon" the movie is anyway - as long as it's good, it doesn't matter to me. I really hope they eventually continue onwards into the future after Nemesis though, it was just starting to get bloody interesting! (Although to ruin that would really suck.)
I am a bit saddened when it comes to the re-imagined Star Trek. THe cast does look a little too young, kind of like the "kids" on the USS Valiant. However, I don't have many ill feelings about the bridge. I know that we are all used to canon Trek bridges (we all play Bridge Commander) but this movie was made to hopefully grab more Trek fans. I can see why they had to "spice it up". Besides, I've heard that Abrams was more of an SW fan than an ST fan. As long as he doesn't get anyone to shoot electricity out of their hands or have telekinetic powers, I'm happy.
And yes, having Sylar as Spock is still feels a little different. I'm still seeing him as the head-capper and picture 5 only reinforces it. Still, I'm looking forward to watching this movie. If the guy in the first picture is Eric Bana, aka. Nero, then he would definitely make for one heck of an antagonist.
The movie is gonna be a 50/50 for me. Either it will be bad, and Star Trek will
officially be over, or it might be bad, but still spark a much long awaited new
series. Enterprise was new in 2005 guys, its almost been 5 years since there was
a new series. I'm only going to support the movie based on that.
These are the things I gathered from the pictures:
1. The bridge looks way too "high tech" compared to the TOS bridge. I know budget
was a huge concern in the original series, but still, it looks too fresh and white for it
to even evolve into the TOS bridge as we know it.
2. Anyone else but me think the guy who plays Kirk looks like he's a serial killer or
something? Just the way his eye's and mouth looks, bleh.
3. Spock looks way too young. If they are going to put Enterprise into the continuity
(Which I'm sure they are going to), they should look at that episode where T'Pol
was in the 1950's on earth. She looked pretty much the same in the 20th century
as she did in the 22nd. Clearly Vulcans age much more slowly then humans do.
I don't know, I'm not sure I'll even go to the theaters to see it. Probably wait for a
DVD release or something. Reviews will be meaningless to me. I just hope this
movie, as Major Stress put it, be the final nail on the coffin that is this franchise.
what would be a welcome surprise would be that these pics were just fabricated by Paramount to spark speculation and to cause general turmoil. however closer to release they start to let out what things will really look like.... but that is something i would do because i sometimes like to stir up the hornet's nest, just because it gets people more energetic about it... be that for better or worse.
So, is that Romulan in the first pic another Shinzon rip-off? I Mean really, it looks like a Romulan version of Shinzon.
Hmm
If the USS Kevin is any indication of how the Enterprise is going to look (rough, plated hull armor, spartan...), then it's kind of disorienting to look at the Bridge being all white and bright and shiney. Not a lot of design consistency there.
The cast does seem a -bit- young. Kirk I don't mind as much, as he was supposed to have been the youngest captain in Starfleet history (iirc). However, something tells me the movie won't play with that fact and everyone will just overlook that a guy 2 years older than half of them is their captain, which will be somewhat disappointing.
Also, they ether spent too much or not enough budget on those uniforms. They're not bad at first glance but staring at the pattern makes me dizzy =P
I think the U.S.S. Kelvin only got in the movie because of that class's original use in Armada (I could be wrong about that, but that's where I first saw it's use), which is now spread out to just about every modifiable trek game...and then some...
But it's not the first time a fan inspired design made it into the shows/films.
I personally never liked that class, anyway...I can't say much about the bridge given that the technology looks a lot more advanced then the series. I think the cast selected wasn't exactly good choices...
Overall, I'll reserve judgment for when I actually see the movie...because it could very well be an excellent end to the official trek industry.
But for the record...I'm so far not very impressed with what I see.
Is that Simon Pegg as Scotty?!?! hahaha!
@ BLasToFF: T'Pol wasn't even born when that episode took place. It was her grandmother that was on Earth during the 50's.
@ everyone that hates the new bridge design:
What were you expecting?! This new design looks great AND functional AND futuristic! Yes, we've all gotten used to the technicolor acid-trip nightmare bridge from the 60's, but that could never work now! Would you really pay $10 to go see a movie that could've been filmed in some dude's garage? Even the early seasons of TNG look horribly outdated compared to what we SHOULD expect now.
