Star Trek Beyond (the not The Search for Spock)

[Graham]

Horrible looking trailer IMO. The only thing I liked in it was Karl Urban.

From the trailer, not even worth a rental.

[Phobos]

Wat.

[Mommar]

Yeah, ugh, I watched the trailer again and there's just so much stupid. The motorcycle because, hey, it's that guy who made The Fast and the Furious. Better put in a car stunt. And then the lame leap from the escape pod to the rock climbing handhold Scotty makes like it's suddenly Mission Impossible.

And I can't tell if wrecking the Enterprise once and for all is because Simon Pegg wanted to find a way to erase that thing, Justin Lin couldn't figure out how to make a decent movie with star ships (and without motorcycles), or because JJ Abrams is still executive producer and hates Star Trek so he ordered The Enterprise destroyed once and for all just like his movies are destroying the franchise.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Mommar

[sh9000]

[Mr March]

It's like Star Trek's sophisticated elder statesman father died, leaving the IP to his barely-there frat-boy son, the idiot who thought that embarrassing, nerd-dump would work if only it had more Fantasy Football, Maxim Magazine and fist-bumping to the "good music" they used to play when he was a 90's teen

[spanner]

Trek preview looks ok i guess..

[JB0]

... JJ Abrams is still executive producer and hates Star Trek so he ordered The Enterprise destroyed once and for all just like his movies are destroying the franchise.

Oh, come on. The franchise was doing a fine job of destroying itself without JJ's help. Voyager and Enterprise are near-universally reviled, and justifiably so.

[505thAirborne]

Sheldon and the guys from The Big Bang Theory all just had a heart-attack!

Wouldn't be the first time a bad trailer has ruined a good movie, but damn that looks lame.

[jenius]

That wasn't a trailer, it was a music video, and it wasn't as good a music video as the one that originally featured that song... or even the live performance at that year's VMAs.

I think the producers just keep having happy accidents with the reboot series. Like they heard that Star Trek was supposed to be 'serious' so they made Into Darkness and it minted a ton but people were like "No, not THAT kind of serious, as in blowing stuff up and having a horror movie kind of villain, it's supposed to be FUN but thoughtful." This time all they heard was FUN so they'll make it Fast & Furious in Space and it will make more money than any other Star Trek ever. Then everyone will be like "Hey, we said THOUGHTFUL too!" and they'll make a good Star Trek movie and everyone will be like "Yick, that movie felt way too Star Trekky" and then will get Star Trek V - Beyond 2, Extremely Beyond.

[areaseven]

Bad trailer or not, this will still be better than Star Trek V.

[Dynaman]

I can't believe people here are remarking that the possible destruction of the Enterprise is any kind of problem. The original Enterprise was destroyed how many times? Including the A,B,C,D,E,etc...

[areaseven]

[Mommar]

Oh, come on. The franchise was doing a fine job of destroying itself without JJ's help. Voyager and Enterprise are near-universally reviled, and justifiably so.

Those aren't films, and they're actually not universally reviled. You'll get just as many opinions about Voyager or Enterprise being someone's favorite as you will TOS, TNG or DS9.

Bad trailer or not, this will still be better than Star Trek V.

Other than budgetary restraints people are far too harsh on Star Trek V... and that dumb flamenco scene with Uhura.

I can't believe people here are remarking that the possible destruction of the Enterprise is any kind of problem. The original Enterprise was destroyed how many times? Including the A,B,C,D,E,etc...

It's just that after aping things, poorly, from Star Trek II in Into Darkness with Khan and a crew members death, etc. they've now decided to destroy the Enterprise in their third iteration... just like what they did in Star Trek 3. It smacks of the same issues present in Into Darkness.

[JB0]

I can't believe people here are remarking that the possible destruction of the Enterprise is any kind of problem. The original Enterprise was destroyed how many times? Including the A,B,C,D,E,etc...

I don't think the A and B ever got canonically destroyed. Obviously they were retired from service, but there's no indication it was a violent retirement.

The E was pretty banged up, but not retired, when last seen.

Same is true of the NX-01, if I recall correctly. I didn't actually WATCH the final episode of that one, I admit.

But yeah, it wouldn't be the first time they blew up an Enterprise. It's highly likely, if the last movie's desperate attempt to homage/crap on the bullet points of Star Trek II is any indication.

[JB0]

Those aren't films, and they're actually not universally reviled. You'll get just as many opinions about Voyager or Enterprise being someone's favorite as you will TOS, TNG or DS9.

