This is Not Your Father's Star Trek - Another New TV Spot
by Alex Billington
April 12, 2009
Another new TV spot for J.J. Abrams' Star Trek has aired. Considering we've seen plenty of TV spots already (and even had reviews of the entire movie), I wouldn't have normally posted this if it weren't for the hilariously awesome tagline in this one - "This is not your father's Star Trek." Take that all you old school Trekkies! There are only a few more weeks left until this comes out, so this is probably the last TV spot we'll be featuring, since I don't want to get oversaturated with last minute footage. I think it's best to save the experience of seeing this new Star Trek in its entirety in theaters (including IMAX, don't forget). Enjoy!
Watch the latest new TV spot for Star Trek:
A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members.
Star Trek is directed by J.J. Abrams, of "Lost", "Alias", and Mission: Impossible III previously. The screenplay was written by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, of The Island, Mission: Impossible III, Transformers, and the upcoming Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. This is the 11th movie in the Star Trek universe, following most recently Star Trek: Nemesis in 2002. The original "Star Trek" TV series first aired in 1966. Paramount will debut Star Trek in theaters everywhere on May 8th this summer!
Not going to be seen then and this coming from a 20 something who likes TOS not this mud.
angry on Apr 12, 2009
yeah because every positive review must be lies LOL
nelson on Apr 12, 2009
Extreme music, extreme sex, extreme action. Looks dumber than the Star Wars reboot. My dad watched Star Trek. My dad loved Star Trek. My dad kept Star Trek alive. He was part of the greatest fandom movement in the history of media. Twenty years after the cancellation of Star Trek my dad and other like minded individuals brought Star Trek back from the grave for 6 movies. Then a new TV series. Then another TV series. Then another 4 movies. My dad rebuilt Star Trek with his bare hands in the basement. This isn't Star Trek. It's Hollywood fantasy fluff erected on the grave of an iconic concept.
Motu on Apr 12, 2009
I think it looks very entertaining, definately better for the general public
Scott McHenry on Apr 12, 2009
When I think of Star Trek this is what comes to mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1eFdUSnaQM So your father's Star Trek can kiss my ass. The series has always been corny as all hell. Everyone always screams foul when a franchise takes a new, more mainstream approach and usually those screams are justified. In the case of Star Trek it's without a doubt the right direction to take.
Frame on Apr 12, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukMNfTnI5M8 post more green women
Motu on Apr 12, 2009
Looks good. I look forward to it, but I hope it hasnt been gen y'd with too much MTV gloss. Star Trek was always a lot about the philosophy and dilemna scenario. If its Star Trek gone Fast and Furious I'll be a bit upset.
JimD on Apr 12, 2009
Right on, Motu!
angry on Apr 12, 2009
Sex, Skydiving, corny dialogue, dumbest car scene ever... ya
James on Apr 12, 2009
Hmmm... isn't this supposed to be a reboot that pays homage to the past? I find the tagline to be odd.
BahHumbug on Apr 13, 2009
JJ ABrahms has done to Star Trek what Michael Bay did to Transformers. If you didn't like TRansformers, then you are not an entertainment loving person and you wont love this. But it's not going to ruin Star Trek. Star Trek will still be there for you to watch, while I watch this kick ass edge of your seat thrill ride and be wholly entertained. And then I'll go back and watch Best of Bother Worlds because Picard is and always will be Locutus of Borg.
WingcommanderIV on Apr 13, 2009
#11 - I don't think General Motors provided the Enterprise...
RPD on Apr 13, 2009
Here Here Motu!!
