Whoosh indeed.
Kirk has a fondness for antiques. That’s been established in Wrath of Khan and the actual episodes. So why bitch because a young James T. Kirk decides to go joy-riding in an antique car (you know, like the person I was responding to was doing)? That’s exactly the sort of thing a young Kirk would do, and yet, people have been bitching about the Vette since the trailer has been revealed.
That was my point.
The new trailer also makes Kirk seem to be a bit of an adrenaline junkie.
My problem with the Vette is that the whole scene just seems really hokey. I have no problem with young!Kirk stealing an antique car and going for a joyride, but the whole race-to-the-edge-of-the-canyon-and-drive-off-just-barely-leaping-to-safety thing seems pointless and unbelievable. I can accept a wild stunt like that at the climax of a movie where my adrenaline is already pumping and my disbelief suspended and where it’s an act of desperation by a badass hero who absolutely has to get away to save the day. I can even accept it in a James Bond-style let’s-show-how-badass-the-hero-is-by-jumping-in-at-the-climax-of-his-last-daring-adventure opening. But I have trouble with a restless thirteen-year-old farmboy who can somehow jump out of a falling car and grab onto a cliff ledge and who does so just because he’s bored.
It’s not a “scene,” it’s a clip in a trailer. That’s all you need be concerned about until you actually go see the movie.
The new trailer looked interesting to me.
In the “Vette” scene though, the hovercycle cop asks for a name, and the boy-kirk responds defiantly with “James Tiberius Kirk!”
Uh… why include his middle name? Unless there is another James Kirk running around, so that our hero wants to make sure there is no confusion…
Or maybe it was the formative event of his childhood. Maybe the fact that he almost died, *should *have died, but didn’t changed his life forever. Maybe the escapade with the Vette is what made him, essentially, Kirk. We don’t know. All we’ve seen is a trailer.
why didn’t they go with “enterprize, the first adventure”? i thought the book was rather good, and flying horses.
flying horses are always a crowd pleaser and the book had some very good humour in it.
Uh, JJ Abrams isn’t quoted anywhere in that article saying it isn’t a reboot – that is the article’s author putting words in his mouth. They can fill the entire movie with “homages” and still dance on continuity’s grave the whole while.
And why say “It’s not a complete re-imagining…” if it is not, in some way, a re-imaging. Simply not complete.
I suspect we’ll see stuff like, say, the Kobayashi Maru scenario. I doubt they’ll, say, change Spock’s ancestry (despite rumors to the contrary).
As frequently occurs nowadays, much of the plot of the movie has already leaked out. Just in these threads here, we’ve seen much of the canon backstory is already gone:
Checkov is already on the Enterprise. Kirk is probably not around to see Kodos’ massacre. Kirk is not the straightlaced by-the-book cadet described by Finnegan. He also apparently does not start out serving on the Farragut. Etc.
I’ve been reading these threads and watching the trailers with interest. I would prefer it if they kept to the canon, but the time travel angle means that this can always be said to occur in an alternative timeline or something. Besides no sci-fi series has ever worried too much about continuity where a good story was concerned, for example Genesis of the Daleks in Doctor Who completely re-wrote the Dalek origin, but is widely held to be one of the best Doctor Who stories ever.
The film looks good visually and seems action packed and most of the characters bear some resemblance to their counterparts. My biggest worry is that there won’t be the chemistry between the characters that there was in TOS.
I suppose it depends upon whether the chemistry of TOS was due to Shatner, Nimoy et al or the writing and characterisation. I think a little of both, but I don’t think anyone will do Kirk like Shatner.
Maybe this will be a little like the James Bond franchise in the future, assuming it is successful and sequels are made, and each generation will have it’s own favourite Kirk/Spock. My generation will always remember Shatner as Kirk and Connery as Bond whereas the younger generation might prefer Pine/Quinto a Kirk and Spock.
I’d pay to see that. Are there ninjas in it?
You know, that’s more or less what I thought after I wrote it.
I’ve never seen the Wrath of Khan, and only watched a few epidosed of TOS and TNG, so I really don’t care about canon. I’m only judging the trailer, for itself, and the opening sequence makes me go: what’s up with that? Translating to the present, being a history buff who collects antiques is one thing, taking a vintage American Revolution-era horse chariot out for a joyride (and out-speeding the highway troopers) just tickles my suspension of disbelief a bit too much. I suppose, however, that I would be tempted into seeing a movie called Amish: The Fast and Furious.
Total fan-geek canon violation warning, Kirk did not know how to drive a car in “A Piece of the Action.” Did he forget?
I don’t know. I don’t think he was doing a great job of driving the Vette. It’s impossible to tell because we don’t know how much he actually drives it, but a straight line, through the desert, over a cliff (Which may or may not have been an accident. I, personally, don’t think he went over that cliff on purpose) is not the same as driving an old Ford (or whatever it was) through a crowded city. Plus, going for a joyride and guessing how things work doesn’t mean he knows anything, or would have any knowledge to apply to a much different car, in a much different time and place, years and years after he nearly kills himself.
If your only previous experience driving a car ended with the car going over a cliff, is it fair to say you know how to drive?
Did anybody else notice something familiar from that TrekBBS thread… a few pictures down, in the picture with Sarek and Amanda?
Homages, indeed.
You mean Vulcan being a planet made up entirely of Vasquez Rocks formations?
Big shot of the bridge. If you notice on the lefthand side of the bridge, just to the right of the turbolift doors, there appears to be someone taking a piss on the bridge, with his back turned to the camera. On the navigation console Chekov is sitting at, inbetween what looks to be barcode scanners, it appears that Scotty has left his roll of duct tape.
One thing that’s an admittedly exceedingly minor nitpick, but common in a number of films, is that you can see the bare fluorescent light tube in the fixture in front of Chekov. How hard would it have been to slap a frosted cover over that thing so it’d at least look like the light wasn’t coming from a conventional source?
I wonder how the chairs are affixed to the floor?
Heh, duct tape. I’d always suspected.
Is it just me, or do those lights make Checkov look rather ghastly, like he’s detoxing after being strung out on drugs or something?