I... didn't say they were films? I said the franchise was doing a fine job destroying itself without Abrams' help, not that the Voyager and Enterprise movies killed the franchise.

And, well... while I also didn't say universally, I DID say near-universally. And I stand by that. The balance of opinion on both shows is far more against them than for them*.

Hell, Enterprise actually got Trek kicked off the air, putting an end to two decades of continuous Star Trek productions. It DID come within a stone's throw of killing the franchise.

I remember how crazy it was when Deep Space 9 started, and we had TWO STAR TREK SHOWS AT ONCE. Those days were awesome.

*I happen to think Enterprise was, on average, better than Voyager, but recognize that is ALSO a minority opinion. And when Enterprise was bad, it was VERY bad.

[Duke Togo]

Trek was all but dead before JJ came on board, and the first reboot film reinvigorated the franchise. You'd have to be living in a fantasy world of denial to think otherwise.

[Mommar]

Trek was all but dead before JJ came on board, and the first reboot film reinvigorated the franchise. You'd have to be living in a fantasy world of denial to think otherwise.

This argument... I am sick to death of this argument. Putting a nametag on a giant dick and telling me I should love it because it still has that name isn't proof of something being better. It made money, so frakking what? McDonalds makes money, it's not gourmet, it's actually quite crap. While Star Trek had been written into a corner by it's original creators it's very well possible to create something smart that also has more action and a faster pace, Star Trek still could have been Star Trek and been more exciting. We've seen numerous movies just this year that have pulled this off.

Coming in here, as non-fans, and telling the old fans we should be happy that you now like the half-baked, POS JJ has put out and we should be grateful for it is insulting. Passing off a blow-up doll as your dead wife doesn't mean your wife has been saved.

[JB0]

The original creators didn't write Trek into a corner. A pair of incompetent hacks proud of the fact they had no knowledge of the franchise's history did. A pair of hacks that took over after the original creator was dead(not that Roddenberry was a saint himself, but...).

But what do I know? I'm a non-fan that never liked anything before the Abrams movies. It isn't like I grew up watching Trek reruns, I DEFINITELY never wanted to be Captain Kirk when I grew up, I was totally not excited as hell to see them doing a BRAND-NEW STAR TREK SERIES, and I absolutely positively didn't waste hours of my life buried in Trek books because watching two shows a week PLUS RERUNS wasn't enough Trek for me. No, I never really cared much for Star Trek at all.

[Duke Togo]

This argument... I am sick to death of this argument. Putting a nametag on a giant dick and telling me I should love it because it still has that name isn't proof of something being better. It made money, so frakking what? McDonalds makes money, it's not gourmet, it's actually quite crap.

I could use this same description to describe most of Trek before the first reboot movie. What has occurred since that initial reboot is pretty much in line with too much of what came before: sub-par and uninteresting.

Trek didn't fail before this because it was too niche; it failed because it was bad. Khan and TNG were a long time ago, and they failed multiple times to produce anything of similar quality.

[Dobber]

I am a Star Trek fan...and....gasp...a Star Wars fan. I just like sci-fi/sci-fantasy period. I liked the rebooted/alternate universe by JJ well enough. Yes there are issues with them that my Trek fan side has problems with...but I still overall enjoyed them. I agree with what some others have said about the Berman and Braga era. Has some good but also has ALOT of bad. The cheese factor was strong with them. I would like a more "Cerebral" approach to Trek that can still incorporate some action too..which was what I was hoping was coming....but this trailer.....egads. I just did not like what I'm seeing...or more appropriately....I did not like how it was presented. Maybe this would have worked as a trailer AFTER the movie was released, but certainly not as our first look at it.

Chris

[Kanedas Bike]

I am a Star Trek fan...and....gasp...a Star Wars fan. I just like sci-fi/sci-fantasy period. I liked the rebooted/alternate universe by JJ well enough. Yes there are issues with them that my Trek fan side has problems with...but I still overall enjoyed them. I agree with what some others have said about the Berman and Braga era. Has some good but also has ALOT of bad. The cheese factor was strong with them. I would like a more "Cerebral" approach to Trek that can still incorporate some action too..which was what I was hoping was coming....but this trailer.....egads. I just did not like what I'm seeing...or more appropriately....I did not like how it was presented. Maybe this would have worked as a trailer AFTER the movie was released, but certainly not as our first look at it.

Chris

This.