The fact of the matter is that Star Trek became so full of technobabble (VOY), diplomacy (TNG), and politics (DS9) that we've become entrapped in it. We're so used to those topics that it seems everyone forgot the old cowboy days of Kirk and pals. And let's remember Roddenberry's pitch for TOS: A western in outer space.
This movie has a very good chance of being superb, it stands a greater chance of bringing Trek back from the dead, and we should all stop complaining about how much it isn't like the original TOS. If it was anything like the show, I'd never give it a chance. Not because the show was bad, but because it's not good enough for this day and age.
* Moderator's Note: ** EDITED ** - You are edging towards a flame, Tone it Down. People are entitled to their Opinions. You might want to take into account. without TOS, TMP and even TNG. You would not have a DS9, VOY or ENT spin-offs at all. I love the way the younger generation loves to de-value and trash anything that's over five years old. And that is sad. The People who are saying that Bridge design is Hideous? Have and are making Bridge sets in development. Can you say the same? -BR32
Why is everyone so against techno-babble? (nothing against JoshBlade, just
hearing it alot lately in random articles and comments, just starting to bug me now
that you bring it up) I personally love it. It adds a scientific value to star trek,
however "out there" some of the stuff might be. Star Trek has always been about
the putting existing theories into a futuristic fictionous scenario where they have
the technology, manpower, and resources to put theories into a workable
process. Atleast more then half of Star Trek's technology has been theories and
ideas that already are on the drawing board.
If you don't like Techno-babble, then go watch Star Wars or something. Not even to
degrade star wars at all cause I love both Star Wars as well, but Star Trek more
cause its what I grew up with. Star Trek IS "techno-babble". Don't like it? Go watch
something else. Its like complaining that the color of a horse is Brown. You just
can't change it, and you can't make it go away. So just deal with it.
And about T'Pol that was a bad example, my memory was F'ed up. But a different
example would definately have to be Spock. He was alive and well in the TNG era,
no thanks to timewarps, alternate realities, ect ect. It was all natural (sort of, i.e.
ST3 lol). So it wouldn't be too hard to imagine that in the span of 20 years, his
appearence would change that much. He was well into his adult years when he
entered Starfleet Command. And if that isn't a good enough example, looks aside,
look at Surak. He was Spock's father. I can only imagine that during a Vulcan's
"golden years", that a good 60 years as an adult, that his appearence wouldn't
change that much. Thats atleast my impression.
Sorry if this is offending anyone, I just feel I have to defend legacy Star Trek is
defined by. Its just outrageous that the new generation is starting to re-define what
has already been established a thousand times over.
I would just like to say, please give the movie a chance, wait untilll youve seen it. i find it vaguely annoying that people seem to deside stuff int going to be good before it even released.
The sames going on at the Halo Wars forum, people are saying its going to be rubbish and not have the halo feel, yet, they havent played it
like i said, give the movie a chance, you never know, yoou might acturally like it *Shock*
The chick playing Uhura can stay, the rest has got to go!
So, Paramount think that Trek needs a re-boot, just because it worked for BSG? There is a marked difference between BSG and Trek...
Problem is, if they are re-booting Trek from the beginning, will this not mean that TNG, DS9 et all won't have happened? 500+ hours of TV and 10 films will suddenly become meaningless, and trash... is it only me who finds that idea annoying?
The look of the film "feels wrong" - sorry, that's my opinion, and I'm allowed to have it! Maybe the movie will be ok, and be respectful and all that, and there again, maybe it won't. The pics don't inspire any confidence in me that this movie is going to be respectful to the last 40+ years of Trek.
Paramount would have been better looking forward, rather than looking back into Trek's past again - or leaving it alone, and developing something new.
Yep, I know a lot of younger people are saying that Trek needs to be "re-imaged" and "given a new look" to bring it up to date. Why? Isn't the Trek universe big enough that something new could have been invented that would look "modern" and "edgy" and yet still have appeal to the older generation of Trek fans who - frankly, kept the show alive before it became the billion dollar monster it became? Do Kirk, Spock & Co really need to be reinvented for a younger generation?
