Star Trek 2009 movie Catch-All (Now on DVD/Blu-Ray and sequel rumors)

nsmike wrote:

It was only one episode, though.

Okay, i thought it was a 'to be continued' two-parter.

I think the hubbub is about sticking to canon, and that it's kind-of hard to see how the Enterprise evolved into the TOS version from this. Star Trek fans are anal beyond reason about canon.

Why should the fans care about canon? The writers of the movies and series never did!

I think the ship looks cool. Haven't looked at the clips yet, but I've always disliked any time travel plots. Always just a convenient way to kill loopholes in the story.

Duoae wrote:
nsmike wrote:

It was only one episode, though.

Okay, i thought it was a 'to be continued' two-parter.

It was epic enough that it wouldn't have suffered if they did that. It might even have been better. Ah, 3rd season... The first season TNG really took off.

I'm a (sort of) Trek fan, I guess, as I really loved STTNG...liked TOS, didn't like DS9, didn't care enough to watch beyond season 1 of Voyager, and never watched an episode of Enterprise.

I don't care all that much about continuity in this case, but the more I see of this film (the cast, mostly) the more it just rubs me the wrong way-- it looks sort of like a Star Trek costume contest being held at a gay bar. I know they can't keep having the 80 year old original crew make films, and all NEW "original IP" Trek projects seem to tank, but watching guys playing "dress-up" for two hours might just be a little much for me to take.

SommerMatt wrote:

I don't care all that much about continuity in this case, but the more I see of this film (the cast, mostly) the more it just rubs me the wrong way-- it looks sort of like a Star Trek costume contest being held at a gay bar. I know they can't keep having the 80 year old original crew make films, and all NEW "original IP" Trek projects seem to tank, but watching guys playing "dress-up" for two hours might just be a little much for me to take.

Beware. This is going to happen more as we get older. They did a Dukes of Hazard movie. They are now doing a Star Trek "remake". How long before we see a Star Wars "remake"? I'm just saying...

DSGamer wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:

I don't care all that much about continuity in this case, but the more I see of this film (the cast, mostly) the more it just rubs me the wrong way-- it looks sort of like a Star Trek costume contest being held at a gay bar. I know they can't keep having the 80 year old original crew make films, and all NEW "original IP" Trek projects seem to tank, but watching guys playing "dress-up" for two hours might just be a little much for me to take.

Beware. This is going to happen more as we get older. They did a Dukes of Hazard movie. They are now doing a Star Trek "remake". How long before we see a Star Wars "remake"? I'm just saying...

I wouldn't mind an ep I-III remake.

Grenn wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:

I don't care all that much about continuity in this case, but the more I see of this film (the cast, mostly) the more it just rubs me the wrong way-- it looks sort of like a Star Trek costume contest being held at a gay bar. I know they can't keep having the 80 year old original crew make films, and all NEW "original IP" Trek projects seem to tank, but watching guys playing "dress-up" for two hours might just be a little much for me to take.

Beware. This is going to happen more as we get older. They did a Dukes of Hazard movie. They are now doing a Star Trek "remake". How long before we see a Star Wars "remake"? I'm just saying...

I wouldn't mind an ep I-III remake.

True, but you would mind "Ashton Kusher is Han Solo".

DSGamer wrote:
Grenn wrote:

I wouldn't mind an ep I-III remake.

True, but you would mind "Ashton Kusher is Han Solo".

I think he actually meant episodes 1-3 and not 4-6 as you seem to think. I too would love a ep 1-3 remake they couldn't be any worse and who knows? Lucas may be dead before they get remade so their story can be fixed and the acting/actors can be given better direction

They should never remake eps 4-6 and in fact should remove the crappy 'Han shot second' crap and Irish Jabba the hutt in ep 4 scene.

You missed my point. What I'm saying is that it's inevitable. Someday someone will remake IV-VI. Not I-III, but IV-VI. Although at that point it won't be Ashton Kusher. It will probably happen when we're all much older. But it will happen.

DSGamer wrote:

You missed my point. What I'm saying is that it's inevitable. Someday someone will remake IV-VI. Not I-III, but IV-VI. Although at that point it won't be Ashton Kusher. It will probably happen when we're all much older. But it will happen.

Yeah that's true. So.... Shia LaBeouf Jnr?

DSGamer wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:

I don't care all that much about continuity in this case, but the more I see of this film (the cast, mostly) the more it just rubs me the wrong way-- it looks sort of like a Star Trek costume contest being held at a gay bar. I know they can't keep having the 80 year old original crew make films, and all NEW "original IP" Trek projects seem to tank, but watching guys playing "dress-up" for two hours might just be a little much for me to take.

Beware. This is going to happen more as we get older. They did a Dukes of Hazard movie. They are now doing a Star Trek "remake". How long before we see a Star Wars "remake"? I'm just saying...

I guess that if the characters are iconic enough, we tend to accept new actors in the roles much more readily... look at James Bond, Batman, or Superman, for example. I just don't know if that really works with characters like this, where the actor and the character seem inextricably linked. As much as I love Steve Carell on the office, he's no Don Adams. And "Sylar" ain't Spock.