Jmoney on Apr 13, 2009
This continues to look AWFUL!!! I'm with you, Motu. 'Reimagined'. The first time I saw that word was on a teaser 1-sheet for Tim Burton's "Planet Of The Apes" remake. I liked the way the word sounded and what it conjured up creatively. Over the past eight years I've learned to feel disgust and fear whenever I hear it mentioned or see it in print. Saw the latest full on trailer for "Star Trek" before "Watchmen" during the midnight show. As I watched Kirk and crew doing a whole bunch of over the top things, I just kept shaking my head. And that head shaking exceeded the number of times I did so during "Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull". Here are just a few of the reasons why the new "Star Trek" is going to suck. Yes, True Believers, I said SUCK! First off, all the action scenes look like something out of one of the "Star Wars" prequels. Every frame is filled with a flurry of phaser firings, ships exploding, and general over-the-top mayhem. Jeez, reel it in, would ya!!! This is not "Star Trek"...at least not the Kirk, Spock, and McCoy version we should be getting. Also: - Kirk has a sexual relationship with Uhura? - Kirk and Spock have a fist fight on the bridge? - Space skydiving?! WTF! Again, this is not "Star Trek"! Call me a purist (which I am and where I speak from), but that's the way I see it. The minute I saw the first still of the new Enterprise (overly bulbus warp engines?) I knew this thing was going down the wrong path. Plus a couple of images of the new bridge, which some have said looks like something you'd see in an Apple Store. Big Red Flag!: J.J. Abrams never was a "Star Trek" fan. But he LOVES "Star Wars"! Nothing wrong with that...BUT THE TWO DO NOT MIX! However, I'm sure all the fans who hold those sometimes obnoxious prequels high above the alter of George Lucas worship, will drink this head shaker in without question. If by some remote chance this movie doesn't suck, I'll be the first one to admit it...but don't hold your breath. A number of the fan reviewers coming out of the advanced screenings have stated they are non Trek fans. Some of these people have also mentioned that this compares to the "Star Wars" prequels in it's greatness. That says a lot right there. A lot. I'm still looking forward to "Terminator Salvation" and "Wolverine" a hell of a lot more than this. I kind of laugh when I read some of the advance publicity that says The Enterprise is the most powerful war machine there is. War? Star Trek is not about war! But then again I guess seeking out new life and new civilizations doesn't make good bank at the box office these days. The new movie will just mess with the icon way too much. Imagine "Watchmen" where they through out most of the heart and soul of the graphic novel and instead have Silk Spectre moonlight as a prostitute, Nite Owl push drugs, and Dr. Manhattan battle a bevy of outer space monsters while high fiving Rorschach. Do you see what I mean now? From what I've seen, the new "Star Trek" can best be summed up this way: Let's blow a lot of shit up while Kirk and Spock high five one another.
editboy on Apr 13, 2009
Not your Father's Star Trek. Shut the fuck up. We know already. This is my sister's Star Trek with that cast. lol I don't doubt it'll be a good flick but after seeing the previews so0o0o0 many times and hearing about it blah blah blah etc etc that I don't even see it as a Star Trek film or one to take seriously. I take it into account of the Star Trek expanded universe like I take into account that shitty ass Clone Wars movie/show that's out. It's like an alternate universe for kids. Not bad, it's fun sure, just not the same.
Hey Ya on Apr 13, 2009
Star Trek purists would probably want this to be 2 hours of people talking. Which is exactly what nearly every episode of every Star Trek series was about. And #15, unrelated, but the Clone Wars TV show is darker than the movies a lot of the time.
RC on Apr 13, 2009
#16 - Star Trek purists probably want to see Star Trek, not "Lost" in Space...
RPD on Apr 13, 2009
Mr Pine is doing a hell of a job as well as his crew. Looking forward.
Fisherr on Apr 13, 2009
ediotboy sure can sum it up!
Jont on Apr 14, 2009
I love all these Trekkie nerds. So pathetic.
David Alan Grier on Apr 14, 2009
Get the fuck over yourselves you dorks.
han on Apr 14, 2009
Jeezus , you people a bunch of douches. You complain and moan that trek isn’t accepted by mainstream media (AND DONT LIE AND SAY YOU DONT). Now there’s a trek movie that may cause more people to be interested in the franchise and all you can do is rip shreds off WHAT YOUVE SEEN IN A 90 SECOND TRAILER!. As if you turds could do any better! Trek was dead before this movie was made and you should be thankful that this movie has been made at all as it will prolong the life of trek for future generations to enjoy.
Honkee on Apr 14, 2009
no, this isnt your father's Star Trek...its the Star Trek made especially for the new fu*king slacker generation...what a bunch of losers...wouldnt spend .50 cents on this piece o' sh*t....
SICKOFSAINTJJ on Apr 14, 2009
Once it's all said and done II will still be the best...