Is this how it's going to be? Trek re-imaged every 10-15 years so a new generation can "access" it?
To me that devalues the work of those who made the show originally. It trashes the effort and time they spent on the creation and development of it. And it's lazy... instead of doing something new and original, they will keep doing this. Fast buck indeed.
I have mixed feelings!
There a few instances on the art-direction that don't give me the ST vibe. The Bridge looks like something that was popular in the late70'.
Hope it's not to bad!
I never had a problem with original BSG. In fact it had a kind of "trek feeling", too. Something the reimagined (sp?) BSG completely lost. I realy hope ST11 will happen the same. I think the new Cast is Ok, altho Spock now is younger than he was 10 years before on Talos IV. As long as the movie has the trek feeling that's OK. Even the Bridge, wich looks much more like a 4th or 5th refitt, not the first or second.
All thease complaints about the bridge are totally unjustified. The TOS bridge is awful, it was designed to look futuristic in the 60s. We now have plastic consols with little plain bar indicators and square screens with little LCD lights on the top. If they made a bridge like that for the film it would just be plain old-fasioned, in fact, you wouldnt think its a sci-fi from first look. This bridge is the 2008 future, it needs glass and blue lights and the sort in order to sell.
You can say it spoils the Star Trek feel, there is no Star Trek feel, its a buisness and if thats what makes money then thats what happens. As for the younger cast, its a younger audience they want. I know if I saw a film with a load of 40-year-old actors and actresses It wouldnt really appeal to me at all.
TBH, the TOS series was pretty crap anyway. I mean they did fantasticly well for the budget and technology that they had but face it, if the film was even remotely similar to the series then it would be plain rubbish by today's standards. Star Trek is ok, mabye even good, but it has to move on just like everything does. You cant make a good film nowadays whilst basing it on something from the 60s. I personally an eagerly awaiting this film and I am sure it will bring a new light to Star Trek and mabye even inspire a new series full of glass, blue lights, and young and angry actors. That spok picture is soo cool, makes me want to see the film even more
Even if it will be a good film: I'm not going to accept this as canon.
And Abrams said that he would respect canon. 
Let's hope that at least he'll respect Gene Roddenberry's vision.
I know a lot of people don't like Enterprise or consider it cannon, but I think they would have been much better off if they had tried to make an evolution between the NX-01 bridge and the 1701 bridge. They could have made it so much better. I agree with the guy above that it looks like they built the set for the Enterprise F and realized they were making a Pre-TOS movie.
Other than that it looks pretty good and I'm looking forward to it.
I find it very strange for some people to like Trek and hate TOS? That's like saying "I like lemonade, but hate lemons" lol. Must be some generational thing? If it's over five years old. It should be tossed aside and reinvented. Now we have people saying TNG, DS9 and VOY is becoming dated?
The Bridge aesthetics of TOS can hold up because in Trek fiction TOS is post 21st century Holocaust (The Atomic Horror). So any tech relevant now, would have to had be "Rediscovered" is that such an impossible ideal to wrap your minds around? Trek has 40 years of history/canon, and that should not be tossed out like yesterday's garbage.
I know some of you guys are in your teens and early twenties. Some of us are not, lol. There will come a time when the things that is cool and cherished by you now. Will hold fond memories. Will be judged trash and outdated by others 10 to 15 years from now. I will guarantee you, your perspective will be different. Just because something is dated doesn't mean it is useless or has no value.
I Like TOS and everything about it. Indie Trek films show that aesthetics hold up even with updated quality CGI. And Anything can be made in some dude's garage (If he has the cash for it). Hollywood Studio productions doesn't equate to quality. I've seen better stuff created by Inde Trek film makers like Star Trek: New Voyages, Star Trek: Lexington, Starship Exeter and Starship Farragut to name a few. I have promoted them here on BCFiles, and I make no apologies for that.
If You have a problem with canon Trek? Maybe you should try something a little slower and lighter. Something that doesn't challenge your mind intellectually. Like Star Wars...
