'Cause what you see you might not get
December 14, 2015 4:07 PM   Subscribe

This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- frimble



 
Does anyone do anything other than leap in this universe?
posted by selfnoise at 4:12 PM on December 14, 2015 [32 favorites]


LENS FLARES!

There, I saved you the trouble. Carry on.
posted by AlonzoMosleyFBI at 4:13 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Gene Roddenberry: "Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom..."

Not sure what this stupid shit is, but it isn't Star Trek.
posted by killdevil at 4:15 PM on December 14, 2015 [72 favorites]


Does anyone do anything other than leap in this universe?

Listen to the Beastie Boys, obvs.
posted by Artw at 4:15 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


(Can be combined)
posted by Artw at 4:16 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


I watched the trailer about an hour ago.

I actually kind of enjoyed the first two, a bit, guiltily, because I'm a Kirk-Spock-McCoy diehard, but crikey: this new one looks terrible.

LENS FLARES!

Not JJ Abrams this time, so not so much. On the downside, Fast And Furious director, so it looks like: lots of punching, and jumping, and fucking motocross bikes, and then some more punching and jumping.

I think it might be time to give up on the Trek thing.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:17 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


That... looks... terrible
posted by eyeballkid at 4:17 PM on December 14, 2015 [9 favorites]


Script by Simon Pegg? All right, shut up and take my money.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:17 PM on December 14, 2015 [18 favorites]


I feel hopeful. My hopes may be dashed, of course, because the previous movies had such huge problems. At first look, though, this seems like a huge step in the right direction. (Maybe a leap, as selfnoise points out.)

There's a lot I love about the reboot. I can forgive it for a lot, too. But the last two movies were written like nobody on staff had even taken a sidelong glance at a science book since middle school, and while that's okay for Star Wars, I expect at least an attempt at giving a shit from Star Trek.

Also, JJ invested two movies in demonstrating in no uncertain terms that his Kirk should not be captain of anything. Reboot Kirk is like Sterling Archer in a Starfleet uniform. It's not okay.

If they fix or at least walk briskly away from these two problems? Then I'm super excited.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:17 PM on December 14, 2015 [16 favorites]


The Guardian has equally insightful articles about the trailers for Angry Birds and Alvin and the Chipmunks. Somebody make posts for those, too!
posted by Wolfdog at 4:19 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


I think you guys saw different Abrams movies if you think this looks worse.
posted by Artw at 4:19 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


My friend had the best response

"Check out the LITERAL CLIFF HANGERS. THERE'S MORE THAN ONE"

The Trek and the Furious.
posted by emptythought at 4:19 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


Love the music!

I saw this trailer and a few minutes later I saw the trailer for the new Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movie; that music looks like some fan dubbed in his favorite awful music on top of what is otherwise a kick-ass trailer.
posted by el io at 4:19 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I turned the trailer off halfway through. Really frustrating to be reminded after that neat nerdy DS9 thread that the kind of Star Trek I liked most is never coming back.
posted by Drinky Die at 4:21 PM on December 14, 2015 [19 favorites]


lots of punching, and jumping, and fucking motocross bikes

Is it a Ferengi that fucks the bike? If so they'll be hearing from my lawyer.
posted by selfnoise at 4:21 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


I really missed the Enterprise in this trailer. Where's my starship?

Getting destroyed, again, apparently.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:22 PM on December 14, 2015


Excellent post title, btw. I see what you did there.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:23 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


As a big ole dork and geek who also likes Lin (and Pegg) way more than Abrams, this is awesome. If you think Lin's movies are just big and dumb, you probably haven't actually seen his movies.
posted by hydropsyche at 4:23 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


I find I am a little more interested in the Independence Day: Resurgence trailer.
posted by biffa at 4:23 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


Ugh. Star Trek: Neutral Zone Drift.
posted by pjern at 4:24 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


that music looks like some fan dubbed in his favorite awful music on top of what is otherwise a kick-ass trailer.

Holy shit that's actually terrible. I expected cheesy trailer music but... it even sounds poorly dubbed in and mixed. Just what the hell?

I'm actually shocked.
posted by emptythought at 4:24 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm pleased to see that Star Trek is getting dumb enough that we will probably see an Enterprise vs Star Destroyer movie in our lifetimes.
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:24 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


Star Trek: Faster and Furiouser*

*(Not Furiosa, which would make it better)
posted by nubs at 4:25 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I saw this trailer and a few minutes later I saw the trailer for the new Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movie

Yeah, I really like the idea of a slow, dark, haunting cover of Bad Moon Rising, but that...that was just not good.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:26 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


"Let's never do that again."
"Agreed! Unless this one makes boatloads of money, in which case let's do that repeatedly until Justin Lin gets some other job."
posted by damehex at 4:26 PM on December 14, 2015


I expect that Lin will probably make a better movie than Abrams, but from the look of it, it will resemble Star Trek even less than the first two.
posted by tavella at 4:27 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


If you think Lin's movies are just big and dumb, you probably haven't actually seen his movies.

I have, and I would maintain that they are.

Not terrible, in that they ably achieve what they set out to do -- which is to be both big and dumb and also fast and loud-- but not dovetailing very well with any essential Star Trekness, I don't think.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


Wolfdog: here's the guardian review of the independence day trailer.
posted by biffa at 4:29 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Reboot Kirk is like Sterling Archer in a Starfleet uniform.
and
Ugh. Star Trek: Neutral Zone Drift.

Anybody up for Star Trek: Zapp Brannigan vs. the Neutrals or perhaps the Retiree People of the Assisted Living Nebula
posted by Existential Dread at 4:29 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]


The Star Trek Canon is that there is no Star Trek Canon. Every past iteration has confirmed this. Apparently this one will as well. I am content and awaiting its arrival...
posted by jim in austin at 4:29 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


*(Not Furiosa, which would make it better)

In fairness: What movie wouldn't be better with Furiosa?

I mean that's just not a fair standard.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:30 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Eh, it's a trailer, it's fine. The two previous Trek reboot films were quite enjoyable, and this probably will be too, although in a slightly different way. If you're losing your shit over this trailer, you need to watch more bad movies, I guess.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 4:31 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Can they just stop and run a TOS TV serial again? Ditch the A team actors, grab some up and coming talent, throw the action oriented directors into the garbage, and make New Trek Star Trek.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:33 PM on December 14, 2015 [17 favorites]


They need to confront a great ethical and moral challenge and overcome it through the power of self righteousness and kirk's superior penis.
posted by Glibpaxman at 4:33 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


I've said in the past that the only worthwhile bits of the new trek movies come from Urban's portrayal of McCoy. This doesn't change my mind at all…
posted by Pinback at 4:33 PM on December 14, 2015 [26 favorites]


and fucking motocross bikes

I hope they don't burn themselves on the exhaust pipes.
posted by Greg_Ace at 4:34 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


you need to watch more bad movies, I guess.

i'd be okay with it if they would just cast Tom Atkins or Lance Henrikson or somebody who can make bad lines cool
posted by Existential Dread at 4:34 PM on December 14, 2015


I liked the first reboot. The second one was a chore to sit through. This one looks even less appealing now that Star Trek is targeting the dude-bro demographic. I wish we had a new Trek series on TV instead of these movies.
posted by cazoo at 4:34 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


I'm not even gonna bother to see this one. I've given the reboot two chances already, and both times it has disappointed me utterly. This trailer looks like everything that was wrong with the first two movies, put into a blender with several generous scoops of human feces, and then used to write "FUCK YOU OLD-SCHOOL TREK FANS" on the face of Gene Roddenberry's corpse.

I MEAN NOT THAT I'M BITTER OR ANYTHING
posted by escape from the potato planet at 4:34 PM on December 14, 2015 [22 favorites]


Kirk will defeat the hegemonizing swarm by performing Bodhisattva Vow at it.
posted by Artw at 4:35 PM on December 14, 2015 [7 favorites]


Things are allowed to change.
posted by ColdChef at 4:35 PM on December 14, 2015 [15 favorites]


I think it might be time to give up on the Trek thing.

He's not dead yet, Jim!

As for this trailer... *sad trombone*
posted by Kevin Street at 4:37 PM on December 14, 2015


Things are allowed to change.

For the better. Otherwise, we select against it.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:37 PM on December 14, 2015 [35 favorites]


The only way this could work is if that scene where Spock got beamed away it was so that they could then remove his brain and use it to run their central computer.
posted by ckape at 4:38 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


If you search for it, there's leaked footage of the scene where Kirk shotguns an energy drink and punches a tribble in the face.
posted by Wolfdog at 4:39 PM on December 14, 2015 [19 favorites]


(Actually, you know, thinking about it: the original series, the only one I've ever truly loved, had more than its fair share of punching and unCGI'd Shatnerian leaping, and was frequently super-dumb, even for the times, so I may be being unfair. I guess this new Superhero Mode Trek stuff is For The Kids, and fair enough. I haven't sat down in an actual movie theater in years, so I'm not the target audience.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:39 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


If you're losing your shit over this trailer, you need to watch more bad movies, I guess.

Might I suggest ST 5, 7, 8, 9, and/or 10?
posted by Hoopo at 4:39 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]




Pretty sure the music is the track that child Kirk is playing in the stolen car in the opening of the first JJ Star Trek? It's an in-canon call-back. Those are good!
posted by DangerIsMyMiddleName at 4:40 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


I read the comments here first and thought, how bad it could it be?

Oh. Oh, my poor Star Trek. My poor baby.
posted by painquale at 4:41 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


After the iTunes wars, only three songs from the late 20th century/early 21st century survived.
posted by ckape at 4:42 PM on December 14, 2015 [36 favorites]


Yep, it's the same song.
posted by Kevin Street at 4:43 PM on December 14, 2015


For anyone who thinks the cocaine problem in America has remotely subsided, submitted for your (dis)approval ....
posted by AGameOfMoans at 4:44 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


I'm guessing that the nu-Trek mostly annoys the Next Generation generation who didn't grow up with Kirk punching all the aliens that he didn't sleep with. Obviously this needs more boring discussions around a conference table in the captain's ready room.
posted by octothorpe at 4:44 PM on December 14, 2015 [48 favorites]


Things are allowed to change.

Things must change. Railing against change is a fool's game. But not all change is good, and keeping a weather eye out is important.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:45 PM on December 14, 2015 [9 favorites]


That trailer was excellent, really excellent, because it so firmly and irrevocably shamed me for thinking "well at least it can't be worse than abrams' atrocity".

bad trailer you have humbled me
posted by poffin boffin at 4:47 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


Ill Communication is NuKirk's equivalent of a dusty copy of A Tale of Two Cities.
posted by Artw at 4:47 PM on December 14, 2015 [14 favorites]


One thing I learned from the trailer is they still use internal combustion in the future.
posted by chimaera at 4:48 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Damn it, Bones, you're a doctor. You know that butthurt and pedantry can't be taken away with a wave of a magic wand. They're the things we carry with us, the things that make us who we are. If we lose them, we lose ourselves. I don't want my butthurt taken away! I need my butthurt!
posted by entropicamericana at 4:48 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


This looks like everything people compalined about in Abrams' Trek films taken as enthusiastic suggestions to do all that stuff but much louder and more Fast and Furious-like.
They should just call it Space Karate Jerks.
posted by Senor Cardgage at 4:48 PM on December 14, 2015 [17 favorites]


I wish we had a new Trek series on TV instead of these movies.