RPD on Apr 15, 2009
Nerds, if you want to see a nerd just look at JJ Abrams ugly jewface. He looks what he is, a lamo nerd who wants to be cool. I quote from another reviewer of JJ. "He is obviously making movies because he is part of a nepotistic degenerate crowd that is so prevalent in the Entertainment Industry. I loved mission impossible the series and he ruined it. I liked Star Trek (original) and he will ruin that too. He has no talent and survives only because of the degenerate virtually illiterate population that exists in the United States at this time." JJ is the nerd and you people who like his "productions" are the degenerates illiterates. The old Star Trek was very low budget but its originality and complex themes tied with the strength of characters is what made it great. They don't seem to be able to produce quality anymore just quick action sequences tied together with weak themes and sexual overtones. Now that is boring as in predictable and typical.
Damon Crofton on Apr 16, 2009
@25 Hey you mother fucking bigot, I think you're posting on the wrong site. This is not the site for anti-semitic douche bags who are crying over their nerd fantasies being ruined....move out of your mom's basement and get a fucking life!
Cmurder on Apr 17, 2009
So it seems I am in a small minority here : I like TOS - I like STNG - I like DS9 - I like VGR - I like ENT - and I think this Looks KICK ASS! I guess I will be out in left field with the few that are not predujice. Oh, by the way (I am 47 years old and actually like to type the words instead of BTW - I did watch TOS when it first aired) - I like both Battlestar Galactica's - I like Star Wars - I like Aliens (all) - I like Predator - I like Farscape and for a real blast - I absolutely love Firefly/Serenity. Thanks for reading... I care not what you think
Savage on Apr 18, 2009
@26 you are a whiney little vulgar degenerate who is likely employed in some form of media or new media. However, I am not vulgar and I have never lived under anyone’s auspice as you so witlessly suggest. I am well tired by the over used and worn out label of "anti-Semitic" all to often spewed at any criticism of that egregious group we call Jews. Anti Semitism is a machination of a Mr. Wilhelm Marr who in his infinite wisdom created this misnomer of a term to be used in the face of any criticism of the Jewish people. I guess he thought that all Semites are Jews? That said, people like you use this joke of a term at any hint of critique of Jewish activities. Well I could care less about your thoughts and your terms and I will criticize as I wish, when I wish! JJ Abrams is a member of a group of degenerate pigs (most of whom are Jewish) who have for many years turned out trash films aimed at the lowest common denominator. The Jewish media creators create trash par excellence as their incredible representative numbers in the Pornography industry illustrates. Now juxtapose the high numbers of Jews in Pornography to the incredibly low number in the military and you have a fact that cries out for critique. Oh but to critique the jews is to be labeled with the most extreme of haste an anti-Semite. Given a choice i prefer have the misnomer of anti-Semite applied to me rather than give up my freedom to criticize.
Damon Crofton on Apr 20, 2009
I'm 47 and have been active in the Star Trek fan community nearly all my life. I am liking a lot of what I've seen of JJA's movie, and am encouraged that there were standing ovations at the premiers. So please don't go thinking we're all stuffy nerds that won't like JJA's take on Trek. Someone here made the point that Trek was already dead....and they were right. Voyager and Enterprise killed it. This is JJA giving it CPR. And the most important point I wish to make is that a lot of the older Trekkie's fears about this movie appear to be based on pure fear and paranoia. They will tell you it has been made for teen slackers with ADHD, yet one notoriously hard to please reviewer said of the new movie: "It is one of the few movies I have seen in recent years which has celebrated intellectual endeavour, the informed weighing up of risks, the taking of responsibility. It is, well nigh uniquely in modern Hollywood, grown-up. After the artistic disappointment of George Lucas' Star Wars prequels, with their terrible dialogue and worse acting, this movie really does promise a creative re-birth of the science fiction adventure. The result is not only by far the best of the 11 Star Trek movies, it must also rank as the outstanding prequel of all time." Now tell me, does that sound like the picture some miserable Trekkies have been painting? What these fools are clearly ignoring is that a Trek movie can have action, pace, be more modern but also be emotionally resonant, have a good story and pay tribute to all what has gone before it. And the more I hear from people that have seen it, the more it seems JJA has pulled it off. Let us also not forget that Nimoy himself wouldn't have gone near this had he not thought it had the potential to be great. He has turned down at least one Star Trek movie in the past. He loves the new one. So while some of us will always love "yer father's Star Trek", we're also ready to love our son's Star Trek. There is room for both.