Forgive me if im wrong BR32, but the registry of the Kelvin says NCC - 0514 does it not? Meaning that this ship does fit as being 23rd century, and older than the constitution class itself
Sorry if that has already been clarified, or if im mistaken
* Moderator's Note: I was talking about the ship "fonts" style, not numerical classification. - BR32
I will agree the cast does seem a bit young, but I'll reserve judgment until I see it.
I can see both sides of the argument concerning the look and feel of the film, (even though we have 7 pics to judge from) the bridge does look more advanced than the Enterprise D's so that's a bit puzzling. On the other hand, you cannot make a 2009 summer film and deliberately make it look *less* advanced than the set of a 60's sci-fi show. I don't consider that disrespecting 40 years of canon, that's keeping up with the times. I mean, iPhones and the like are pretty much TOS communicators.
@BR32: Zephram Cochrane made a warp ship defying all known laws of physics in the Post-Atomic Horror and the mission to Mars somehow happened in the middle of WWIII. Clearly they didn't need to "rediscover" anything (to say nothing of it taking them until the 23rd century to do it), they just needed to rebuild infrastructure. I completely agree with your statement that just because something is dated doesn't make it useless (STII being the ultimate proof of that!), but it does mean that you cannot pretend it's as fresh as it once was. TOS is horribly dated, a product of its time and a product of the need to increase viewers. C'mon, what 23rd century feminists would agree to Uhura's uniform, especially in a semi-military context?
Personally, I regard TOS as more of an allegory and the result of imperfect storytelling rather than something to be taken 100% literally in terms of trek history. But that's just the opinion of one young whipper-snapper.
As far as concerns about the direction of the movie, let us not forget the words of Captain Kirk: "Come, come, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant! "
* Moderator's Note: On the subject of the TOS Female Miniskirt / Uniforms (which I liked very much). They were "Unisex" though rarely seen past the First season. The only difference was the cowl which was exaggerated for the females. Though I never heard any female Trek fan or actress complain about the Miniskirts being sexist. As a matter of fact. Terry Farrell (DS9 Jadzia Dax) loved playing TOS dress up in the famed DS9 nod to TOS "Trials and Tribbel-lations"
Even in the first season of TNG both male and female wore unisex uniforms. Though I was a bit freaked out about the Males waring TNG Mini's. I just figured the dude was from Scotland, and left it at that, lol. -BR32
also it seems that the plot involves Romulans and time travel, so that might conveniently explain away any errors in canon that will result. it just happened in an alternate timeline.
The bridge shot does look a little unusual, but think back to The Cage. I mean those goosenecks, and the paper print outs, all the while having screens respond to waves of the hand, very bizzare. We've seen really bright bridges before, (STIV's ENTA bridge, even the Prometheus to a lesser extent, and if I remember correctly, the Dauntless from VOY. I know Dauntless isn't a "real" federation bridge, but still. It definitely makes me wonder some, but I know some of our older fans are concerned about the cherished TOS, but if they made a perfect replica of the Enterprise's bridge it'd probably look rediculous. The folks at Phase two, Exeter & Farragut have made them work out ok, but there is still a little bit of hokiness (sp) to them. Even in Trials & Tribblations & In a Mirror Darkly, the Connie's bridge looked odd. I'm a little nervous & skeptical after seeing these pics, but it's still fresh Trek, & I totally plan on seeing it. Growing up with the TNG eras, TOS looked cooky to me, but I still put that aside to see Phase 2 when it was still New Voyages, and loved it So we all should keep open minds, so that if it is totally awesome we won't have missed out, and if it totally blows, well there are worst things to waste twenty bucks and a couple hours on then Trek.
I'm really not trying to bash anyone here whether they hate the look of the bridge or love it (I personally think it looks great). But let's think of it this way. We're all Trek fans. Most of us have been with it since it's humble beginnings. We watched it grow and evolve and we kept coming back because it continued to grow and evolve. That's good and fine.