But I guess that's REALLY the point-- these studios don't really CARE about the people who remember the originals because they are attempting to capture the newer generation of moviegoers who have no preconceived notions.

SommerMatt wrote:

But I guess that's REALLY the point-- these studios don't really CARE about the people who remember the originals because they are attempting to capture the newer generation of moviegoers who have no preconceived notions.

Good luck finding someone who doesn't have some kind of preconceived notions about "Star Trek"! Those who never watched the movie will probably consider this just another film for nerds. The faithful fans will bemoan its betrayal of the originals. How many does that really leave?

Quintin_Stone wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:

But I guess that's REALLY the point-- these studios don't really CARE about the people who remember the originals because they are attempting to capture the newer generation of moviegoers who have no preconceived notions.

Good luck finding someone who doesn't have some kind of preconceived notions about "Star Trek"! Those who never watched the movie will probably consider this just another film for nerds. The faithful fans will bemoan its betrayal of the originals. How many does that really leave?

I was actually going to type those very words in my post above... you're exactly right.

Dukes of Hazard grossed $110 million worldwide, so there's always someone.

LockAndLoad wrote:
Maybe this is one of those alternate timeline Enterprises.

That's exactly how I feel about the movie. It's not canon, it's not the Mirror Universe, it's a tangent. If I'm entertained for a couple hours, what more can you ask for.

LockAndLoad please hand me your agonizer for your heresy!

DSGamer wrote:

Dukes of Hazard grossed $110 million worldwide, so there's always someone.

I don't think today's teens (or "tweens") really knew much about the original show before this film came out. STAR TREK has a huge cultural shadow, even if you've never seen an episode. Case in point-- I played the "City on the Edge of Forever" episode for my SCI-FI class, and when I mentioned it, the very idea was met by moans and groans.

SommerMatt wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Dukes of Hazard grossed $110 million worldwide, so there's always someone.

I don't think today's teens (or "tweens") really knew much about the original show before this film came out. STAR TREK has a huge cultural shadow, even if you've never seen an episode. Case in point-- I played the "City on the Edge of Forever" episode for my SCI-FI class, and when I mentioned it, the very idea was met by moans and groans.

Did they end up liking it at all?

nsmike wrote:
SommerMatt wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Dukes of Hazard grossed $110 million worldwide, so there's always someone.

I don't think today's teens (or "tweens") really knew much about the original show before this film came out. STAR TREK has a huge cultural shadow, even if you've never seen an episode. Case in point-- I played the "City on the Edge of Forever" episode for my SCI-FI class, and when I mentioned it, the very idea was met by moans and groans.

Did they end up liking it at all?

I did have a few people say things like "it wasn't as bad as I thought it'd be." I guess that's about the best I can expect out of this current generation

DSGamer wrote:

You missed my point. What I'm saying is that it's inevitable. Someday someone will remake IV-VI. Not I-III, but IV-VI. Although at that point it won't be Ashton Kusher. It will probably happen when we're all much older. But it will happen.

Something tells me that Lucas is egotistical enough that it he'll make it a condition of his will that no one will ever be able to remake any Star Wars film. They'll be able to tell stories about the verse he created, but he'll allow no one to f with his original stories (no matter how shamefully bad they are).

I think the Enterprise looks fine, I was hoping for something like the refit/A model, and it looks like that was a major inspiration. The only thing I'd change though would be to move the neck forward more on the engineering hull, but I can live with it.

First Trek film footage unveiled
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertain...

Edit: Actually its the original trailer that was shown a while ago. Sorry about that.

The full trailer to the movie is supposed to be attached to prints of Quantum of Solace in the US, but reports indicate that not every print has it. If you're geekness can't wait until it officially debuts online Monday, you could try calling ahead to your theater to see which showing of the Bond movie has it. Surprisingly, bootlegs of the trailer have yet to appear on Youtube despite Quantum of Solace being out for the better part of a day.

If you're crafty and look through certain video sharing sites that don't come to mind at first, you can find the trailer, or at least part of it. I take back a bit of what I said about the Enterprise. From the front, she looks pretty good. Guess the picture EW had was not from a flattering angle.

Not really sure what to think. Didn't realize I was watching a Star Trek trailer until he said his name. I do like Simon Pegg and John Cho but I'm not sure if they were the right choices.

It's appropriate that this was shown before Quantum of Solace as it looks like the kind of 'high explosive' action film that would appeal to the same audience. I'm just not sure that Star Trek was supposed to be that way.....well, we'll see when it comes out.

That opening was pure WTF?

Quintin_Stone wrote:

That opening was pure WTF?

I have to ask (as i forgot before) what was the significance of Kirk trying to play chicken with a canyon? To show that he's a maverick with a death wish?

Duoae wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

That opening was pure WTF?

I have to ask (as i forgot before) what was the significance of Kirk trying to play chicken with a canyon? To show that he's a maverick with a death wish?

I think it was because he was being chased?

Duoae wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

That opening was pure WTF?

I have to ask (as i forgot before) what was the significance of Kirk trying to play chicken with a canyon? To show that he's a maverick with a death wish?

I'm guessing he either stole the car from his dad and lost control of it while trying to drive too fast, etc., or was running from that alien. Either way, blah.