Support NeoGAF

[Justin Bailey]

I don't like this Kirk so far. He just seems a bit too typical Rebel Without a Cause. This story sounds like a dozen rehashed B-movie sci fi films for the last decade.

Kirk doesn't have to be a cocky douchebag that everyone hates, then learns to love. He's supposed to be a normal guy with cocky tendencies. This Kirk sounds like a parody.

Well tbh, those types of people are usually cocky douchebags when they're young and they mellow out later on in life. So this could be a pretty good envisioning of what Kirk would be like as a young man.

 

[Lebron]

As someone who never cared about Star Trek, this sounds pretty kick ass to me.

yup, same for me.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Well tbh, those types of people are usually cocky douchebags when they're young and they mellow out later on in life. So this could be a pretty good envisioning of what Kirk would be like as a young man.

Even as someone who is generally getting bad vibes about this project, you do have a point. And as someone brought up earlier, at one point in TNG we even see Picard as a cocky enough douchebag to get in fights that end with him stabbed in the heart.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

What was the last good remake? And by good, I don't mean, "well...it didn't totally suck." You guys are the problem with Hollywood. This movie is a fucking disaster waiting to happen. You can pay for a good cast, but a good cast working with bad ideas will still result in a bad movie. This shouldn't be called Star Trek. This should have a new name instead of shitting on my memories. The well of creativity has apparently run dry, so they're pissing in buckets, and you guys are begging for more. Stop paying for this shit, and it might not be made anymore. PEACE.

this is more of a reboot than a remake, and the last good ones were Casino Royale and Batman Begins/Dark Knight, just a few years back.

 

[bengraven]

Well tbh, those types of people are usually cocky douchebags when they're young and they mellow out later on in life. So this could be a pretty good envisioning of what Kirk would be like as a young man.

Maybe that's my problem. I don't want to hear that Kirk's story. I want to hear about his first year on the Enterprise, but I want to hear the story after he's grown past all that.

 

[RedShift]

Despite having never seen any ST stuff for more than 5 mins and most of my knowledge of the show coming from the Futurama episode where the Planet Express crew fight the original cast, I sorta want to see this movie. Abrams, Quinto and Pegg are sorta whats doing it for me.

Problem is I won't be able to persuade my friends to see it, and by trying I'll horribly fulfill the nerd stereotype...

 

[TAJ]

I'm a fan, and I'd love this... if not for more fucking time travel.

 

[Spotless Mind]

That sounds worse than i could have ever imagined. The dialogue is so bad. So bad. So very bad.

 

[Fatalah]

So... I'm going to avoid reading anything about this movie. It just ruins my actual first viewing of the movie.

All I'm here for is the generic "COOOOOLLLLL" or "THAT SUCKS NOOO".

 

[bengraven]

As I said in the other thread, Kirk just really comes off like Zack from Saved by the Bell. I still have hope though and I'm not even a Star Trek fan...just a reformed Star Wars fan needing something more adult. :lol

 

[Tim the Wiz]

Will Smith's kid could have starred in a random karate movie, and earn reviews on the merits of his performance and the story. Instead, they're gonna slap The Karate Kid on it, b/c the movie probably isn't good enough to sell on its own, and to help push his career forward. Are you ok with this creatively bankrupt approach to movie-making...nay, story-telling? Movies cost $10 a pop now. Is this the sort of shit the viewing public is willing to co-sign to? I stand by my outrage, I don't think it's misplaced at all. We're being sold the same old shit in a smelly wrapper, and some are actually supporting it. Bologna. This says that the people behind Star Trek can't make a good enough movie (or show) to sell on its own merits, so they're relying on the strength of the brand (in particular, it's marquee characters) to sell what is MOST LIKELY a substandard movie. PEACE.

I'd agree, if not for the fact that the Trek franchise has been in decline for years. Also, your disgust at the replacement of guys like Nimoy and Shatner in roles that they created is not dissimilar to when I first heard Starbuck would be a woman in the new Battlestar Galactica. I nearly sold the series short before it had even begun. However, the one thing that sets modern remakes on the right path is if they truly are re-imaginings. If the director and the scrip-writer have the guts to follow a specific vision that is in keeping with the spirit of the original, but is still their own.

That's the reason why things like The Dark Knight and BSG are such big successes. They each offered something new to the visual story of their characters and world.