Now, the younger generation (like me) never got to see where it all began. Not much of us got to watch Kirk and crew boldly go where no man has gone before or maybe we were too young to understand any of it (I didn't understand ANY of the TOS movies cuz I was just too young). I just bought all those movies and I think they're great (especially Wrath of Kahn. Greatest....enemy....ever!!!) I wasn't around during TOS so I tried to watch them. I know it was great for its time, but I honestly couldn't stand to watch many episodes because its too outdated.
Star Trek can continue to grow and evolve, but that kinda leaves people like me in the dust. We'll never know Kirk, we'll never know Kahn, we'll never know why McCoy has so much beef with Spock (lol), and not many of us will take the time to watch those classic episodes. It isn't fair to make us watch something so old and take it seriously. This movie has to be done. The next generation of Trek fans need to love the characters you guys do or we'll never get it. And it'll help this fantastic franchise reach the broader audience it needs. How many of you out there know a lot of people that like or know Star Trek? How many do you think will like it and know it after this film is released? Don't you wanna have something to talk about? Don't you wanna be able to answer questions that new fans will have and become somewhat of a teacher?
I'm babbling now. Comment over! lmao
@JoshBlade,
I guess I can see your point. I love the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica (not afraid
to admit ). I never got to see the original series, except for a few episodes on
sci-fi, even then they were way too cheesey and almost laughable. I have the
mini-series, and season 1 (in the original red package), season two and three,
along with Razor bought on DVD. Plan to buy it up until its completion (and
Caprica, if and when it comes out, as well as The Plan).
I suppose fans had the same reaction when the new series started, and probably
alot are still mad at it. And same is obviously true for the new Star Trek movie. I
don't know why they couldn't be totally original and make a new plot from scratch.
Same thing is happening to every single comic book/video game to movie right
now. I was weirded out when Spider-man had "glands" instead of web shooters,
and Venom (eddie brock) was some sort of anorexic model instead of the body
builder version from the comics. Not to even imagine the Resident Evil movies.
The second one gets props for having a cool looking Nemesis, but thats about it.
I dunno, from my new perspective, it might either just be a good thing, or bad thing.
If it sparks new life into the franchise, it could be a very good thing. If it gets horrible
box office results and people hate it, it could be the end of the franchise as we
know it (except for random airings of the movies and series on random channels).
never seen such a reaction before , im taking it kirks just been promoted to captain? perhaps earlier then intended because of a crisis, could indicate why such a young crew are together on a starship. is the bridge we're seeing, the bridge of the ship pictured? would make sense JJ is hiding the enterprise till last, who knows it might be a fantastic achievement of keeping the old style bridge but using today's tech and cash. if 7 pictures have managed to get everyone talking again, then i feel the movie is doing its job. just think about when the next trailer comes out then eventually the film itself.
Why are all you's so suprised that it's not got the classic trek feel to it??? It's re-imagined, duh!!
And i dunno why you're all going on about the bridge looking too futuristic. The bridge of the NX 01 looked too futuristic when compared to the TOS bridge.
Besides, the current, classic, trek francise is pretty much dead. So you can't say that re-doing it with a different twist will mean all the old trek will be thrown outta the window.
Your expecting it to lead into TOS in 20 years time. Well it wont!!! The Enterprise won't look the same and neither will the bridge.
Now I love ST!! And i'm not gonna say that this looks crap or brilliant but jeez give it a chance.
IMO, this should lead on from Enterprise. TOS,TMP,TNG should be considered old trek. And when I say old, I don't mean crap!!!
But seriously, old trek is now becoming un realistic. The amount of stuff we have now that's already better. Look at the Starfleet pads in Voy. An Iphone looks more futuristic and impressive. The Doctors Holocam, the digital cameras in the shops look more advanced. And don't get me started on their laptops. Compare that to a Mac Book Air.
TBH, if you go to watch this film and expect it to be ST canon then quite frankly I doubt you'd enjoy it.
Just think of it as a different timeline. Remember the NX-01 had all Daniels stuff from the 31st century in one of it's quarters???
Basically all i'm saying is to watch it and then judge it. And TBH, if someone showed me these shots next to TOS then i'd pick these anyday.