You know about this, right? My hopes are not high.

And, yeah—things are certainly allowed to change. But they took one of the most beloved franchises of all time, stripped it of everything that made it beloved in the first place, and turned it into a mindless dudebro action property. Change is fine if it reinterprets or builds upon the original material, but the new Trek movies don't do that: any resemblances to past iterations of the franchise are completely superficial. They ran over the spirit of the thing, then backed over it a few times for good measure. The only reason to attach the "Star Trek" name to these movies is that it's a recognized, readymade brand that's guaranteed to pull people into the theaters. These films contain a ship named "Enterprise" and characters named "Kirk" and "Spock" and "Uhura", but otherwise they are generic Hollywood spectacle.

I'm guessing that the nu-Trek mostly annoys the Next Generation generation who didn't grow up with Kirk punching all the aliens that he didn't sleep with.

I grew up with, and loved both. NuTrek has nothing on the original series' finer moments.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 4:48 PM on December 14, 2015 [18 favorites]


The tribble-punch scene makes use of the other two surviving songs from the late 20th century/early 21st century, which were both "All Star."
posted by Wolfdog at 4:49 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]


This looks pretty bad, but at least Lindelof didn't write it.


LINDELOF!

FROM HELL'S HEART I STAB AT THEE! FOR HATE'S SAKE, I SPIT MY LAST BREATH AT THEE!
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:50 PM on December 14, 2015 [28 favorites]


NuKirk beams down to a planet where two halves of the population seem locked in an allegory for a 20th century earth conflict, manages to bring the barriers between them down by telling them the tale of Run DMC and Aerosmith's "Walk This Way".
posted by Artw at 4:51 PM on December 14, 2015 [40 favorites]


I'd rather absolutely over the top stupidity because christ knows that TOS certainly did that in abundance.
posted by Ferreous at 4:52 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


LINDELOF!

FROM HELL'S HEART I STAB AT THEE!


The default Lindeloffian IT-IS-A-MYSTERY move infuriates me too, but man, I loved the second season of The Leftovers, which is super-lindeloid but also super-great. So, hey, I'm willing to get my mind changed. Maybe this latest Trekthing will be super-great too. Maybe.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:53 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


NuKirk fights a Gorn, hits it with his skateboard.
posted by Artw at 4:54 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


I wish people would understand that for many of us complaining about these movies, it's not about fear of change and it's not because we can't enjoy bad movies or fun action-packed spectacles. It's because of the particular direction of this change, and the fact that there are hundreds of dumb action-packed spectacles already. Star Trek played a unique role in SF that has not been replaced by other narratives, much less augmented by reboots of other franchises that change them in the Star Trek direction. Perhaps more importantly, these changes are not just isolated events -- they are part of a sea-change that has occurred in a vast amount of mainstream film since the 70s, with very little counter-current in the other direction. Star Trek was optimistic science-utopianism, interested in exploration, mutual understanding, multicultural respect and non-interference, camaraderie, cool ideas and philosophy, and a variety of other progressive ideals as embodied in the first show and its sequel (TNG). Like so many other SF narratives (including Star Wars, in its way), what began as a flawed but genuinely progressive world has been step-by-step corrupted, rebooted, and sequelled into a fundamentally conservative mold, where violence solves most problems, characters are simplistic and relatively unchanging, science is merely a guise for plot, and the main argument in favor generally takes the apolitical form of "sit back, turn off your brain, and enjoy it." Again -- this isn't something unique to Star Trek, but in what has happened to Star Trek the general cultural shift to the right in the US and its premiere art-form is acutely evident. I feel some affection for Kirk, Roddenberry, and the rest, but what's really lamentable here is how yet another icon of my youth -- not just a piece of nostalgia, but a moral anchor, like Sesame Street -- has been not just corrupted, but corrupted in such a way that most people don't even notice or mind the damage that is being done and the broader cultural effects these bastardizations continue to have.
posted by chortly at 4:54 PM on December 14, 2015 [269 favorites]


Also, JJ invested two movies in demonstrating in no uncertain terms that his Kirk should not be captain of anything. Reboot Kirk is like Sterling Archer in a Starfleet uniform. It's not okay.

Years ago; a friend developed a character in the Star Trek universe that was everything that a captain shouldn't be. The hours we spent discussing different plots with this captain drunkenly taking the ship on voyages to misread every situation and cause unnecessary carnage - oh those hours I would not trade for anything.

new!Kirk is just a few shades away from our character. And that kind of warms by heart.

(That being said, I would argue that new!Kirk is closer to TOS!Kirk than movie!Kirk.)

Me, I'm excited. I'm okay with a big explosions Trek, but I've never been one to hang on to tradition and find updating a lot of fun. I have friends that refuse to speak of it.

I'm certain it helps that Pegg is so heavily involved, and he has always been such a big geek. He is us. Sorta. Of course I'm going to get the chills if he has more screen time kicking ass AND wrote the darn thing.

(I am sad that in the intervening years since the invention of our character, the needle has moved in such a way that Rim Seville would be hard to bring to life now and not seem derivative. Oh well, it likely never was going to anyway.)
posted by [insert clever name here] at 4:55 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


Amen, chortly. Well said.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:55 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


What chortly said. I'm hopeful for this movie, but 100% what chortly said.

Especially about the sea change. It's not just Star Trek. I flat-out refuse to watch most TV shows of an action/intrigue bent anymore, because ever since the Bush era and 24, every asshole writing a show in Hollywood seems to think torture is the only way to get information out of anyone (and it always works and it's always accurate). I just can't anymore.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:57 PM on December 14, 2015 [15 favorites]


Dumbness in the service of asking questions about what is humanity, what is civilization, etc., is different from dumbness in the service of listen all y'all it's sabotage, listen all y'all it's sabotage, listen all y'all it's sabotagwAaaAAAHAHHHH.
posted by nom de poop at 4:58 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


Those who long for the earnest space philosophy and gleaming conference tables of OldTrek will be interested in Prelude to Axanar, an independent, fan-made, unlicensed Trek film set in the TOS era. What's been released so far has startlingly high production values. It's due out in 2016.

there are hundreds of dumb action-packed spectacles already. Star Trek played a unique role in SF that has not been replaced by other narratives ... what began as a flawed but genuinely progressive world has been step-by-step corrupted, rebooted, and sequelled into a fundamentally conservative mold, where violence solves most problems, characters are simplistic and relatively unchanging, science is merely a guise for plot, and the main argument in favor generally takes the apolitical form of "sit back, turn off your brain, and enjoy it."

Exactly this; a thousand times this.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 4:58 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


I'm guessing that the nu-Trek mostly annoys the Next Generation generation who didn't grow up with Kirk punching all the aliens that he didn't sleep with.
Not in my case - grew up on TOS, quickly got bored with & barely watched TNG when it aired.

Watching TNG now, the only way the first series makes any sense is if you imagine that off-screen during any encounter - probably during the opening credits - Picard first apologises for Kirk's behaviour, and Riker doesn't understand why…
posted by Pinback at 4:59 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


(Sorry—Prelude to Axanar is the 21-minute teaser I linked above. The full-length film to which it's a prelude—due out in 2016—is simply called Axanar.)
posted by escape from the potato planet at 5:00 PM on December 14, 2015


The failure of every Star Trek movie (save the one) is that the franchise was never satisfied to simply make a cinema quality/cinema length episode of Star Trek. rather than respect the fan base enough to allow them to fill seats and buy merch and make the studio the money, the have, time and time again, made awful Epics set in the Star Trek universe.

Each epic has to hit all of the bullet points: humorous quips from Bones/Scotty/Chekov; noble sacrifice by Sulu; I'm not just a token woman/POC moment from Uhuru; friendship is thicker than blood sacrifice by Kirk/Spock.
By the time they've written all of that in, there's only enough time left for action sequences, not plot. there's no evidence that this is going to change anytime soon.
My expectations are always pretty low for Star Trek movies, hence my enjoyment is relatively high. so it goes.
posted by OHenryPacey at 5:00 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Star Trek has always been action, I don't mind action. It's just the type of action is changing. It should be military movie style action rather than Marvel superhero sort of action. Aim for (I don't expect you to achieve, but aim for) Das Boot or Saving Private Ryan, not The Fast and the Furious.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:01 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


It's as disjointed and content-free a trailer as you can get, so I'm not ready to dismiss Justin Lin and Simon Pegg as director and screenwriter just yet. But oh my god, you guys have GOT to turn it around and show me there's a reason to watch this.
posted by chrominance at 5:01 PM on December 14, 2015


Listen if you guys are upset I get it. Let me help. Watch this scene of Data effortlessly trolling some Klingon rando.

There, feel better? I know I did.
posted by selfnoise at 5:06 PM on December 14, 2015 [35 favorites]


The failure of every Star Trek movie (save the one) is that the franchise was never satisfied to simply make a cinema quality/cinema length episode of Star Trek. rather than respect the fan base enough to allow them to fill seats and buy merch and make the studio the money, the have, time and time again, made awful Epics set in the Star Trek universe.

This is especially galling given that we now live in a world where the Harry Potter books can extend to EIGHT movies and the Hunger Games to FOUR, where The Lord of the Rings can win a Best Picture Oscar, and where a friggin' AVENGERS movie can be split into two. We've trained an entire generation of people to understand that stories can be spread over multiple movies. And yet Star Trek, a series that has always lent itself to episodic storytelling and the slow evolution of character, has to always have films that are one-and-done plots and even then somehow rehash the same character arcs (Kirk already learned how to be a leader in the first one, why is he again learning to be a leader in Into Darkness?!).
posted by chrominance at 5:06 PM on December 14, 2015 [14 favorites]


They should just call it Space Karate Jerks.

I'd watch a movie called Karate Space Jerks.
posted by Hoopo at 5:07 PM on December 14, 2015 [21 favorites]


NuKirk is stranded on an asteroid after an encounter with the revived Benny Crumbles. He gets a call on his spacePhone - it's NuSpock! "it appears that like Ma Bell he has received ...the communication", NuSpock intones. NuKirk nods, knowingly, having gotten the reference and hidden meaning.
posted by Artw at 5:09 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


I like movies where people just talk.
posted by davebush at 5:09 PM on December 14, 2015 [15 favorites]


I'd watch a movie called Karate Space Jerks.

Starring Wil Wheaton as Ensign Daniel LaRusso.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:11 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


I agree with most of what chortly said, but I have to disagree with the framing that the new Star Trek movies have moved in a rightward direction. They're not political - it's just that they've lost all hope the future will be a better place than the past, and consequently are no longer interested in world building. In original universe Trek humans went through some bad times, but then grew up and became better people. Human nature actually improved. The people in the new movies don't seem to be any different than us.
posted by Kevin Street at 5:12 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


Could have sworn the Beastie Boys threw a shitfit when that toy company used one of their songs (or riffed on it) and said, "We will never allow our music to be used in ads -- Adam wouldn't have been happy." And yet...

