New ‘Star Trek’ Photos Revealed

You may also like...

21 Responses

  1. Vinnie Bartilucci says:

    With both Star Trek and Watchmen (among others), the movie companies are trying to release just enough to convince the hardcore fans that the film will be good. I recall the terror that gripped the fan community over the Tim Burton batman movie. That one photo of the costume in Time Magazine calmed everybody down. And the trailer a few weeks later sealed the deal.

  2. Andrew Bergstrom says:

    Why isn't Kirk in a Gold Shirt indicating command?

    • Patrick Calloway says:

      According to comments from JJ Abrams, the black shirt is a Captain's shirt, and it's part of the plot as to why it's black. Whether said plot reason will make sense or not, we'll have to wait and see…

      • Josh Wigler says:

        Can't say I'm wild about the all black look for Kirk, but I'm pleasantly surprised with the rest, especially Karl Urban as Bones. I thought that was very weird casting, but he really looks the part in these pictures. On the flip side, it's gonna be hard for me to divorce Sylar from Quinto's portrayal of Spock. I hope they can sell me on it.

  3. Allan Lamberti says:

    i dig everything but kirk and chekov

  4. Andrew Bergstrom says:

    Beyond the color choice for Kirk's tunic, it also is devoid of any rank or insignia. In the original series each ship had their own insignia, however, after the animated series this concept was dropped in favor of the unifying symbol that our heroes on the Enterprise have always worn to indicate Starfleet personnel.

    • Vinnie Bartilucci says:

      It was dropped in the animated series for the most obvious of reasons – it would have cost more money for model sheets and character designs to use different insignias for different ships. Only in ST:TMP was the move to a unified insignia made canonical.I notice that some characters have the insignia (Spock, Scotty Uhura and Sulu) and some don't. It's possibly just the angle thy're being photographed at. They seem to be positioned ever so slightly differently on the chest – a little to the left.

  5. Dave says:

    This looks like a higher budget version of the online Star Trek: The New Voyages (now Phase II) shows. Those shows aren't bad and have decent replacements for the original actors. I don't see how these actors are better replacements than the online show and the story probably won't be much better either.I know Trek needs a shot in the arm, but this method has been (and continues to be done) online. I'm a huge Trek fan but I haven't seen or heard anything about this new film that is new/fresh/different/ enough to get me to buy a ticket.

    • MJ says:

      "Those shows aren't bad and have decent replacements for the original actors. "Wow. They're so bad they're AWESOME. In how bad they are. I highly recommend the Rifftrax audio commentary for the episodes with real Chekov and real Sulu. Or just watch and supply your own jokes with some buddies.One shouldn't compare a real attempt at relaunching Star Trek with the online efforts of a well-meaning Elvis impersonator.

      • Dave says:

        My point is that I don't feel the new movie is any more "well-meaning" than the online versions. One can complain about the merits of the online episodes (or many of the TV episodes) but it doesn't indicate the people involved don't mean well. Shoot, many of the original series episodes were extremely awful ("Spock's Brain") but I doubt they would shoot themselves in the foot by intending episodes to be bad.Personally, I've like the online episodes. Maybe I'm being charitable because they do what they do while meeting the requirement to be completely non-profitable, but thay are nowhere near as bad as you've said – I never said the actors were great, just decent. If they had the resources that this movie has, they would be as good as any of the existing TV series.Anyway, the reason I brought up the online shows to begin with was to point out that some people are ready to accept new actors as the original crew. But no matter who plays the characters in any venue (online, TV, or movies) there will be people who say, "They're so bad they're AWESOME in how bad they are." One person's "worst" actor is another person's "best" actor.Finally, I'm not sure this movie is any more of a "real attempt" at relaunching Star Trek than any of the past attempts – Star Trek: The Animated Series or Enterprise anyone? If it's not a financial hit (and I don't think it will be) then it will be years before Paramount is willing to try again.

        • Anonymous says:

          Hmm… for some reason comicmix isn't recognizing my password. Anyway, the common denominator here isn't being well-meaning. (I was just acknowledging the online guy had his heart in the right place.) It's talent, or lack thereof. You can't compare a 150 million dollar film with proven talent that was re-positioned for a May release with the efforts of fans who got their buddies together.Ed Wood was well meaning. And I enjoy the online Star Trek episodes for the same reason I enjoy Plan 9.MJ

          • Dave says:

            Apparently I haven't done a very good job at making my point here.Bottom line: While there will definitely be customers for this film, I don't think it matters how proven the talent is or when the movie is released, I don't see it becoming a big enough financial success to spawn another film – let alone a new Trek TV series.But it doesn't really matter how either of us view this situation. We're just voicing our opinions and won't know whose prediction is right until next summer. Frankly, I hope I'm wrong as I'd love to see more good Star Trek stories. For now, let's just agree to disagree.