* Moderator's Note: Unrealistic TOS? Do you realise the real tech was inspired by that series. I hope you like your cell phone/Iphone and PC/laptop. Portable communications, and multitasking hand held devices? Trek inspired. No one is saying a TOS tricorder looks better. But to discard one genre just because you don't get it? Is like throwing out the baby with the bath water. The TOS show was inspirational... that is my point.
Different timeline? I think you just proved My point. entirely -BR32
Btw, i dunno why people are saying that it might not be the bridge of the enterprise. It's got 1701 written on the consoles.
The rear pannel says 1701 cnc or something like it not ncc, this might be some sort of alternate reality/timeline enterprise maybe something like the mirror universe. I plan to watch it and judge it then and not before because pictures and trailers are deceiving. at times.
I think it says SCNC. But the Kelvin has NCC so unless they cross over?
Wow, people need to stay current more lol.
@5 Not even close to the Kelvin that has two nacelles not one.
@13 That most definitely is the first 1701 connie Enterprise.
@16 Its been a fact that thats Nero for about what...more than eight months now?
@25 13 new pics actually
@30 Yes that is Nero.
@33 More like a rouge Romulan.
@35 This Kelvin and the Kelvin made for Armada are definitely not the same ships.
@41 "So, Paramount think that Trek needs a re-boot, just because it worked for BSG? There is a marked difference between BSG and Trek..."
If you had read the article for the leaked plot then you would know that is definitely not the reason.
"Problem is, if they are re-booting Trek from the beginning, will this not mean that TNG, DS9 et all won't have happened? 500+ hours of TV and 10 films will suddenly become meaningless, and trash... is it only me who finds that idea annoying?"
Starts in the 24th century with Nero, he goes back in time to erase Kirk from history(you will just have to wait for the reason).
"Is this how it's going to be? Trek re-imaged every 10-15 years so a new generation can "access" it?"
Nope, not at all.
@45 He DID respect canon for this movie.
@49 "I will agree the cast does seem a bit young, but I'll reserve judgment until I see it."
Thats because they just graduated from the academy.
@54 Again its 13 pictures.
@55 "It's re-imagined, duh!!" A reboot actually according to Abrams and Co.
@57 There is no alternate universe in this movie.
* Moderator's Note: "The Staff" you referring to is Me. The reboot working for BSG? Your kidding right? BSG has nice ships and CGI effects. The rest is a soap opera. Who is pregnant with who's baby? Who is sleeping with who? Who's a Cylon? Who's a Traitor? Who's the Betrayer? Really original stuff there. You can find that on any daytime soap.
As for the other ST:XI pics, Eleven actual photo shots of the flick. The rest were wallpaper that you can find on the official site. Showing a group photo of the crew is more appropriate. Unless you just wanted to ogle single head shots of dudes like Kirk, Scotty, Sulu, Nero and McCoy? The pics were unflattering and were not added here. But If your stressing so much? Goggle them in Entertainment Weekly. -BR32
CNC means Command and Control or something close to that, its essentially the ships command centre, also known as: The Bridge
The Kelvin is from a period of time 20 years before the new Enterprise. I'm guessing the ship will reflect the new bright bridge.
What I am confused about is why, if they are going for a reboot.. and changing the bridge to look more up to date and all that, then why did they bother sticking to the old uniforms? They are every bit as tacky looking by todays standards as the old 1701 bridge is. Why not re-invent them as well? Just a thought. 
As for me, I'm skeptical.. but we be in line to see it on the first night, without question!
I never said the Kelvin Class, I just said "that class's original use in Armada" Its not like the U.S.S. Enterprise was Enterprise Class.
The ship I'm taking about use to be on Armada2files.com a few years ago, don't know if its still there. When I remember the class name...I'll post it.
On a separate note, I found a similar design to that ship here on bcfiles -
http://bridgecommander.filefront.com/file/Renegade;21927
* Moderator's Note: Double post Combined. -BR32
"I never said the Kelvin Class, I just said "that class's original use in Armada" Its not like the U.S.S. Enterprise was Enterprise Class."