And... man this looks like garbage. The effects are laughable, the one with Simon Pegg leaping especially.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 5:12 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


I'm guessing that the nu-Trek mostly annoys the Next Generation generation who didn't grow up with Kirk punching all the aliens that he didn't sleep with.

As someone from the TOS era who a few years ago rewatched the series -- nah. Sure, Kirk did some punching and getting his shirt torn. He also did a lot of other stuff, including talking and being part of court trials (there's at least three episodes in the first two seasons that involve one of the bridge crew being on trial.) In fact, what was rather startling about the rewatch, after decades of the pop culture image of Kirk as a womanizing rebel thug, is how he is in fact so often by the book, serious and careful.

But really, I think if there was one moment in the first movie that displayed the subtle wrongness of the reboot, it was the scene where Sulu whips out his electro-sword in the fight over Vulcan. In the original series, you had a Asian man who was an officer, in a position of responsibility, and that was cool and very rare for the time. But what made it kind of awesome was that he wasn't some 2-d cliche' of orientalism -- when we saw his inner life when unhinged by a drug, we saw that he saw himself as a swordsman from French romances, wielding a rapier with verve and skill. But of course, Abrams has it be a katana, because he's the Asian Dude.

I'm not going to put TOS on a pedestal -- the main three characters were still white guys, and while Uhura was shown as being awesomely competent when she got things to do outside her bridge station, she still spent most of her time answering calls. And if you saw a female guest character that was complex and rich, you could bet that D.C. Fontana was going to be in the writer or story editor credits, and if she wasn't... well, not much good was going. But if you have watched other shows from the same era, it's stunning how brave even going that far was for the show.

And it was a deep bravery; one of the really startling things to me was how often the guest Admiral or the guy running the transporter or a random engineer or redshirt would be black or asian or hispanic. That's something I rarely see even today; someone thought it was important to have the background cast be more diverse than usual, and made it clear to the people casting extras that should be true.

So 40 years later, we get a reboot... and it is actually worse on an *absolute* basis, not just relative. Uhuru is primarily there to be a girlfriend. Sulu is a cliche. Khan becomes a white english dude instead of moving on from a hispanic guy to a guy actually from the subcontinent. And so on. It's just so sad and cowardly. And of course, there's very little about hope or exploration in there as well.

I wouldn't mind the hyped up action stuff at all if only they got the underpinnings right.
posted by tavella at 5:13 PM on December 14, 2015 [92 favorites]


MetaFilter won't be happy until they bring back the Three Bs: beige, Berman, and Braga.

And maybe throw in Rick McCallum for maximum Rickage.
posted by entropicamericana at 5:17 PM on December 14, 2015


I wish people would understand that for many of us complaining about these movies, it's not about fear of change and it's not because we can't enjoy bad movies or fun action-packed spectacles.

Eh, if you guys don't like, that's fine. But please don't shit on Justin Lin or the Fast & Furious series (this is more to some of the other folks in the thread than chortly). Some of us like him and the series of films. And despite being kind of dude-bro-ish, the series under Lin is actually a Hollywood production with a more diverse cast than a lot of other blockbuster movies.
posted by FJT at 5:18 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


I'll just leave this here…
posted by Pinback at 5:20 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I haven't watched them, but did the newer Rollerball and Death Race have any of the commentary of the originals? My understanding was that they just updated the visuals and threw away all of the soul.
posted by ckape at 5:21 PM on December 14, 2015


I have seen plenty of trailers that were dumber than the actual movie, so I'm not going to assume yet that this is fully representative.
posted by dfan at 5:22 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Karl Urban as Leonard McCoy is my doctor, not the wind beneath my wings.
posted by infinitewindow at 5:22 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


i mean first of all they should've used sure shot and not sabotage

altho tbh i think TOS kirk would've been more about rhymin and stealin
posted by poffin boffin at 5:25 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


But please don't shit on Justin Lin or the Fast & Furious series (this is more to some of the other folks in the thread than chortly). Some of us like him and the series of films.

And some of us do not. This is as it should be.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:28 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


The Beastie Boys have songs in plenty of movies.
posted by el io at 5:32 PM on December 14, 2015


actually no it would be slow ride, what an embarrassing error
posted by poffin boffin at 5:35 PM on December 14, 2015


I mentally checked out of this trailer about halfway through, and I'm mad about it. I'm mad about how this reboot squandered so many of its opportunities in favor of this explosions and quips bullshit. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY. Look at the Captain America: Civil War trailer, for god's sake. That trailer hinges almost entirely on characters and their relationships with each other. Sure, that's partly to preserve the suspense and keep the actual plot obfuscated. But also, look! You can trust your audience to remember some basic things about these EXTREMELY WELL KNOWN characters, and you can trust that they're in it for more than explosions and leaping off things! Because literally no explosion or leaping off a thing is inherently interesting, no one's seeing a movie because "that trailer explosion was super cool."

Like, what is this opposites world bullshit that I can trust the goddamn comic book movie trailer to have more nuance and meat than Star Trek?
posted by yasaman at 5:41 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]


Re a shot of Zoe Saldana's Lt. Uhura, "This image shows her being tormented by a grey alien, quite possibly showing her clips of her probably forever-shelved Nina Simone biopic." Ouch. (It also looks like she's developed a serious case of fivehead. For a minute I wondered if she was playing the Borg queen in disguise.)

Is there any hope this one will be worth seeing in 3D?
posted by fuse theorem at 5:46 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


The bit with the motorbike is a clever homage to Captain Picard driving around in a dune buggy, screaming in delight
posted by dng at 5:51 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


What if all this footage was shot specifically for the trailer, and the real film is actually a big budget CGI-filled remake of the TOS episode "Shore Leave," with Joaquin Phoenix as Finnegan?
posted by Bromius at 5:52 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


Would Joaquin be singing or rapping?
posted by entropicamericana at 5:53 PM on December 14, 2015


Wrath of Khan trailer. Compare and contrast.
posted by sfenders at 5:56 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


Star Trek Reboot: Spock needs to be louder, angrier, and have access to a time machine.
posted by kyrademon at 5:56 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


He performs a rap cover of "Bitter Dregs."
posted by Bromius at 5:57 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


Realization dawns on NuKirks face as he reads the message from V'Ger. "It wants to meet... Tyler the Creator!"
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Dammit, I always confuse Finnegan with Riley! I think Joaquin Phoenix would be a terrific Riley.
posted by entropicamericana at 6:01 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I do like the way no one other than Kirk and Spock and Simon Pegg are allowed to do anything now. Here's the full list of things everybody else contributes to the adventures:

chekhov: says wessels once per film
mccoy: 2 grumps per film
sulu: occasional incompetence
uhura: fairly constant moaning
dr carol marcus: takes her clothes off, is never seen again
captain pike: dead
posted by dng at 6:02 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


This makes me so happy.
posted by ethansr at 6:02 PM on December 14, 2015


The Borg are totally going , "Oh HELL no, we're not assimilating THAT !"
posted by AGameOfMoans at 6:03 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


Wow, watching that Khan trailer gave me the chills. It's actually better than the movie was in some ways, more poetic certainly. All of the above in triplicate. Wrath of Khan was so much an extension of the original show and of our society in its better, more optimistic arc that you could fake pretend that this could come to pass in some way. Isn't that the suspended disbelief of sci-fi at work? What arc of our present day ends up with NuTrek? Makes me gag to think about it.
I read in a Wired interview recently Abrams chortling about what a Star Wars fan he was as a kid. Not so much Trek, he wasn't into it. I think he must secretly loathe the Trek universe and hope to destroy it. Perhaps he is the anti-Trek. We must launch immediately.
posted by diode at 6:11 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


When you're out of ideas, wreck the ship.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:12 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]




And some of us do not. This is as it should be.

Geez, and what does bashing on another director and an unrelated movie series actually achieve? Honestly, from all the complaints from the Trek fans, it's not the F&F series or Justin Lin's fault anyways. The first two Star Trek reboot movies were already action fests, and the third one probably will be exactly the same even without Justin Lin's involvement. Maybe if you weren't so eager to bash F&F you'd realize that.
posted by FJT at 6:20 PM on December 14, 2015


That's not the official Wrath of Khan trailer, it's fan edit thing. The real one has a "In a World" type voice over.
posted by octothorpe at 6:20 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


I like movies where people just talk.

You're going to be really disappointed by Lin's next reboot, My Dinner With Andre: First Course.
posted by dephlogisticated at 6:22 PM on December 14, 2015 [15 favorites]


(spoiler: the first course is an explosion)
posted by dephlogisticated at 6:22 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]


Star Trek: Neutral Zone Drift.

2 BOLD 2 GO
posted by emptythought at 6:24 PM on December 14, 2015 [41 favorites]


I think it's great that we're getting The Twins from Matrix Reloaded in another universe.
posted by michaelh at 6:26 PM on December 14, 2015


I fear that we, here in 2015, are living in the mirror universe.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 6:28 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Listen if you guys are upset I get it. Let me help. Watch this scene of Data effortlessly trolling some Klingon rando.

This is funnier than any of the "jokes" in the new movies. And i actually liked the first new movie.

This is still better than anything that happens in it, though.
posted by emptythought at 6:28 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I've said in the past that the only worthwhile bits of the new trek movies come from Urban's portrayal of McCoy.

His line was the best part of the trailer!
posted by Pryde at 6:31 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


its like JJ saw Galaxy Quest and was like, "What if we make Star Trek into this parody of Star Trek?" The visual style seems spot on.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 6:31 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


NuSpock: "Illogical, captain. A game of chess is not like a swordfight."
posted by Artw at 6:33 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Geez, and what does bashing on another director and an unrelated movie series actually achieve? [...] Maybe if you weren't so eager to bash F&F you'd realize that.

Eager? Hardly. I actually dislike the way that Metafilter threads about Cultural Product often devolve into empty snark.

But what you call 'bashing', I call very gentle criticism indeed. I'd totally be down to actually be genuinely harsh, but perhaps it might be better to spare you and others who love the Fast and Furious movies the emotional turmoil that expressing my full opinions about a Superheroes In Cars movie series would apparently engender.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:38 PM on December 14, 2015 [8 favorites]


chrominance: we now live in a world where the Harry Potter books can extend to EIGHT movies and the Hunger Games to FOUR, where The Lord of the Rings can win a Best Picture Oscar, and where a friggin' AVENGERS movie can be split into two. We've trained an entire generation of people to understand that stories can be spread over multiple movies.

It's the comic-publishing industry business model come to Hollywood. Which is what you get when large-scale entertainment is run by top-down corporate producers and the directors are bigger, more powerful heroes than their on-screen creations. I mean look over at today's Avatar discussion - "Where's the cultural significance of Avatar?" No idea. Where's the cultural impact of Swamp Thing or Magnus: Robot Fighter?

In the comic world this is a good thing, because I can safely ignore everything that comes out of the big publishing houses and spend any extra money I might have on graphic novels and fringe projects, trusting that the few mainstream comics that are worth reading will eventually show up on a blog or here. Avatar is just a glossy comic-book story. I enjoyed it because it was a glossy comic-book story, and I wasn't expecting anything else. Avatar: The Last Airbender had more depth. Expecting Star Trek movies to be something more than glorified comics seems like setting yourself up for disappointment.