  6. Steve Chaput says:

    I haven't seen the online episodes so I plan on going to the movie as if it were totally new. If we can accept a half dozen actors as Bruce Wayne or James Bond I don't think we should have trouble with a non-Shatner James T. Kirk.Color me psyched!

    • Dave says:

      We haven't had 42 years of the public only seeing one actor as Batman. This is going to be harder to pull off than some people think.Even so, the online episodes have been received positively, so there are certainly people who won't have a problem with the change. But will it be enough for the movie to be a financial hit?

      • Steve Chaput says:

        Lots of folks grew up with only George Reeves in their minds as SUPERMAN, but easily accepted Christopher Reeve as Clark. I think it will be more how the entire cast gels that will make or break the film.Personally, I think a big mistake will be having Leonard Nimoy appear at some point (from what I have read) alongside his younger self. There it will just shove the fact that these are two different people in the face of the audience.

        • Dave says:

          The different actors playing Superman (separated by decades) is not the same as the same actors being known as the only actors to ever play the characters in Star Trek and whose likenesses appear on every book cover, comic book (except the times when the characters weren't allowed to look like anyone at all), piece of merchadise ever made.

  7. Dave says:

    Anonymous,I forgot to reply to one more comment you made. Throwing $150,000 dollars at a movie won't necessarily make it a hit. It HAS to have a story as well as good actors and good effects help as well. Even if the movie has the final two of these three, the first one is the crucial element. And this movie has a fourth element of convincing the majority of the film's potential audience that having new actors for 42 year old characters with established faces is a good idea. All four of these elements must be achieved in order for this movie to be the hit it needs to be to keep the franchise from going back into storage for the next several years.I hope it succeeds – I really do. However, thinking realistically, I don't think it will.They should have gone with a whole new crew, but have the look and story be obviously Star Trek. This approach worked with Star Trek: The Next Generation and I think it could've worked here as well.I think I've said all I have to say here.

    • Anonymous says:

      That's ridiculous. You are seriously over-estimating the buying power of Trekkies, or their percentage of the film's potential audience, as you call it. In fact, the entire Trekkie community could collectively decide to boycott this movie and it could still be a financial success. It's the non-Trekkies the studio has to win over in order to make this a financial success. Spiderman was not the hit it was because of its comic book fans. The general public is way more powerful than any niche fan set could ever be. So I totally disagree with you. There is no fourth element here. If the movie tells a good story (and even that scale is set pretty low), has good actors, and has good effects, it will work just fine. It has to succeed with the non-Trekkies. So basically, it has to succeed with fans of JJ Abrams and build from there. So just take a look at the numbers he's raking in on Lost and Fringe – that's a pretty good estimate of the audience you're going to get.Plus, because of the writer strikes in Hollywood, the Summer '09 season is decidedly weak on tent-pole movies (big action movies that studios plan their summers around), so it won't have that much competition.

  8. Anonymous says:

    "$150,000 dollars at a movie won't necessarily make it a hit."You meant 150 mil, but ironically I think that's the budget of the online series. Anyway, my point wasn't that 150 mil will make a film a hit; just that it'll (obviously) be out there in the public with the subsequent marketing dollars that goes behind promoting a 150 mil film as opposed to some online series only diehards even know about."It HAS to have a story as well as good actors and good effects help as well."Right. This was my point when I said the online show was so bad it was good."They should have gone with a whole new crew, but have the look and story be obviously Star Trek."They've been doing that on TV and failing. Kirk and Spock have iconic status in the public consciousness. Joe Nobody and Dave Newguy don't.Anyway, maybe it'll suck, maybe it won't. But the online series isn't a factor or a litmus test either way.MJ

  9. gabrielle graza says:

    this flim is the bomb the first day it comes out im fina b in de front right der!!!! 4 rel!! resl talk!!

  10. gabrielle graza says:

    i luv dis movie 4 rel de day it comes out im fina b right der in the frony row right der real talk no joke!!!!!!