That ship is just pretty much the Apollo class with one nacelle and the other replaced by a deflector. The Apollo itself was a fan based model from the 70's old paper games inspired by the original Technical manual. It has appeared in the Armada games, SFA games, and Legacy.
I'm sorry, but they did not rip off some modder's files. The Kelvin is straight from the pages of a book written by Mike Okuda nearly 35 years ago. The over/under nacelle design appeared several times in the TMP movies on the STII Enterprise and STIII Excelsior/Enterprise bridge displays.
I think that by bringing back an original design (one that was considered for the Reliant, by the way) is pretty nice. Remember that Mike Okuda (the technical advisor for 35 years now) was on the team for this movie as he has been a part of every Trek movie and series during his tenure with Star Trek. The ship's view respects "canon" more than what most of us were thinking, which was a complete TMP feel.
The "Apollo" was called the "Landry Class Frigate" in the old FASA roleplaying games from the 80's. They drew their designs from "canon" displays seen in the original technical manual and onscreen in ST1, 2 and 3.
FASA refuses to believe anything from TNG, DS9, VOY, or ENT as canon and regards Gene a villain for retconning their "history" that they created before TNG. To this day FASA has borrowed from mainstream Trek but does not follow in it's wake.
There are no internet images of the Landry, sadly, as the book it was found in is quite rare. I saw one at a church rummage sale last year but I really didn't want to spend the two bucks on it.
The book it was seen in: FASA Federation Starship Recognition Manual
The Apollo from the Armada games and Legacy, as well as the Proxima and a few other starships were borrowed from the FASA book by someone at Mad Doc who was obviously a fan. My mistake, it was not in SFA.
Sorry, had to correct myself.
* Moderator's Note: Double posts Combined. -BR32
...after I've read all these comments...
If Abrams cannot save Trek, no one can. Not even the good Lord.
Why?
Because it's fans will doom it, and NO franchise can survive without fan support.
I've read a lot of you resign yourself to a perspective of "toleration of inevitable failure", when it comes to this movie.
I do not understand how some can feel that this movie will be a 'disrespect to established Star Trek canon', when I see TOS-style uniforms being used in the stills! From my perspective, that ALONE (the use of TOS-style uniforms) is sign of deep--albeit sentimental--respect for the cosmetic canon.
But the point is... Trek cannot afford to do it, as we KNOW it anymore! I one of the millions that have deep respect and a genuine fondness of the original Constituion-class Enterprise (as well as its re-fit), but I grew up with the Galaxy-class Enterprise, and I can't say that if TOS was still running in the 80's and 90's, that it would have fascinated and inspired me as much as TNG did. As a child, I thought of TOS as merely entertaining history in the Star Trek canon. It wasn't until I started asking questions about TNG that I learned that TOS/TMP carried some of those answers (like 'if my ship is the "Enterprise-D", why isn't Kirk's called the "Enterprise-A"?, thats when my father said,'ok, ur ready to see the Kirk movies.').
Then there's the difference with Klingons between TOS and TNG, which ENT helped to explain later (klingon super-soldier project, where looking human was a genetic 'side-effect' that would take generations to disappear)!
So my second point is, that we give Star Trek time to explain itself! Lets not be so hard bound to canon that we tie the hands and imaginations of Trek's talented writers! Inevitably, some things will change with Trek! The producers and "suits" would rather NOT make Trek (thus saving money), then make Trek AND make you unhappy with it (thus losing money)!
Folks my age are getting married and having their children. I myself am planning a family sometime in the next five years, and I'm certain that by today's special effects standards, that my child probably wouldn't (not saying "can't) be as engaged watching TNG, as I was. Same as how I wasn't too entertained by TOS as a child. So I am supporting this movie, in the hope, that it's success could lead to a 'Star Trek: The Third Generation', or something of the like. I've always considered Star Trek to be engaging and wholesome entertainment... one of the FEW good things to watch on TV that wouldn't rub sex and explicit violence in the face of your family, while STILL being able to tell a good story.
This is our chance to resurrect the franchise.... please my fellow Trekkies... let's not blow it with our pessimism...