Hesitates to say anything about Star Wars...
posted by sneebler at 6:44 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Here is what Abrams thinks about Trek.

Wow. That really does not reflect well on Abrams.

I shouldn't be surprised: I enjoyed the reboot (guess that makes me a "moviegoer"), but I saw the direction it was going and that direction was not particularly thinky. The only other Abrams film I remember seeing, though, was Super 8 which I thought was... fairly philosophical and arguably thinky-er than Star Trek. So I was surprised to hear him say he didn't like Star Trek growing up because of the philosophical parts.

Now more scared for The Force Awakens. But I guess the good news is that Star Wars was always for "moviegoers" and was always heavier on action than thinking.
posted by namespan at 6:48 PM on December 14, 2015


Ugh, if there's one thing I hate, it's navel-gazing Trekkies criticizing JJTrek for being precisely what about half of TOS was: silly action-adventure where Kirk and Spock run around practicing cowboy diplomacy.

I'm no great fan of JJTrek, mostly because I think the movies are incoherent content-free exercises in spending money when they're not insulting us with vague 9/11 Truther nonsense, but they look great and they certainly stay true to some TOS. Yeah, I'd like a feature-length version of "The Corbomite Manuever" with a $175 million budget too, but that will never happen.

And God save me from the next person that starts spouting off about Roddenberry's vast and beautiful humanistic philosophy. The man bought his own hype enough for all of us, no reason to help him out. Yeah, he created Star Trek, but he created it as an action-adventure series as a '60s television adult version of science fiction, then when NBC shat all over his show because he was a fucking nightmare to work with, he threw a hissy fit and abandoned it. Then as a follow-up he nearly killed Star Trek twice more with his half-baked philosophies about why people loved Star Trek.
posted by Automocar at 6:50 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


The reason that I'm not a nihilist
Is some day I wanna live like in Star Trek
And I know that we'll never build starships
Until we tackle poverty, war, and hardship

So we fight overnight and over lifetimes
Organize for that warp drive
And of course I realize
That we're a long way from it
But what better reason to start runnin'?

...

There are no stories told in a vacuum
There is no prophecy lighting our way
There is just a lot of darkness to be afraid of
So it's a good thing we are not afraid

There is no Superman in that phone booth
There is no rewarding our faith
There is no one who can save us
So it's a good thing we don't need to be saved

There are no starships in low earth orbit
No aliens to save us from ourselves
There is no voice willing to speak for us
So it's a good thing we know how to yell

There is no chosen one, no destiny, no fate
There is no such thing as magic
There is no light at the end of this tunnel
So it's a good thing we brought matches

-Matches
, Sifu Hotman
posted by chortly at 6:56 PM on December 14, 2015 [10 favorites]


>half of TOS was: silly action-adventure where Kirk and Spock run around practicing cowboy diplomacy.

Really?
Things need be taken into context. Context which unfortunately is lost on the young.

TOS occurred in the 60's. There was a Black officer as a major character. There was an interracial kiss. There was a direct condemnation of the Vietnam War - on TV. There was a move towards diplomacy with aliens rather than just shooting then out of the sky. There was an anti-capitalist sentiment stated several times in several different episodes. There were woman officers on deck. Non-humans were not only not always trying to kill us they were often a higher voice of morality (i.e. Mr. Spock)

All the above is trivial in the 21st century and all the above was practically unheard of and shocking in 1966 - especially in the context of a science fiction series.

It is easy to trivialize a 50 year old work without understanding the context. We live in that kind of society now. Snark and scorn reign supreme.

Star Trek was groundbreaking in the context of it's time. This bloody travesty from the Fast and Furious guy is merely Star Dreck
posted by AGameOfMoans at 7:00 PM on December 14, 2015 [48 favorites]


So it's basically Guardians of the Galaxy with Trek pants on?

Hm.
posted by Doleful Creature at 7:01 PM on December 14, 2015


MetaFilter won't be happy until they bring back the Three Bs: beige, Berman, and Braga.

Try Bajor, Behr (Ira Steven), and Bashir.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:01 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


This trailer was a dumb looking action movie with some Star Trek looking people in it. I haven't seen any Fast & Furious, so maybe it'll be smarter than that. I grew up with TOS and I like some action, but I like some thoughtfulness, and I was pretty sure NuTrek lost a lot of that when I figured out they were whitewashing Khan. (I skipped that movie.) This one looks like a Netflix rental.

There's nothing wrong with dumb (fun) action movies, but it's not what I watch Star Trek for.
posted by immlass at 7:01 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


I like movies where people just talk.

My Dinner With Jean-Luc. The captain spends two hours discussing both the philosophical underpinnings and the practical implications of the Prime Directive with Andorian diplomat Shrath Th'voqohr (played by Ian McKellen), over a five course meal with wine pairings.
posted by leotrotsky at 7:05 PM on December 14, 2015 [79 favorites]


Really?

Yes really.

All the above is trivial in the 21st century and all the above was practically unheard of and shocking in 1966 - especially in the context of a science fiction series.

Which is why I said "about half" of TOS.

Look: I fucking love Star Trek. I fucking love TOS. It's beautiful, moving, groundbreaking stuff. But let's not pretend that Gene Roddenberry snuck socialist agitprop on America's airwaves for three seasons.
posted by Automocar at 7:07 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Automocar: "Look: I fucking love Star Trek. I fucking love TOS. "

"Why, some of my best friends are Star Treks!"
posted by barnacles at 7:09 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


My Dinner With Jean-Luc. The captain spends two hours discussing both the philosophical underpinnings and the practical implications of the Prime Directive with Andorian diplomat Shrath Th'voqohr (played by Ian McKellen), over a five course meal with wine pairings.

You have NO IDEA how much I want to see this film. Please send me a link to the Kickstarter so I can invest heavily in it.
posted by mmoncur at 7:12 PM on December 14, 2015 [34 favorites]


Disney/Viacom/Beatrice brings you Luke Skywalker vs. Paul Muad'dib vs. Dr. Spock, because the spice be with you ... we mean Mr. Spock ... whatever get a life you nerds
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 7:13 PM on December 14, 2015


>But let's not pretend that Gene Roddenberry snuck socialist agitprop on America's airwaves for three seasons.

There is no reason at all to pretend
posted by AGameOfMoans at 7:13 PM on December 14, 2015 [9 favorites]


There was money in TOS.
posted by Automocar at 7:16 PM on December 14, 2015


If Deanna Troi were here, she'd be all "I'm sensing some hostility in this thread."
posted by teponaztli at 7:16 PM on December 14, 2015 [27 favorites]


My Dinner With Jean-Luc

And this is why I need to make a supercut of Garak and Bashir having lunch. It's basically MDWA on the installment plan.
posted by Halloween Jack at 7:28 PM on December 14, 2015 [16 favorites]


The empire frontier strikes back.
posted by telstar at 7:32 PM on December 14, 2015


My Dinner with Android: Geordi and Data discuss Data's cat for several interminable hours in Ten-Forward . No food is served. As he walks sadly back to his quarters, Geordi reflects upon his life and comes to understand that he has been speaking to Lore, who does not own a cat.
posted by Auden at 7:40 PM on December 14, 2015 [41 favorites]


Heh.
posted by Artw at 7:43 PM on December 14, 2015 [11 favorites]


I actually dislike the way that Metafilter threads about Cultural Product often devolve into empty snark.

I agree. I think most of us here who do like the F&F movies are aware of the criticisms and still like the movies. Any criticism is not going to be really unique or insightful. So you're not sparing our feelings but more like not wasting our time.
posted by FJT at 7:53 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Can they just stop and run a TOS TV serial again? Ditch the A team actors, grab some up and coming talent, throw the action oriented directors into the garbage, and make New Trek Star Trek.

Seriously though. The success of the Martian and Interstellar showed that people are incredibly interested in stories about humans working together peacefully to overcome the practical problems inherent with space exploration. There's so much drama and untapped potential there! If someone could make a tv series based on those themes, they'd have a license to print money.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 7:56 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


Well, someone had to throw the Sad Puppies a bone.
posted by Soliloquy at 8:06 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


So you're not sparing our feelings but more like not wasting our time.

Says the person who's written several times as many words chasing me about it than were actually in my original brief offhand comment about the director.

Any criticism is not going to be really unique or insightful.

Are you sure? It might be shattering in its perspicuity and change your way of looking at the world! Probably not, but you never know.

I think most of us here who do like the F&F movies are aware of the criticisms and still like the movies.

Carry on, then! I have zero problem with people liking and disliking what they choose, as long as they afford me the same respect.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:08 PM on December 14, 2015


Warp factor 5 with science and reason, I liked Star Trek better when it was The Fast and The Curious.
posted by mazola at 8:17 PM on December 14, 2015 [9 favorites]


i mean first of all they should've used sure shot and not sabotage

No no no - Intergalactic, for the one two punch of being seemingly idiotically on the nose and super-annoying to those trek fans who know that the Federation don't have easy access to intergalactic travel capability.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 8:21 PM on December 14, 2015 [7 favorites]


I think most of us here who do like the F&F movies are aware of the criticisms and still like the movies. Any criticism is not going to be really unique or insightful. So you're not sparing our feelings but more like not wasting our time.

SO, what makes you like the F&F movies, aware as you are of the criticisms? I mean, in light of how much that might be relevant to Lin's turn at Trek, given the preview we've seen here.
posted by nom de poop at 8:25 PM on December 14, 2015


I think most of us here who do like the F&F movies are aware of the criticisms and still like the movies. Any criticism is not going to be really unique or insightful.

And if this were a thread about the new F&F movie, you might have a point. (But not really.)
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:28 PM on December 14, 2015


You say sabotage. I say sabotage.

Let's call the whole thing off.
posted by RobotHero at 8:29 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


I've more or less given up on waiting for a complex, nuanced Star Trek movie, and now I'm just hoping that it gets a Netflix treatment.

The focal character is so obvious too, isn't it? Just drop the "tf" from Netflix and...
posted by mrjohnmuller at 8:36 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


Trailer looked pretty fun. The music was a good callback to the first JJ Abrams one. I'm guessing... Jim crashes the ship?

I hated the second one with a passion, but this might be festive enough to draw me back in - though I am leary of Lin's male gaze background booty etc.
posted by taterpie at 8:37 PM on December 14, 2015


But they took one of the most beloved franchises of all time, stripped it of everything that made it beloved in the first place, and turned it into a mindless dudebro action property.

Yeah, I was a Mission:Impossible fan too.
posted by bongo_x at 8:41 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


i thought nutrek 3 was going to focus on the klingons at lot more, given the events of 2.

i also agree that this trailor blows, but since Pegg is writing maybe it will turn out to be ok. You can take any 2 hour movie and cut a huge range of trailers that may or may not actually reflect what it's like.
posted by modernnomad at 8:50 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


I feel compelled to jump in and defend the Fast & Furious series, before people start using it as synonymous with "dumb bad movies." The latest one got a bunch of good critical press, including from Michael Phillips at the Chicago Tribune. It's a decent action flick. Doesn't mean the ST3 film is gonna be any good, or that it's a good aesthetic for Star Trek, but let's chill.