Matthew on Apr 29, 2009
Mathew, your an apologetic diplomatic idiot with a great reverence for industry critiques and stomach for rubbish. At 47 you stand as an old pillar supporting the hollywood degeneracy.
Damon C. on May 5, 2009
Ok, so I' starting to lean in protest of this movie simply because JJ is a douche. He actually used his company's show, Fringe, to advertise Star Trek and I don't mean as a commercial. It was written in. Fucker!
Hey Ya on May 6, 2009
JJ is a douche, all hype, no substance JJ stands as an icon of mediocrity and he will do everything possible to sell the film other than write a great screenplay and produce/ direct a great film that is fitting to a great screenplay. Essentially JJ sucks and he is of course another mediocre Jew in the hollywood Jewland that has been creating this kind crap for a long time now... Oh wait I must be anti-Semitic because i have criticized the hollywood jews for being mediocre and nepotistic... Well too bad they are!!!
Ryan on May 8, 2009
First, try to use clean language here. The movie is mainly for the younger folks not the fans of the whole star trek shows. I am 41 years old and I have a normal IQ. I liked most of the Star trek series and most of the movies. I really liked Star Trek and Star the next gerneration the best. My personality is like Capitan Picard. This move in my opinion is actually an insult to older fans. I read the there will be continuity problem with the movie and the original show. Also, the actors in my opinion do not fit the characters. I understand about them using young people, but they do not fit. They change the time line two. So, I am not going to watch this at the movies or on dvd. I would of like to seen a new tv show called time ship enterprise, where they go back and fix the time line. The used the time ship enterprise on Star Trek Voyager.
Greg Patrick on May 8, 2009
JJ is a JEWFACE! LOL! LOL! LOL! Well i just saw his Star Trek and it sucked, unfortunately it was exactly as feared. Oh well more money wasted on hollywood crap. I suggest you try to download this for free if you are curious because it is not worth the money or effort to go to a theater. PS i just googled JJ and he is a Jewface! LOL!
Thomas Dalton on May 9, 2009
SPOILER ALERT * SPOILER ALERT * SPOILER ALERT * SPOILER ALERT * SPOILER ALERT Above, it says "A chronicle of the early days of James T. Kirk and his fellow USS Enterprise crew members." implying that this film represents the history of the characters introduced on the 1960s TV show. This is not correct, this is not the story of how the original crew got together, etc. It is implicitly stated in the film that time was altered from the point where Nero first went back into time (before Kirk was born) and that a separate, new timeline had been established. So, this is NOT the backstory of what we've been watching for the past 40 years, this is a franchise with a brand new history and future. Who knows, since the timeline's been altered, the Federation may never meet up with the Borg or the Cardassians, it's all up in the air now. These characters, as defined by the plot of the film, are NOT the same Kirk, Spock et al. that we saw in the series and movies and that we grew up with. I don't want people to be confused and watch the original show and think that those characters share the same history as those in the new film - they do not, the film specifically said so.
Fjord Prefect on May 10, 2009
35, Then it is not Star Trek. What happened here is JJ and Paramount decided that in order to get a guaranteed minimum audience that they would hijack the Star Trek brand. Much easier and safer than creating your own story or god forbid saga. This movie should of been called General Starship or days of the stars as it is a lame soapy sappy story that has been overhyped in order to gain artificial interest. Dont bother seeing this movie wait for a copy on disc or download it as it is not worth the ticket. It is about time that the Hollywood audience stop buying their crap.
Dan Wolfe on May 10, 2009
I saw the new movie not knowing any background of star trek and I enjoyed it immensely. The new movie was good because it was understandable by my generation and yet it had some older references. The new movie got me into watching the original series and learning more about Star Trek, so I am confused about why your knickers are in a twist about it. Isn't it good that the new movie is getting star trek more interest and fans? I myself loved the cast, as I'm a fan of ZQ, Chris Pine and Karl Urban. Oh and don't forget Simon Pegg =) As a side note, don't see G.I. Joe, it's awful. So is Transformers, that was a waste of my life. I did end up seeing Star Trek in IMAX twice though, so, y'know, it was really good and exciting.
Charlie on Aug 10, 2009
Charlie, your just a fucking idiot!
Willkillyouo on Dec 30, 2011
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.