Check it out here:

http://www.startrekmovie.com/

Trailer 2 is the newest one, trailer 1 has been out for a little while.

T & A in a Trek movie?

My wife is a Trek nut and she even said 'why bring the T&A into the franchise, it was never about the sex'

T & A in a Trek movie?

My wife is a Trek nut and she even said 'why bring the T&A into the franchise, it was never about the sex'

There was plenty o' skin in the original series

T & A in a Trek movie?

My wife is a Trek nut and she even said 'why bring the T&A into the franchise, it was never about the sex'


Huh?
The series was pretty much about Kirk going from Planet to Planet and getting lucky on every one. :yes:

Three words: Green alien women.

Thanks for the heads up.

Bart

What izzit about "Trek" that has kept us enthralled for nearly 45 years ? You go back & watch the original ones & they're SO 1960s cheesy-Cheap sets, $1.98 props, writing & acting about par for the course, but, God help me, I'll sit there thru EVERY one of 'em, & prolly mouth most of the lines...The one(s) I lusted after were Grace Lee Whitney-Yeoman Rand- & Kim Darby-"Miri"...Altho I though Janice's hair was a little over the top...The "cheese" factor coming in again. But a lot of the women on "Trek" had a BIG "Po' White Trash" factor to them...Maybe THAT was the appeal...(grin)

Kirk hitting it with all the women was more of implied thing throughout the series and into the movies. I guess Hollywood thinks it needs to add the actual act to get fans into the theaters. Trekkies are going to go because its a Trek movie, not because Kirk is getting it on with some ALF.

Kirk hitting it with all the women was more of implied thing throughout the series and into the movies. I guess Hollywood thinks it needs to add the actual act to get fans into the theaters. Trekkies are going to go because its a Trek movie, not because Kirk is getting it on with some ALF.

Thus spoke geespot on the topic of sex........

:lmao:

Re-watch "Wink of an Eye" sometime from the original series.

In one scene Kirk & alien hootchie are getting hot & heavy.

Next scene Kirk is sitting on bed shirtless putting his boots back on & she is at the mirror cleaning up.

Implied?

Of course, they could have been at a fevered game of Vulcan chess...........

What izzit about "Trek" that has kept us enthralled for nearly 45 years ?

Although I liked each of the follow-on series in some way, none of them ever came close to matching the vibe of the original. Why? Kirk of course! 'Kill 'em all, let their gods sort them out!' best describes his attitude on first encounters gone wrong. This meme goes back to the dawn of the USENET but is still hits the nail on the head -

Kirk vs. Picard (http://www.duke.edu/web/DRAGO/humor/trek/kirk-vs-picard.html)

Kirk Rules, Long Live Kirk!

:thmbsp:

The new technology in computer generated graphics and sound will surely leave the original series in the dust with regards to sensory overload. There will likely be, however, a bit of a disconnect between the original series and the current evolution. The first movies, with the original cast, did a pretty good job as far as continuity.

As a fan, not a true Trekkie, I look forward to this release.

Saw trailer 2 at the Bond movie this past weekend. I am excited. I am not a true trekie but I do enjoy the movies and enjoyed voyager.

Kirk was an interstellar stud. Add that Federation shrink (bodacious brunnete) in the episode with James Gregory as well as that DA (slinky blond) in the one where he is put on trial to his list of conquests.

Of course Spock managed to seduce both Mariette Hartley and Jill Ireland (hubba, hubba), so sometimes intellect wins over looks. Of course he was wacked out on psychedelic spores with Jill. Nurse Chapel kicked herself for not grabbing a few before leaving orbit.

wow, that doesn't have the "star trek vibe" at all. Is that Spock beating on some guy? The beginning voice over sounded like a cheesy beer commercial. "you never fit in, you can't settle for less, you always knew you were meant for something better." :rolleyes: It seems like they're trying to kill the brand.

wow, that doesn't have the "star trek vibe" at all. Is that Spock beating on some guy? The beginning voice over sounded like a cheesy beer commercial. "you never fit in, you can't settle for less, you always knew you were meant for something better." :rolleyes: It seems like they're trying to kill the brand.

I agree that it seems to bear little resemblance to the spirit or style or themes of the original. It looks to me like just another CGI-heavy modern sci-fi movie, which happens to have taken a lot of names from an old series.

In a way, that may be inevitable; something done today withOUT making uses of the advances in technology would be panned for being so "backwards"... but film technology has advanced so much that a "disconnect" is almost inevitable.

What I DO NOT readily accept is when they apply all kinds of "modern values" to the story lines and change the essence, the very nature of the show, and somehow claim because it uses the same character names, it is the same. Sorry, it isn't. [I'm not saying this about this particular film, since I haven't even seen the film yet, but I suspect it may be true here...]

I look forward to seeing this film, NOT because it is a Star Trek film (which I would be delighted to see), but just as a new sci-fi flick. If I go thinking "Star Trek", I'm likely to be disappointed. If I go thinking, "another Sci-Fi movie", I may well like it.

I enjoyed the series "Enterprise", by thinking along those lines. The same for the remake of "Battlestar Galactica", although I still prefer the original series.

Some modern (re)makes are quite good. Although it wasn't quite MY personal vision of the books, I thoroughly enjoyed the "Lord of the Rings" films; perhaps this will be similarly enjoyable.

Am I the only one who thinks most CGIs look no more realistic than the 1966 model of the Enterprise on wires? Maybe less so?

Simon Pegg plays Scotty, so the film shows promise.

In a way, that may be inevitable; something done today withOUT making uses of the advances in technology would be panned for being so "backwards"... but film technology has advanced so much that a "disconnect" is almost inevitable.

What I DO NOT readily accept is when they apply all kinds of "modern values" to the story lines and change the essence, the very nature of the show, and somehow claim because it uses the same character names, it is the same. Sorry, it isn't. [I'm not saying this about this particular film, since I haven't even seen the film yet, but I suspect it may be true here...]


Exactly. There's no reason they can't use the technology to make something like ST4 (the one with the whales), or even First Contact, which used a lot of tech effects, borg, etc. and yet still had lots of humor and seemed like Star Trek. It's hard to tell from just a trailer, too, but this one just seems kind of "dark" and angsty. I guess they have to appeal more to some teenage demographic or something, not really sure. :rolleyes:

Denny Crane, lock and load.

I still enjoy my DVDs of the original series :yes:

Jim, I'm just a country doctor!

Who says no skin in the original? Tell that to this 10 year old in 1966. :D :naughty:

Sensors locked-in and ready for this one...

He he he...just saw the new trailer.

Phasers locked and ready...

Simon Pegg plays Scotty, so the film shows promise.

I truly enjoy Simon Pegg on both sides of the camera but I believe he was miscast here. He'll do a great job no doubt but with the Kirk & Spock selections, they could indeed be earlier versions of Shatner & Nimoy. (Or at least close enough for the geeks (like me) to be happy.) Pegg is much fairer than James Doohan and wiry. Doohan always looked like he could take a punch. On the other hand, Paul McGillion (Carson Beckett on SG-Atlantis) woulda been perfect methinks. He's even Scottish born. Yeah, I am nitpicking but you judge if McGillion didn't have the look or not -

http://www.todayinscifi.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/beckett.jpg