(also, the latest Mission:Impossible was fantastic.)
posted by Solon and Thanks at 8:51 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


The focal character is so obvious too, isn't it? Just drop the "tf" from Netflix and...

mrjohnmuller was never seen again.
posted by Artw at 8:57 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


You say sabotage. I say sabotage.

How? When?
posted by BungaDunga at 9:05 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


(also, the latest Mission:Impossible was fantastic.)

I don’t even doubt it. I didn’t so much hate the first couple as much as I was dumbfounded at something that was the complete antithesis of the TV series. But you can’t really hope for more these days from a remake. Next up; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy with wisecracks, jumping and explosions, or Sherlock Holmes, oh wait…
posted by bongo_x at 9:06 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


SO, what makes you like the F&F movies, aware as you are of the criticisms?

hot ppl driving fast with good musics
posted by poffin boffin at 9:10 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


That movie looks boring.
posted by eagles123 at 9:22 PM on December 14, 2015


LISTEN ALL Y'ALL IT'S A SABOTAGE! - ahhhhhh, I feel so much better now.
posted by stevil at 9:27 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


I'm guessing that the nu-Trek mostly annoys the Next Generation generation who didn't grow up with Kirk punching all the aliens that he didn't sleep with.

Chenza at court. The court of silence. Temarc: the river Temarc in winter.

Obviously this needs more boring discussions around a conference table in the captain's ready room.

ZINDA! HIS FACE BLACK! HIS EYES RED!
posted by snuffleupagus at 9:36 PM on December 14, 2015 [18 favorites]


hot ppl driving fast with good musics

also familia yo

posted by juv3nal at 10:05 PM on December 14, 2015


[Pegg] said he had been asked to make the new Star Trek film “more inclusive”.

“They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y,” he said of the original draft.

“Avengers Assemble, which is a pretty nerdy, comic-book, supposedly niche thing, made $1.5bn dollars. Star Trek: Into Darkness made half a billion, which is still brilliant.

“But it means that, according to the studio, there’s still $1bn worth of box office that don’t go and see Star Trek. And they want to know why.”

He added: “People don’t see it being a fun, brightly coloured, Saturday night entertainment like the Avengers,” adding that the solution was to “make a western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent.”

posted by Iridic at 10:08 PM on December 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


As far as I'm concerned, what destroyed the Trek movie franchise were the shit TNG movies that I can't even differentiate in my head. Abrams' first movie was a damn sight more enjoyable than any of them. I even watched the nastily trollish wet-crap-onto-our-faces Into Darkness twice, which is one more time than I sat through Star Trek: Insurrection. And this looks to beat both of those Abrams films handily in that it actually appears to be about the final frontier and all. But I doubt my tastes correspond well with most others'. My favorite ST film is The Motion Picture. The one where Kirk is still slim and trim, Persis Khambatta fueled my and V'ger's adolescent fantasies, and pre-pervo Stephen Collins played a good guy. Plus, there's bonus hours and hours of a trippy 70's arena light show included right in the movie.
posted by xigxag at 10:11 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters

Star Trek: The "Ocean's" Picture
posted by xigxag at 10:16 PM on December 14, 2015 [5 favorites]


I'm torn about these new Trek movies.

I enjoy them but I'm not sure I like them.
posted by mazola at 10:33 PM on December 14, 2015 [3 favorites]


Neelix and Jar-Jar buddy comedy. We'll call it>> Mr. Gungan.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 10:34 PM on December 14, 2015


After a close look at the scene, I can say with confidence that the motorcycle was, indeed, jumping a shark.
posted by TDavis at 10:45 PM on December 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Star Trek: The "Ocean's" Picture

Star Trek: Beneath the Oceans

Kirk, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov steal the Enterprise in order to search for Spock (who got lost in time, trying to save Vulcan), then, I don't know, they time travel back too far and crash into the Marianas Trench in the 21st Century. They need to borrow some stuff from a nuclear wessel in Alameda to repair the Enterprise, invent transparent aluminum, appropriate some deep-sea submersibles from James Cameron, save a pair of whales from hostile deep-sea aliens, then go home in triumph.

Easily packed into a single nuTrek movie.
posted by Pryde at 11:05 PM on December 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


the shit TNG movies that I can't even differentiate in my head

You broke your little ships.
posted by lumensimus at 11:14 PM on December 14, 2015 [6 favorites]


In even the silliest episodes, TOS Kirk always felt like an adult, and like someone who had earned his command at the young age he did (mid-thirties).
posted by Pryde at 11:24 PM on December 14, 2015 [12 favorites]


My son and I were discussing the new Paramount Star Trek series and how we hope that it happens in the Startrek Prime universe. "Then we can just pretend that the last two movies never happened," he said.
posted by LarryC at 12:27 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


Peter Jackson finally films the Scouring of the Shire as Oceans Eleventy.

I think I'd be fine with a western, or thriller, or heist with a Star Trek flavor packet stirred into it. Toy Story 3 is a prison break movie, Aliens is a military adventure, etc. Fans and norms alike can love the hell out of that.

I don't think STID left money on the table because it was too Trekky, though. They NuTrek movies were just attempts to do action movies, except "action movie" apparantly meant generic Hollywood stubbly white guy cliché crap to the writers. Then they sucked at instantiating it all in the Trek universe because they are are assholes and hacks. Then they missed the whole point by making the action scenes fucking unimaginative and pointless.
posted by nom de poop at 12:49 AM on December 15, 2015 [5 favorites]


Oh God, is Idris Elba supposed to be a Reman?

You have a world of lore to pull from and you pull from NEMESIS?
posted by lumensimus at 1:19 AM on December 15, 2015 [9 favorites]


I feel compelled to jump in and defend the Fast & Furious series, before people start using it as synonymous with "dumb bad movies."

I think you might have come to this thread a bit late for that.

By fourteen years.
posted by biffa at 2:30 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


This has always been Paramount's doing. JMS understood this during Babylon 5: as soon as you let the execs meddle, it will tend to make you create crappy art.

And there's ample evidence, such as the comments in this thread:

Here is what Abrams thinks about Trek.

what destroyed the Trek movie franchise were the shit TNG movies that I can't even differentiate in my head

Even Simon Pegg is quoted:

"They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little too Star Trek-y. [Instead,] make a Western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent."

The common denominator to these is quite obvious.
posted by polymodus at 3:37 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


It is possible to make a good Star Trek movie that is true to the spirit of Star Trek, and still be entertaining and inclusive of non-fans. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, anyone?
posted by KHAAAN! at 4:11 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


Star Trek: A Little Too Star Trek-y.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 4:28 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


no one's seeing a movie because "that trailer explosion was super cool."

Michael Bay would beg to differ. Ask anyone what they remember from the ID4 trailer.

Sure, Trek is now boldly going where every other franchise has gone before. But this isn't the 60s or 80s. This is the Trek of this generation, the first generation that won't live as long as its parents, the generation that realizes resources aren't limitless, that realizes sometimes the best solution is just the least crappy option. This is the first generation where the middle class is outnumbered by those above and below. This is a generation where things are actually getting demonstrably worse. Trying to sell them on the idea that things will be better in the future just doesn't work.

I'd rather Trek retained its aspirational aspect, but maybe these movies are doing exactly that. The problem is the current aspiration for the future is just the fact that humans survive at all.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 4:41 AM on December 15, 2015 [8 favorites]


As far as I'm concerned, what destroyed the Trek movie franchise were the shit TNG movies that I can't even differentiate in my head.

First Contact wasn't a great movie but the "Diehard on a starship" parts of it were a lot of fun.
posted by octothorpe at 4:52 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


"I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little too Star Trek-y. [Instead,] make a Western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it’s more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent."

Its a fair point, in the current movie environment its difficult to see anyone coming up with an addition to an established sci-fi franchise that would excite an audience. Circle of life?
posted by biffa at 4:59 AM on December 15, 2015


"humans working together peacefully to overcome the practical problems inherent with space exploration. There's so much drama and untapped potential there! If someone could make a tv series based on those themes..."

I so wanted that from Enterprise.
I really want to see a show which shows a spaceship as isolated outpost far from home.
I want the show to ruthlessly keep track of what resources have been used and stick to it (I am looking at you Voyager and your complement of 38 irreplaceable photon torpedos). Stargate Universe tried vaguely, but then got cancelled. BSG had the population blackboard but the numbers were a bit too big to really get a feel for the resources).

So what I guess I'm saying is a show where the first experimental human warp ship (which can be called the enterprise if you like) gets lost and it's gallant crew use their consistent and dwindling bill of materials Martian style to slowly try and find the way home.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 5:26 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


That's a pretty good Sabotage line for the post title, but I probably would have gone with:

"Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy?"
posted by Aznable at 5:31 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


I'd rather Trek retained its aspirational aspect, but maybe these movies are doing exactly that. The problem is the current aspiration for the future is just the fact that humans survive at all.

I dunno, the Cold War era had it's own questions along those lines.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:42 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


> "I really want to see a show which shows a spaceship as isolated outpost far from home. I want the show to ruthlessly keep track of what resources have been used and stick to it."

It was called Battlestar Galactica (the one that began in 2003), and the first couple of seasons were truly excellent.
posted by kyrademon at 6:00 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


Any word on Fred Kelly as Bunny?
posted by whuppy at 6:02 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


Stargate Universe was supposed to be big on the who bullet counting thing, and I think they did well giving a feel of limited resources even if they fell hard on that other Voyager trope, time travel reset buttons. It started getting pretty unteresting towards the end, but sadly the numbers weren't there for it.
posted by Artw at 7:19 AM on December 15, 2015


I'm still disappointed with the Star Trek V trailer. It made the movie look better than it was.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:28 AM on December 15, 2015


Star Trek played a unique role in SF that has not been replaced by other narratives, much less augmented by reboots of other franchises that change them in the Star Trek direction. Perhaps more importantly, these changes are not just isolated events -- they are part of a sea-change that has occurred in a vast amount of mainstream film since the 70s, with very little counter-current in the other direction. Star Trek was optimistic science-utopianism, interested in exploration, mutual understanding, multicultural respect and non-interference, camaraderie, cool ideas and philosophy, and a variety of other progressive ideals as embodied in the first show and its sequel (TNG). Like so many other SF narratives (including Star Wars, in its way), what began as a flawed but genuinely progressive world has been step-by-step corrupted, rebooted, and sequelled into a fundamentally conservative mold, where violence solves most problems, characters are simplistic and relatively unchanging, science is merely a guise for plot, and the main argument in favor generally takes the apolitical form of "sit back, turn off your brain, and enjoy it." Again -- this isn't something unique to Star Trek, but in what has happened to Star Trek the general cultural shift to the right in the US and its premiere art-form is acutely evident

It is as if nobody remembers the 1980's, where every movie was about Defeating The Communists With Rocket Launchers, Regan was president, AIDS was a Gay Problem and Wall Street greed was at a (then) all-time high. The past was not a softer, more tolerant, more enlightened time. Star Trek - and the rest of mainstream sci-fi - has become a non-stop shoot-em-up-fest because that is (and always has been) the surest formula for success, and formerly boutique nerd culture has been mainstreamed. The basic equation, which I will call Bay's Law, is that Everything Which Is Profitable Will Be Turned To Shit. It happened with grunge, it continues to happen with healthcare, it is going to happen with public education, and it is right in front of everyone's faces when it comes to comics, sci-fi etc. The battle is lost, and everyone who cheered the mainstream cooption of nerd culture can thank themselves for aiding in the defeat. I mean, even working in technology has turned, thanks to money, into a cesspool of misogyny, greed and brotasticity.