TDK brought the dark, realistic questions that had simply not been followed in previous Batman films on what it meant to be a vigilante, and its villain brought across what real evil is like - ordered chaos on an unimaginable scale. Battlestar took the storyline of humanity fleeing generational enemies across the cosmos, in itself an origin story of ourselves, that further links to real-world origin stories such as the Jews escaping the Egyptians through Sinai into Canaan, and used that mythological base to create a realistic vision of what that would have been like for those undergoing that journey.

I'm not saying that more remakes/continuations of dead franchises is needed, but that if the creative team behind it are offering a unique and specific vision that justifies the need for new stories, then go ahead and do it. It's the remakes like Poseidon or the Schumacher Batman movies that need to die, not the ones attempting to give life to staggering old franchises with a breath of fresh air and good story craft. Basically, the more original films the better, I'm not arguing with you there, but sometimes delving back into old franchises is justified.

I do agree that Hollywood has latched on to this more than it should, watering-down the quality and expectations of new versions of old things and taking away the potential of producing completely new great things, but that does not mean that this film should be pre-judged as a result of those unfortunate circumstances.

 

[Replicant]

Sounds interesting to me. I'll give it the benefit of the doubt and fails to see why Trek geeks are wailing about it just like I fail to understand those "Craig is not Bond" losers.

This sounds exactly like Casino Royale's Bond, but with less respect for the franchise.

If this film ends up being like Casino Royale then I'd love it. And Casino Royale was not respecting the franchise? If not respecting the franchise means less tacky line, less useless characters like Money Penny and Q then by all means disrespect the franchise.

 

[Busty]

James King, the movie 'reviewer' of BBC Radio 1 was in the audience and just talked about what he saw as he was in the audience for the screening.

He didn't go into detail but did say it was 'amazing'.

He went on to say that Kirk is now a teenager who drinks in bars and fights and that, in his eyes, makes him alot more relateable.

Ummmmm.

He actually described the film as being about Kirk and Spock in their 'teenage years'.

Hmmmm. o_o

Not sure what to think. That trailer can't come fast enough.

 

[kaching]

I like the sound of it. Not a hardcore trekkie but I've watched just about all the series inclusively so I don't get how this doesn't sound like Trek to some of you. The spirit of it is clearly preserved.

 

[Kai Dracon]

I'm a fan, and I'd love this... if not for more fucking time travel.

This is why Star Trek should have been totally rebooted ala BSG (not the dark tone, just a true re-imagining). So long as Trek continues to be shackled to the expectations of pleasing fans who want "old Trek, but better" we're going to see stuff like time travel run into the ground.

Star Trek has its great moments but it also has tons of generic dreck that it has abused for too long. The franchise needed a clean cut.

The problem with this film is that while it may be fresh and invigorating in some ways due to such a different take on the style of Trek, it may leave the franchise as a whole with no new direction to take because the movie is not truly a new beginning.

If I was in charge of establishing a new Trek continuity, one of the first rules I'd make was to place a one-shot restriction on key Trek stereotypes: ONE time-travel episode, ever. Etc.

 

[Haunted]

I'll watch this movie for Simon Pegg and the explosions and stuff.

 

[ZeoVGM]

That sounds worse than i could have ever imagined. The dialogue is so bad. So bad. So very bad.

:lol Seems about spot on for Star Trek!

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

This is why Star Trek should have been totally rebooted ala BSG (not the dark tone, just a true re-imagining). So long as Trek continues to be shackled to the expectations of pleasing fans who want "old Trek, but better" we're going to see stuff like time travel run into the ground.

Star Trek has its great moments but it also has tons of generic dreck that it has abused for too long. The franchise needed a clean cut.

The problem with this film is that while it may be fresh and invigorating in some ways due to such a different take on the style of Trek, it may leave the franchise as a whole with no new direction to take because the movie is not truly a new beginning.

If I was in charge of establishing a new Trek continuity, one of the first rules I'd make was to place a one-shot restriction on key Trek stereotypes: ONE time-travel episode, ever. Etc.

Agreed. And lets make the actions of the characters have real impact on events and themselves. No getting taken by the Borg, only to be rescued, and back in command of the flagship a week later.

 

[Phoenix]

:lol Seems about spot on for Abrams!

Fixed

 

[Phoenix]

Agreed. And lets make the actions of the characters have real impact on events and themselves. No getting taken by the Borg, only to be rescued, and back in command of the flagship a week later.

The only problem with that, and note that I'm a fan of it, is that audiences get lost. They miss an episode (or 3) and then they don't know what's going on or why. And then they just tune out. Its an unfortunate reason for the "fixed next week" syndrome that plagues all these sorts of shows.