* Moderator's Note: Double post Combined. -BR32
@Barihawk, I hate to burst your bubble, but I happen to have that book you talk about,
(I collect various manuals and reference books all the time whenever I see them), I
just flipped through it, looking through the index section, and I see no ship bearing
resemblance to the Kelvin, or anything called Landry Class Frigate.
The only one that comes close is the Larson class, but it has the nacell on top.
There's another, Wlkerson class that has dual nacell's top and bottom, but no
deflector dish. Perhaps you are thinking of a different reference manual.
Larson, that's the name. Maybe I was in a Stargate mood or something.
But regardless, it proves to show that the design was out there many years ago.
That is awesome that you own it. Like I said, I just flipped through it a while back at a rummage sale.
You ever go to half price book stores? They always have some random star trek
related reference manual. Thats where I found my copy of Omnipedia. That book
has an awesome cover. As for the picture, I found a torrent with a collection
of alot of reference manuals awhile back (don't look at me like that, I just
downloaded the electronic version of the same book I have, and I don't have a
scanner), just realized it had the FASA book in there, along with quite a few
others. I copied a picture of the Larson's Schematics:
http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj225/bas_hyper/larson01.jpg
The big difference, obviously, is that the nacell is dorsal, and no ventral
deflector dish. Perhaps whoever made that other ship, had a creative vision or
some other such. In any case, thats the closest to bearing some visual comparison
to the Kelvin.
* Moderator's Note: Folks can you PLEASE proof read your comments? Before hitting the "Add this Comment now" button? The double post here are starting to get very annoying. -BR32
The only book stores here are Barnes and Noble
I must have had the wrong book, then. What I am describing looks exactly like the Apollo Class from Legacy and Armada. One of the guys on my Legacy team used to be a big FASA guy before he got married and recognized some ships inspired by those designs. Sadly he doesn't have the manual either, anymore.
But regardless, the over/under configuration is hardly a modern concept. Somewhere in one of the original Okudabooks from like 1989 or so they have tons of ship concepts which include the Daedalus. It's history has been totally retconned even by TNG, but I remember seeing it in my local library like 10 years ago.
Bet I cud make the sickess star trek reinvison fiim,
it wud be abit later on in life, and some space between the last flopped try,
I wud make it as a movie version of the best of both worlds,
just outta the blue,
not watsing the first half hour getting 2 knw the charaters ,
just boom,
here we are, day in the life of picard and crew except this happens 2 be one of the most crazy periodz in the ships history,
just think, if done propely just picards assimulation wud be enuff 2 sell the film gud relationships between data, picard & crew where seen in that episode great 4 new comers,
i knw wat ure sayin, dun be4 wid first contact,
but
A) me directing wud add a totaly new scope on the star trek uni in terms of visuley i guarantee u 100% now questions asked
B) propley the greatest TNG episode ov all time (fanz will go crazy)
C) I will be casting ohh so carefully (but u cant replace stewarts voice thoe DUB it!)
D) like u've neva seen her be4 (the ship iz large on tha outside ,why not the in?)
I dont knw wat 2 make ov dis new trek film,
so im bout make my judgement when i see it
I guarantee you, you wont be saving Trek with that grammar .
So basically, you want to make a movie out of an episode?
When posting comments, you must follow these rules:- No "Yay I got First Post!" posts, no exceptions and no matter what other content the post has!
- No Pornographic Material. Any sexually oriented imagery or links to such content will not be tolerated.
- No Warez or Illegal Software. This includes linking to software, posting about it, and suggesting to get it.
- No Cursing or Swear words. We encourage you to use our comment sections as a forum to debate files, news, etc., but please use proper adjectives to express yourself. We will not tolerate abuse upon another member or author.
- No Attacks / Retaliation of any kind against a member, or group of members.
- Please do not advertise for other sites or forums here.
- Maximum of 3 smileys per regular member.
The high interactivity of this site should be considered a luxury, not a right. If you cannot follow these simple rules, you can and will be warned or banned from the comments, site or the entire network for any period of time.
Now enjoy yourself and behave!
|
10-24-2008 @ 06:03 - E3 will grow bigger in '09
10-18-2008 @ 14:14 - Current POTD overflow