If you want media that doesn't reflect a mainstream violence-as-a-solution ethos, you have to look somewhere besides the 13th #@&%@ Star Trek movie, which is, SPOILER ALERT, just a cash cow. See also: every Avenger's movie.
posted by grumpybear69 at 8:04 AM on December 15, 2015 [5 favorites]


Trying to sell them on the idea that things will be better in the future just doesn't work

I respectfully submit the wild success of the Martian for your consideration. That was a profoundly optimistic movie about the potential for achievement in the sciences when people of all races, genders, and nationalities put aside individual interests and work together. Interstellar, too, depicted a dying world but showed a path forward based on human ingenuity. Both of those were optimistic old-school hard scifi stories. Even our movies about dystopia (like the Hunger Games) are about individuals fighting revolutions for more compassionate worlds.

Today's young people are the generation that made Barack Obama and Occupy Wall Street happen - and before anyone says "yeah, well, that didn't pan out and now they're disillusioned" - the same young people have gone on to support Bernie Sanders, Black Lives Matters, etc.

Young people today have seen a lot of rough shit, but the idea that they're not interested in a better future is off the mark.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 8:30 AM on December 15, 2015 [12 favorites]


What the hell does this have to do with Star Wars?
posted by NedKoppel at 8:33 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little too Star Trek-y

This is one of the saddest things I have ever read.
posted by blurker at 8:34 AM on December 15, 2015 [8 favorites]


Speaking of BSG and the Beasties...
posted by NedKoppel at 8:37 AM on December 15, 2015


They had a script for Star Trek that wasn’t really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little too Star Trek-y

This is one of the saddest things I have ever read.


Agreed. And the fact that Simon Pegg became the quisling? I'll never be able to watch second series episodes of Spaced (post-The Phantom Menace betrayal) in quite the same way again.
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:46 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


We become the thing we hate the most.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 8:57 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


What the hell does this have to do with Star Wars?

Pay attention, we're talking about the Star Traks.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:08 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


What the hell does this have to do with Star Wars?

In some ways - and I don't necessarily agree - Star Wars is viewed as being the wellspring of many changes that are now part of current pop culture. It (along with some other films, like Jaws), were the start of the idea of the blockbuster movie - a film that had great thrills, special effects, that could dominate the box office. It is viewed as the start of a shift away from films that were more focused on drama and storytelling towards the creation of the franchise films, where the focus is on the action and the special effects and a level of ability to reproduce the same type of story and audience impacts.

Right now, we are at a point where the franchise influence is immensely strong and going cross-platform - Marvel and Star Wars are probably top of the heap; Harry Potter; Hunger Games; Game of Thrones; Walking Dead are some other examples; DC is trying to establish one; and it feels like the major studios/multimedia empires are all interested in finding the next one (or exhuming the graves of past ones and seeing if they can still walk). Star Trek is one of the potential next great franchises, but the approach (and it has been going on for years, not just with the reboots) has been to see if making it less philosophical and character focused will work. This means taking the setting of Star Trek and then injecting the ingredients of generic Sci-Fi action into it.

Now I enjoy the Marvel stuff and both Star Wars and Star Trek, and anyone who has partaken in a Game of Thrones discussion over on FanFare likely has noted what a fanboy I am. I don't necessarily view a franchise as a bad thing, but the overall drive towards it is doing a few things:

-it tends to create a generic soup, where the similarities between different products outweigh the differences. In my youth, Star Wars provided one type of experience (action & adventure), and Star Trek a different one (adventure & thoughtful exploration of an idea). They are still different products, but the focus for both is now an action & adventure experience.
-A tendency towards broing - not just the special effects & action extravaganza, but the use of the male gaze and touches designed to appeal to a young male audience (Game of Thrones; the reboot of Star Trek).
-as the franchise grows and sprawls, keeping the puzzle pieces together becomes more difficult, meaning a choice between narrative coherence in-universe or needing to delay/shoehorn plot developments around each particular piece of the franchise (this has been evident in some of Marvel's franchise universe, particularly Agents of Shield and the second Avengers film). It seems Star Wars might be on a similar track.
-bloating - particularly evident with the Lord of the Rings franchise & the Hobbit films; also the Harry Potter and Hunger Games universes.

Blah, blah, blah. Basically, for everyone engaged in the pursuit of your entertainment dollar, the best formula for the moment is to have a franchise that hits a lot of common denominators and can be built upon ad infinitum. They dominate the landscape to such an extent right now that they are hard to escape. Star Wars is one amongst many, but it is a big example of how to do it.
posted by nubs at 9:11 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


All I want to know is if I will understand this movie without first having seen Star Trek Bed and Star Trek Bath.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 9:19 AM on December 15, 2015 [17 favorites]


poffin boffin: "altho tbh i think TOS kirk would've been more about rhymin and stealin"

Brass Monkey, surely.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:36 AM on December 15, 2015


Wow, Metafilter sounds really middle-aged lately. I think many around my age cohort (Xers, if you will) forget that large-scale creative properties are just that, things that businesses own rights to and use to make money. Because we are, really, the first fandom age cohort, we have often forgotten that the massive, corporation-created creative works we have so loved for so long are much more like widgets or plumbing supplies or whatever to the companies that control and profit from them.

Our personal, long-time relationships with these characters, stories, and universes have obscured the essential nature of those products: Paramount doesn't exist to make Star Trek, good or bad. Paramount exists to make money. They think this kind of ST movie will make money, so this is what is being made. When I was younger, it seemed more obvious that one shouldn't expect commercial endeavors to prize any kind of artistic integrity at all, yet now we seem to be in a place where a for-profit corporation somehow owes it to us to suddenly find a need for any kind of creative integrity or substance when their interest is making money.

I understand the criticism that this trailer looks like it's for a bad, cookie-cutter action movie; I just don't understand the indignation about what Star Trek is supposed to be, or what this particular movie ought to be. We, the customers, are entitled to nothing from this for-profit entity--as they are entitled to nothing from us, if they make dumb, generic movies masquerading as more interesting properties.

In sum, this.
posted by LooseFilter at 9:47 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


I don't claim to be a huge Trekkie or whatever, but I liked TOS and watched the shit out of TNG when it was on, every week with my younger stepbrother. Never much cared for DS9 or Voyager, and upon rewatching TNG I'm not really a fan anymore--it's just kinda bland and aged about as well as other 90s stuff like X-Files and Fu-Schnickens IMO. The Borg stuff was cool though. In retrospect only TOS really continues to stand out for me, and I can see why they went back to that for the reboot movies. These new movies are OK "popcorn movies" but what worked for me about TOS was the charisma of the actors combined with the campy B-movie effects and costumes and ridiculous action and space battles. It was a show they had a lot of ideas for and it was fun to watch them try to make them work--and often fail. You won't get something like this from the movies. Or "brain & brain, what is brain?". Look at how Bones leaps over to the table in that scene, how exaggerated and over-the-top everything is. The problem I have with non-TOS Trek is that it's simply not as fun as the old stuff. Almost all the main characters in TNG and DS9 were all formal and stiff. The only guy in the original series like that was Spock, and it was almost always played as a foil. The new movies seem to want to create that fun again, but it's like they didn't think about why TOS was fun to begin with. They are trying to do it with fancy effects and explosions and Beastie Boys songs and a Poochie version of Kirk. It makes for a pretty standard sci fi action flick but it doesn't work as something in the vein of TOS.
posted by Hoopo at 9:55 AM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


I don't think one is required to feel "owed something" by Paramount in order to feel disappointment with what is being provided here.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:56 AM on December 15, 2015 [10 favorites]


It's not the disappointment that I criticize (I understand and share that); it's the entitlement expressed by sentiments of 'this thing ought to be more this way and not that way'.
posted by LooseFilter at 9:58 AM on December 15, 2015


We, the customers, are entitled to nothing from this for-profit entity--

Maybe not, but people have the right to voice their disappointment.
(Upon preview: Jinx, Chrystosom!)

I'm glad Solon and thanks mentioned The Martian upthread. That movie had the feel that appealed to me in the old Star Treks - a sense of challenge and adventure, cooperation and cleverness. And ahem, it was hugely succesful. Which also didn't surprise me one bit, because I've long had the feeling that the studios are a bit misguided in their fixation on pleasing mainly the dudebro segment.
posted by sively at 10:02 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


One key point on why the Star Wars reboot looks good to me and why the Star Trek reboots have me less enthusiastic, it would be that John Williams is still composing the soundtrack for Star Wars and Star Trek since '09 decided to go in the direction of The Beastie Boys. Nothing against The Beastie Boys, but they definitely set a very different tone than this does.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:05 AM on December 15, 2015


I like Trek. I like this cast (Urban, especially). I like Lin. I like Pegg. I'll watch the hell out of this, especially since Orci isn't involved anymore. The Star Trek films have always dipped their toes into different genres, from submarine war films (II) to time travel comedies (IV) to cold war thrillers (VI). If this is the Star Trek/F&F mashup that people seem to fear (based on that one motorcycle bit, I guess?) I'm okay with that. Trek can be that too.

If the concern is that the trailer is too action heavy, I suggest you go back and watch the trailer for Wrath of Khan.

One key point on why the Star Wars reboot looks good to me and why the Star Trek reboots have me less enthusiastic, it would be that John Williams is still composing the soundtrack for Star Wars and Star Trek since '09 decided to go in the direction of The Beastie Boys.

The direction of the Beastie Boys? Michael Giacchino's score for the 2009 film is great! The Beastie Boys were used in one scene in the 2009 film (that sorta worked) and now in this trailer.
posted by brundlefly at 10:19 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


This trailer put me in mind of two things: i) Sabotage is no shortcut to cool, any more than grafting Dedicated Follower Of Fashion onto The Search For Spock would have been; ii) Karl Urban's McCoy (like Karl Urban generally) is Super Good Value.
posted by comealongpole at 10:21 AM on December 15, 2015


If Deanna Troi were here, she'd be all "I'm sensing some hostility in this thread."

First-season Troi, sure.

Of course, if Abrams et al. did a TNG reboot, that's all she'd say as she'd be reduced to a one-dimensional caricature based on an inaccurate pop culture perception of her most notable character trait.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 10:31 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


If nothing else I'm a bit optimistic because this looks like a fun adventure on an alien planet, which would be a nice change of pace after the dour and cynical 9/11 Trutherism of Into Darkness.

Also, it probably won't be aping Wrath of Khan in utterly pointless ways.
posted by brundlefly at 10:31 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


Also: Idris Elba.
posted by brundlefly at 10:33 AM on December 15, 2015


Sadly I suspect the entire score will NOT be by the Beastie Boys, who may not even feature in the finished product.