The trailer just looked like a Star Trek original series TV episode, made for the big screen for this iteration of Star Trek. And as child that grew up watching TOS I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing.

A bad trailer does not a bad movie make, anymore than a really good trailer make or equate to a good movie.

-b.

[Mommar]

I could use this same description to describe most of Trek before the first reboot movie. What has occurred since that initial reboot is pretty much in line with too much of what came before: sub-par and uninteresting.

Trek didn't fail before this because it was too niche; it failed because it was bad. Khan and TNG were a long time ago, and they failed multiple times to produce anything of similar quality.

You're right, Branan and Braga messed up big time and you'll even hear Trek fans tell you that. Regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that new Trek "failing upward" isn't a valid argument. And don't assume I think Khan is the best movie, that's the fanboy favorite but it isn't the best film.

[Mazinger]

wheaton.jpg

Yeah basically. Won't pay money to see it. I did grow up watching the classic series on re-runs along with Twilight Zone re-runs in my area. I was 13 when Next Generation came out so I guess I was spoiled by decent science fiction.

I didn't mind the first JJ Trek, but really didn't like the Re-make of Khan. It just had no soul, which is actually what worries me about the Force Awakens. I worry that it might try to essentially re-play all the plot points of the original SW trilogy, the way the prequels did.

Anyways, the best comment I saw yesterday on the trailer summed it up for me, a trailer full of people jumping around.

[Duke Togo]

You're right, Branan and Braga messed up big time and you'll even hear Trek fans tell you that. Regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that new Trek "failing upward" isn't a valid argument. And don't assume I think Khan is the best movie, that's the fanboy favorite but it isn't the best film.

The Voyage Home is obviously the best of the movies. But Khan has enough testosterone and revenge-fueled machismo to make it a thoroughly enjoyable watch.

[sh9000]

Star Trek is sabotaged.

[Kanedas Bike]

Star Trek is sabotaged.

The movie will be fine.

Will it appease Star Trek traditionalists? Nope.

Will it win over hardcore Star Wars fans? Nope.

But it will be at the very least an enjoyable action science fiction film, and if that's what Star Trek films have been relegated to, well then so be it. Maybe the upcoming series will be more of what folks are looking for out of Trek.

-b.

[JetJockey]

I wasn't going to watch the trailer. I was going to give the new director a chance to do something different than what came before with those previous two poor Star Trek movies. But I read a post on Egotastic with some comments and just had to take a look. This looks even worse than the other two movies. With the music on it's like a bad joke. Even more of a parody than the last one. With the music on mute it's still bad. Just like the other two movies it's only Star Trek in name. What is really is, is just a generic space action movie, and I wrote this last night before Wil Wheaton's post. I don't think anymore, I know I can make a better Star Trek movie than what I'm seeing here. Even if Idris Elba is awesome in this, I didn't notice his character anywhere, what's going on in that trailer looks comical at best. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. The same people I assume are behind the production. So they aren't going to go that far from what they think their Star Trek series is about.

[peter]

Any identifiable aliens in the trailer? Looked like a Jem Hadar looking guy?

[electric indigo]

"We don't have any story to tell, but we put some eyeliner on Chris Pine..."

[Chewie]

I guess Lin is going to ignore the happenings of Into Darkness going forward.

A reboot of a reboot?

[Mommar]

I guess Lin is going to ignore the happenings of Into Darkness going forward.

A reboot of a reboot?

How would you assume that?

[Kyp Durron]

image.jpeg

Perfectly summed up my feelings. Although I have to admit that I loved watching the J.J. Fuglyprise biting the dust. $10 says they'll bring it back either as an "A" variant, or use time travel to prevent it's destruction, so I'm not going to get my hopes up yet.

[Kanedas Bike]

Enterprise A for sure.

They've progressively destroyed, or rather upped the amount of damage the new Enterprise sustained in each movie anyway. Someone here commented about how in Into Darkness the Enterprise took more hits in 30 seconds than it did the entirety of the original TV run.

-b.

*edit to clarify remarks about the Enterprise getting wrecked in each of the reboot films

Edited December 16, 2015 by Kanedas Bike

[Keith]

Meh, I both enjoyed the trailer, and like the current series direction. Far better than anything to come out of Voyager or Enterprise. But, hater's gonna hate.

[Mommar]

Far better than anything to come out of Voyager or Enterprise. But, hater's gonna hate.

Ladies and Gentlemen, irony.