Perhaps Clint Mansell of Pop Will Eat Itself could be brought in next time.
posted by Artw at 10:34 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


The direction of the Beastie Boys? Michael Giacchino's score for the 2009 film is great ! The Beastie Boys were used in one scene in the 2009 film (that sorta worked) and now in this trailer.

It didn't work at all for me, and it's the only part of the soundtrack I even remember. This is of course more a symptom of changing trends in all movie scores, but it's striking that with how much Star Wars has done wrong with new content they get on a deep level how much the music sets the emotional stage. New Trek is about changing Trek for a modern audience that never liked old Trek to begin with, new Star Wars is about trying to recreate the timeless parts of what has always worked with it across generations. As much as I hated the prequels, I can at least respect what Lucas was trying to do for me as a longtime fan.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:35 AM on December 15, 2015


I'm sure that they don't have a score for Trek yet, scores tend to come pretty late in the process and this movie doesn't get released until next summer. It's pretty typical to use a pop song in a trailer that never actually shows up in the movie.
posted by octothorpe at 10:37 AM on December 15, 2015


Yeah, I get it, but The Force Awakens didn't need to use The Foo Fighters or something in the trailer for a reason.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:39 AM on December 15, 2015


a fun adventure on an alien plane

If there's one thing you can get from this its that Kirk, Spock and Bones go down to an alien planet and try and solve some kind of space mystery, which is astonishingly a NuTrek first.
posted by Artw at 10:42 AM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


Lin and Pegg do at least like Star Trek, which will make a change from Abrams. So there's always a chance they'll sneak in a few bits that are a little more reminiscent of Star Trek's former nature. But the DNA of the reboot is so thoroughly, hopelessly generic action bro'ey that it's unlikely to be more than set dressing. And I don't pay to watch bro shows anymore.
posted by tavella at 10:43 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


Orci is out of the picture too, which is great news.
posted by Artw at 10:44 AM on December 15, 2015


If there's one thing you can get from this its that Kirk, Spock and Bones go down to an alien planet and try and solve some kind of space mystery, which is astonishingly a NuTrek first.

It would make my day if we don't see Earth at all. For a franchise that's ostensibly about exploration it likes to hang out in the front yard a whole lot.
posted by brundlefly at 10:45 AM on December 15, 2015


a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters

Star Trek: The "Ocean's" Picture


"Badda-Bing, Badda-Bang."
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:51 AM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


We, the customers, are entitled to nothing from this for-profit entity--as they are entitled to nothing from us, if they make dumb, generic movies masquerading as more interesting properties.


I'm not owed anything, nor do I feel entitled. However, in addition to voting on these efforts by not opening my wallet, I also think that unless we express our disappointment in the choices being made and the direction being taken, we aren't doing ourselves any favours.
posted by nubs at 10:52 AM on December 15, 2015 [7 favorites]


I'll wait for reviews, but am not remotely inspired to follow this.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 10:59 AM on December 15, 2015


BungaDunga: You say sabotage. I say sabotage.

How? When?
"Spock, sabotage the system."
posted by ob1quixote at 11:29 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


Trek suffers from many of the same narrative problems as Superman does. Both are supposed to be reflections of what humanity is supposed to be like at its best. NuTrek seems to have fallen for the current trend of grey and gritty, where there are no right choices, while missing the fact that you can still have people at their best in those kinds of situations, even when old Kirk wasn't playing by the rules, he was still playing by rules. I'm even willing to argue that it's more interesting to put good characters in situations where there are no easy choices than it is to have a character take on of the easy choices and run with it. But that's harder to write, harder to sell, and probably won't sell as many tickets which is probably why NuTrek doesn't do it.
posted by Meeks Ormand at 11:34 AM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


Script by Simon Pegg? All right, shut up and take my money.

As has been mentioned, apparently the script he reworked was considered to "Star Trek-y" so personally I won't be spending money on a Star Trek movie whose script was reworked to reduce the Star Trek in it.

I thought original Scotty was mostly ridiculous. Pegg's Scotty is absurdly ridiculous.

they are part of a sea-change that has occurred in a vast amount of mainstream film since the 70s, with very little counter-current in the other direction.

Indeed. Mainstream being the key word. Most of the Star Trek films have been terrible for different reasons but some not bad. I saw mixed results for the first 4 followed by more consistently terrible from then on. That Next Generation movie with the Romulans was total garbage for the same reasons the reboot films have been. There seems to be a fundamental philosophy of bigger=better, more action=better, and if we use the word "better" it will be better (i.e. see Donald Trump) for films made from television shows and that's what we'll get. It's bled into science fiction on televison as well, where you have a billion trillion million Daleks to deal with in Doctor Who or the grandiose plan which never really existed in Battlestar Galactica.

Mainstream cinema and television has been consistently horrible over the last decade. I can't even watch Colbert anymore because his show has the stink of the mainstream all over it. These new Trek films are openly appealing to mainstream tastes and I see it as an insult to audiences in general, who can usually appreciate films with substance if done well. I doubt this will be such a film. It will make tons of money and be enjoyed in a casual manner that I very much doubt will stand the test of time. I'd be shocked if there are groups of people who give two shits about this movie franchise 20 years from now.

Check out Chaos on the Bridge (it's now on Netflix) for some interesting insight into the direction of Next Generation and how producers, lawyers, and writers influenced it's course. I'm sure such things are pretty standard.

Eh, if you guys don't like, that's fine. But please don't shit on Justin Lin or the Fast & Furious series (this is more to some of the other folks in the thread than chortly).

If you're free to say you like, love, adore something, which you are, others are free to say otherwise. Are you new to threads about films, television, music? There is plenty of stuff I adore that others feel is absolute garbage. They're free to feel that way and free to say so, snarkly or otherwise.

The bit with the motorbike is a clever homage to Captain Picard driving around in a dune buggy, screaming in delight

Which was also terrible. They do terrible with great consistency.

So it's basically Guardians of the Galaxy with Trek pants on?

Does this mean it's going to as boring as GoG?

Any criticism is not going to be really unique or insightful.

This includes positive criticism as well? What do you mean by criticism?

A friend of mine, after watching Transformers: Dark of the Moon or whatever it was called, which was the first new Transformer movie they saw, was heartbroken.

I was just shocked at how bad that film is. The Transformers meant nothing to me. I believe there have been 3 sequels? I was told it was a great film. It was not.

It's not the disappointment that I criticize (I understand and share that); it's the entitlement expressed by sentiments of 'this thing ought to be more this way and not that way'.

Metafilter: Fucking pretty much anything can be cast as entitlement.
posted by juiceCake at 12:30 PM on December 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


It's not the disappointment that I criticize (I understand and share that); it's the entitlement expressed by sentiments of 'this thing ought to be more this way and not that way'.

The audience isn't stupid.

That's the counterargument.
posted by polymodus at 12:32 PM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]




A friend of mine, after watching Transformers: Dark of the Moon or whatever it was called, which was the first new Transformer movie they saw, was heartbroken.

I was just shocked at how bad that film is. The Transformers meant nothing to me.


By the time the films came out, they meant pretty much nothing to me, either, and I struggle with the idea that these movies somehow "exploded and mangled" someone's childhood. I was huge into Transformers as a kid. Had the toys. Watched the cartoon any time it was on. Saw the 1986 animated movie in the theater and cried when Prime died. Was over the moon when Marvel put out a GI Joe and Transformers crossover comic; it was like my 2 favorite toys/cartoons in one setting and it was all my friends and I could have ever wished for in a comic. But I got older. Have you watched the cartoons or animated movie since growing up? They're fucking terrible! I wouldn't say this about everything I was into as a kid, necessarily. Star Wars is still OK by me. The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, Roald Dahl stuff...I mean yeah, the Michael Bay Transformers movies were crap and really hard to follow visually, but honestly...this friend of yours must have a lot invested in some cool toy robots for them to mess with his whole childhood.
posted by Hoopo at 1:29 PM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


Justin Lin on ‘Star Trek Beyond’ Criticisms: “We Are Trying to Be Bold and Take Risks”

"Director Forced to Defend Film After Outrage Over 90 Out of Context Seconds"
posted by brundlefly at 2:05 PM on December 15, 2015 [5 favorites]


"Destroyed my childhood" is the usual internet echo-chamber hyperbole.

But brand loyalty is a thing, and had previously been a big part in keeping the franchise running through multiple spin-offs. So while I don't feel particularly entitled or betrayed, I'm not feeling all that eager to talk up my anticipation film with Trekkie family and friends either.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 2:30 PM on December 15, 2015


Trek fans turning out to be bigger outrage monkeys than Who fans is really quite the thing.
posted by Artw at 2:42 PM on December 15, 2015




The real question is: what does Abraham Lincoln think?
posted by grumpybear69 at 4:23 PM on December 15, 2015


I'm not outraged, I'm disappointed. I just find it sad that a current-day version of the same canon is more racist and sexist and less imaginative and daring than a 50 year old version. And it's hard to get worked up about a 'clash of philosophies' when there's not much evidence in the previous movies that Kirk has any moral philosophy to defend, or that there's much worthwhile in the Federation. He likes being a captain, he likes fighting, he likes doing what is fun and challenging, he's got personal loyalties to certain people, but could you articulate any theory or ideology he holds apart from doing what he wants?
posted by tavella at 4:29 PM on December 15, 2015 [7 favorites]


Based on his comments, that sounds like something that Lin wants to explore.
posted by brundlefly at 4:40 PM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


Three movies in is likely a little too late for Kirk to believably develop a moral philosophy that is going to clash in any interesting way with another sophisticated ideology. If there is anything more to it than "I do what I want, captain, and so do you! How are we different?" I'm going to be surprised. And if there is any deeper reason to support Kirk than him not finding it as much fun to kill innocent people than the bad guy, I'll be equally surprised. Relative body counts are not quite the same as actual philosophical systems.
posted by tavella at 4:51 PM on December 15, 2015 [4 favorites]


I guess we'll find out when the movie comes out. I just think it's kind of weird to write this off, sight unseen when it's a completely new writing and directing team.
posted by brundlefly at 4:56 PM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


It’s A Clash Of Philosophies In STAR TREK BEYOND

This interview made me interested in the movie in ways the trailer never could.
posted by meese at 5:24 PM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm not outraged, I'm disappointed. I just find it sad that a current-day version of the same canon is more racist and sexist and less imaginative and daring than a 50 year old version.

That's a good reason to be excited about Justin Lin being brought on. Racist and sexist is pretty much the opposite of his Fast and Furious movies. Simon Pegg also has a good record on writing decent women characters. This could be better!
posted by hydropsyche at 5:42 PM on December 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


Well, someone had to throw the Sad Puppies a bone.

This seems an unlikely film to please them.
posted by Artw at 6:08 PM on December 15, 2015 [1 favorite]




"400 years ago, on Earth, workers who felt their livelihood threatened by automation flung their wooden shoes, called sabots, into the machines to stop them."
[Uhura and Chekov look at each other in confusion.]
[Valeris taps a nearby computer panel, "Sabotage" starts playing.]
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 9:54 PM on December 15, 2015 [11 favorites]


Khan killed it, really. Then TNG killed it again. Then Enterprse vaporized the ashes. Star Trek as a thing that always stays the same has been long gone for some time.
posted by Artw at 6:00 AM on December 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


I think, as fans, we are allowed to want our Trek to be Trek. There are plenty of other movie franchises that are not Trek, and there is no reason to make everything into the same car-chase-explosion kind of adventure movie.

That being said, I will see this because Karl Urban is absolutely the best McCoy I can imagine, and I have been squeeing over his portrayal since meeting him in the shuttlecraft on his way to Starfleet with the rest of the recruits.
posted by blurker at 8:33 AM on December 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


I also liked him as Éomer.
posted by Chrysostom at 8:45 AM on December 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


Dude, the problem is not that it stayed the same, the problem is it went backward. I don't think it's accidental that the worst previous rendition of Star Trek also went backwards. Okay, so you want to do a reboot... well, then, do something fucking interesting with it. Explore possibilities that were stillborn in the first version, that were held back by the time. The most disappointing thing about the first movie was there were flashes of what seemed like potentially interesting changes. There had been hints of a Spock-Uhuru interest in TOS, but of course network standards would never have allowed it because of racism. So hey, it looked like they might have an cool exploration possibility... except that after the movie, I read a soul-killing quote from Abrams about the only reason that he had the Spock-Uhuru romance was for the scene where Spock breaks down, because he needed a stand-in because Kirk and Spock weren't friends yet. And so Uhuru has been stuck as the girlfriend in an boring relationship. Similarly, blowing up Vulcan could lead to fascinating explorations among the survivors, how it shaped the Federation... but it turned out that mainly Abrams was only interested in Earth and disposed of externalities.

Chekov - in the 60s, it was super brave to have a Russian character. It was only 5 years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US still was laboring under an existential threat from the USSR, having a character that was not only Russian but very proud of it and constantly asserting the superiority of his culture; quite daring. It's not these days. Even having an Iranian character constantly talking of the glories of Persian culture wouldn't really recapture it, because there isn't the constant fear of being 15 minutes away from utter destruction. Chekov's mostly there to have a funny accent at this point.

So why on earith would you suddenly turn him into a genius so he can show up a year early? But there *is* a character who didn't get explored, whose actress ended up leaving the show because of sexist abuse: Yeoman Rand. She didn't get much to do in TOS, but there were interesting flashes with Charlie X and elsewhere. Bring *her* on, turn *her* into a genius if you must to explain it, and there is fresh potential to explore. You could continue the tradition of being daring and make her sexuality non-standard -- hell, Uhuru and her could be fun, and means they stop being girlfriend-bait for the male characters.

I could go on and on... (if you *must* rehash Khan, do something other than make him a mustache twirling villain who kills civilians for no reason, if you *must* rehash the your friend scene, make it between two characters who actually have relationship history. Maybe Spock and Uhuru. Hell, Rand and Uhuru would be entertaining if you had gone that way) - but you get the point I hope.
posted by tavella at 9:12 AM on December 16, 2015 [6 favorites]


Chekov - in the 60s, it was super brave to have a Russian character. It was only 5 years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US still was laboring under an existential threat from the USSR, having a character that was not only Russian but very proud of it and constantly asserting the superiority of his culture; quite daring

Chekov was supposedly partially created as a response to Soviet statements about being the first in space - maybe a publicity stunt, but maybe something more - but I've always read his "Russian superiority" thing as a bit of a running gag. Because no matter what the cultural reference, Pavel claimed it was Russian in origin.

But, to your larger point, yes - Star Trek was a show about taking some risks in terms of casting and storylines given the social climate of the day. The reboot is far less engaged on that front, which is a shame.
posted by nubs at 9:34 AM on December 16, 2015


I hated the rebooted Khan storyline. With the events of Space Seed and the tragic results of Ceti Alpha V--which is entirely due to Kirk not giving a shit about his marooned mutants as he runs off to the next adventure--Khan becomes the revenant of a Jacobean revenge drama. In fact, in almost every Western post Leone, Khan would be the unquestioned hero of the story.

Take that away, and Khan's emotional resonance is with Admiral Robocop, and Kirk just happens to be the wrong guy at the wrong time.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 11:13 AM on December 16, 2015


And, um, what are we supposed to do with the primary marketing vehicle of a feature film if not make judgements about whether it's worth spending premium money to see?
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 11:14 AM on December 16, 2015 [6 favorites]


I hated the rebooted Khan storyline

I really think JJ blew it with the storyline. He had a chance - and for brief time I thought he was taking it - to make NuKhan the good guy of the film.

I've expounded on this before, but I will again, because I am helpless to stop myself.

ST II: Kirk's Midlife Crisis is all about Kirk and him being faced the consequences of the decisions he has made to that point in his life, along with him having to face mortality and loss. Into Darkness, on the other hand, gives us a brash Kirk who doesn't understand about protecting his crew and about the responsibilities of command.

Khan in STII is what he needs to be; a revenant from Kirk's past, a haunting reminder of mistakes made. He's not wrong in his desire for revenge - which is part of why I think the film works well, because Kirk does have to come to terms with the problems of his past, and those problems are legit and big, but he's still the bad guy because he's indiscriminate in methods when it comes to getting his target (again, a necessity of the story, because Khan is the catalyst for Kirk's development - that wide scope draws in more elements of Kirk's past).

But in Into Darkness, we have a different Kirk who needs to learn something different. And initially, the film gives us a Khan who can fit that role - he's not evil, he's driven to do what he is doing to save his crew. He will do whatever is necessary to protect his crew, which is the very lesson NuKirk needs to learn (and original Kirk always knew that principle of command, it seems to me). Instead of making him the villain, Khan should have remained in that place - a commander, desperate to save his people. After some initial misunderstandings, Kirk and the Enterprise come to realize the righteousness of his cause, and side with him. This culminates in a big set piece battle during which time the Enterprise loses warp drive at the critical moment. But it is Khan who goes into the breach to fix the problem; Khan who gives his life to save the ship and his crew (who are now somehow on board the Enterprise) while Kirk stands and watches.

Khan remains the catalyst for Kirk in both films, but I think this outline changes the role in a way that suits what Kirk needs in both films. And it has the benefit of inverting audience expectations for the Old Trek crowd (Khan is the hero?!?!?!?), while not relying on any historical knowledge for the NuTrek crowd. You could even build in the KHAAANNNNNNN! scream, but one of anguish as Kirk looks on helplessly while Khan dies.

Anyways, just my take on how I see that Into Darkness could have been a better film. I am the nerdsplainer.
posted by nubs at 12:04 PM on December 16, 2015 [20 favorites]


Ugh. I hate when I brain-o a character name repeatedly!
posted by tavella at 12:49 PM on December 16, 2015


During the genetic wars of the 90s Khan actually fought the Beastie Boys in a giant robot.
posted by Artw at 12:52 PM on December 16, 2015 [3 favorites]


I think, as fans, we are allowed to want our Trek to be Trek.

I'm a fan. I don't think what I want Trek to be is like what you want Trek to be, though. I'm very happy with the reboots. I want space exploration to be exciting, not an encounter with a McGuffin of the Week to be defeated through techno-babble.

Most of all I want people who act like people. I don't want facsimiles of people wearing spandex while they act out fan fiction in front of a camcorder. "Ho ho he's drinking tea made to conform to very specific parameters that's a thing he does. Say something stupid but obvious about feelings, badly-built android! Oh look it's John de Mxyztplk, he'll certainly mix things up because reasons."
posted by obiwanwasabi at 3:57 PM on December 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


And, um, what are we supposed to do with the primary marketing vehicle of a feature film if not make judgements about whether it's worth spending premium money to see?

Yeah, consumer culture fully integrated. It’s an ad for a product they’re selling. "I don’t like the looks of that product based on the ad" seems like a reasonable response. They’re selling to me. I don’t owe them anything.
posted by bongo_x at 5:03 PM on December 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


The law is that our shared myths are private property, and that their owners have monopolistic control over when and how they will be told. It is true that legally the owners of our stories owe us nothing.

I remain free, even under current law, to object when, in my opinion, they are telling the stories badly.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 5:57 PM on December 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


I don't know. Give me a new crew with new adventures and the reboot would have worked. Instead, we had an overly convoluted time-travel plot to get Nimoy on the screen, followed by a mawkish imitation that required Nimoy to explain.

Just put Pine in the chair. Put Bale in the Batmobile. Put Brosnan or Craig in a tux. Put five different actors in 221B Baker Street every decade. Explaining how the new fits in with the old is tits on the storytelling bull.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 6:00 PM on December 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


During the genetic wars of the 90s Khan actually fought the Beastie Boys in a giant robot.

Yes but that occurred in ♫ another dimension ♫ ♫ another dimension ♫ ♫ another dimension ♫ ♫ another dimension ♫
posted by dephlogisticated at 7:14 PM on December 16, 2015 [10 favorites]


Pegg doesn't like the trailer either, asks fans to bear with them
posted by bonaldi at 5:45 AM on December 17, 2015 [4 favorites]


I would like nubs to be the head writer for all Star Trek properties, effective immediately.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:43 AM on December 17, 2015 [1 favorite]


Pegg doesn't like the trailer either, asks fans to bear with them

Oh, Simon, you're really not my idea of Scotty, but you love what I love, and so I will give you the benefit of the doubt...and my money.
posted by blurker at 8:09 AM on December 17, 2015


The common denominator to these is quite obvious.

Odo Blart, Space Mall Cop.
posted by Smart Dalek at 1:54 PM on December 17, 2015 [2 favorites]


Oh, Simon, you're really not my idea of Scotty, but you love what I love, and so I will give you the benefit of the doubt...and my money.

Enh, not me. They need to show me a better trailer or I'm Netflixing it. Sorry his feelings are hurt, but that has no bearing on whether my ass is in a paid ticket seat. (Tumblr, or at least the end of it I read, is very upset that we've upset Pegg.) This is why we can't have nice fandom things: the people making these movies rely on the fans to show up anyway even if they serve a steaming pile of crap.
posted by immlass at 2:58 PM on December 17, 2015 [4 favorites]


Star Trek: Beyond Sabatage [sic]
posted by sparklemotion at 3:38 PM on December 17, 2015 [1 favorite]


Non-video link (well, with video, but also words) on Pegg's ambivalence about the trailer.

With not that much to back it up, I admit, I feel like Pegg still has some of his integrity and youthful Spaced-era geekiness left, hasn't entirely been swallowed up by Hollywood, and so I'm willing to wait and see. If the movie actually ends up somewhere between what we've been given in the last couple of movies and a little more traditional trekkiness (the generic action-movie nonsense of the trailer notwithstanding) as he suggests it will, then that'll be a step in the right direction, at least. We'll see.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:16 PM on December 17, 2015


What's up with the angry albino Narn towards the end?
posted by snuffleupagus at 9:08 PM on December 17, 2015 [1 favorite]


Still cheesed off about the Centauri Cardassian occupation, I guess.
posted by nubs at 9:14 PM on December 17, 2015


"Check out the LITERAL CLIFF HANGERS. THERE'S MORE THAN ONE"

They will all be saved by Spock in rocket boots.
posted by Sys Rq at 9:32 PM on December 20, 2015


« Older Sweet dreams!   |   “...people are guilty if they eat shrimp that we... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments