Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Star Trek Premiere Gets Standing Ovation, Surprise Showing In Austin

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the set-phasers-to-awesome dept.

Sci-Fi 437

MrKaos writes "Proving that science fiction can still be great entertainment, J.J. Abrams appears to have impressed Star Trek fans at the official world premiere of Star Trek, who gave the film a five-minute standing ovation at the Sydney Opera House in Australia today. Meanwhile, mere hours beforehand, flummoxed fans at the Alamo Drafthouse theater in Austin, TX, deceived into thinking they were seeing a special, extended version of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, were pleasantly surprised when a disguised Leonard Nimoy greeted them and announced they would be seeing the new film in its entirety. ILM's influence on the film is reported as visually stunning, and lucky Australian fans are scheduled to see the movie first, as it opens a day before the American release."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I hope it's better than Nemesis..... (5, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503779)

.... I'd hate to see this guy [stardestroyer.net] have to do another plot synopsis ;)

Re:I hope it's better than Nemesis..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504267)

Its already off to a rough start its 11. that makes it an ODD ST....

Have they broken the ST curse?

Re:I hope it's better than Nemesis..... (5, Insightful)

rpillala (583965) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504537)

This post is a better movie than Nemesis.

Re:I hope it's better than Nemesis..... (2, Interesting)

0racle (667029) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504689)

Since he could even make Nemesis entertaining, I'd like to see him take a whack at this one.

Wait...what? (5, Insightful)

gnarlyhotep (872433) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503815)

"Proving that science fiction can still be great entertainment"

When was this something that needed to be proven? I've found plenty of entertaining science fiction around. Did I miss the elitist newsletter that told us all we had to say science fiction was crap now?

Jeez, miss one meeting...

Re:Wait...what? (5, Funny)

enilnomi (797821) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503987)

Did I miss the elitist newsletter that told us all we had to say science fiction was crap now?

No, you just didn't see Transformers.

Re:Wait...what? (5, Funny)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504033)

No, you just didn't see Transformers.

What? Are you mad? Two words: Morgan Fox.

+5 insightful.

Re:Wait...what? (5, Informative)

dietdew7 (1171613) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504093)

Megan Fox

Re:Wait...what? (1)

paitre (32242) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504105)

Uuuh.

Get her name right, moron.

MEGAN Fox.

MEGAN.

Re:Wait...what? (1)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504539)

"Moron" is a little harsh there Chief.

But yes, you're obviously correct. Megan. Feel free to go ahead and remove that wad from your panties now. ;P

Slashdot Freudian Slip Of The Day (5, Funny)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504139)

Two words: Morgan Fox

Every time he thinks about Megan Fox, he thinks about his organ.

Re:Wait...what? (4, Funny)

VShael (62735) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504327)

Not to be confused with Megan Freeman.

Re:Wait...what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504357)

Megan Fox

Re:Wait...what? (2, Funny)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504501)

My apologizes, fellow geeks of slashdot. In my defense, a co-worker named Morgan walked in as I was typing that. (no, she's not hot, sadly)

Anyway...I'll get me coat. /self-flagellates with a spaghetti (mmm, spaghetti) noodle.

Re:Wait...what? (0, Troll)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504205)

Transformers was awesome.
Pure action excitement. I can't wait to see it yet again.

Re:Wait...what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504419)

Evidently you didn't either? Or Iron Man?

Re:Wait...what? (4, Funny)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503993)

Jeez, miss one meeting...

Speaking of which, your dues are not current. Please remit $263.81 as soon as possible. We also voted you "Most likely to annoy others at the theater by leaving to go to the bathroom during a pivotal scene".

Congrats, I understand this is the 4th straight year you've won the award. ;P

Re:Wait...what? (3, Insightful)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504229)

That's just the uninformed younger generation. They haven't had much opportunity to experience great science fiction, since they don't read novels and few great science fiction films have been made in their lifetime.

Re:Wait...what? (4, Insightful)

xouumalperxe (815707) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504705)

I've found plenty of entertaining science fiction around. Did I miss the elitist newsletter that told us all we had to say science fiction was crap now?

Hell, did I lose the memo that said that crap scifi (or is it syfy?) can't be entertaining?

refunds (5, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503835)

Those guys in Austin should demand a refund! They paid for a ticket for The Wrath of Khan, but that's not what they got. If it were me I'd be raising hell.

Re:refunds (1)

LordEd (840443) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503903)

If it were me I'd be raising hell.

Sure, then you'd have to get your own www.refuuund.com page.

It was free (3, Interesting)

tylersoze (789256) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504077)

Well actually it was a free screening. I got there too late and was turned away because the theater was full. It would've been cool to see Nimoy. I say I would have walked out since I really wanted to see Khan, but honestly I'm sure the atomosphere was totally electric after Nimoy came out. I think all the good reviews coming out from that are more than likely colored by that fact. I'm sure I would have been caught up in it too even though I could give a crap about seeing the new one.

Re:It was free (2, Funny)

Gadget_Guy (627405) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504403)

Hang on, you say that you could give a crap about seeing the new film?

Well I certainly wouldn't want to sit in your seat during the next session then!

Re:refunds (1)

reSonans (732669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504527)

They paid for a ticket for The Wrath of Khan, but that's not what they got. If it were me I'd be raising hell.

I believe most cinemas will refund your ticket if you leave within the first 15 minutes of the film. YMMV.

On the other hand, though, who do you think is attending a screening of a "special, extended version" of The Wrath of Khan? It's a safe play for the organizers to assume that it will be mostly die-hard fans, and "rewarding" them with a surprise showing of a brand-new Star Trek film is a very inexpensive and effective publicity stunt. (FWIW, I read about this first in the mainstream media.)

I'm as cynical as most about Star Trek and Hollywood. But this is pretty cool, especially the introduction by Leonard Nimoy.

Better than a refund, and maybe not planned (5, Informative)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504593)

Those guys in Austin should demand a refund! They paid for a ticket for The Wrath of Khan, but that's not what they got. If it were me I'd be raising hell.

The story I heard via word of mouth was that they were actually going to play Wrath of Khan, with ten minutes of sneak-preview footage from the movie that hadn't been seen before as a bonus. However shortly after Wrath started playing, the old and damaged film caught fire and was destroyed. Then Nimoy revealed himself, and instead of showing the 10 minute teaser, they showed the whole film.

linky [originalalamo.com] I found on a Drafthouse blog, btw.

I can't imagine (though I guess it's possible) even Spock himself would dare show the full movie without authorization. So that may have been planned. The destruction of a print of Wrath... probably wasn't.

The last time I had a film burn up (actually it was the projector bulb that exploded, side effect was the print was destroyed) all I got was a lousy refund. Getting to watch a world premiere of a movie I'd probably be interested in, rather than having my night out ruined, is way way better than a refund.

I seriously fucking wish I had been there and I may have been but I didn't even know they were running Wrath. Why do I not check the Drafthouse web page more often?!

Re:Better than a refund, and maybe not planned (2, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504701)

Why would they have had the entire film print there, just in case? It doesn't make sense...

Ah yes, STUNNING! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27503853)

I'm sure it is visually stunning. Too bad I think it'll be intellectually dumbing.

Leonard Nimoy in disguise? (5, Funny)

14erCleaner (745600) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503875)

I guess he didn't wear his ears.

Re:Leonard Nimoy in disguise? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504141)

Wait what? Wear his ears? They aren't real?!?

New blood (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503885)

Well, it is nice to see some new blood in the Star Trek franchise.
Perhaps J. J. has an idea or two. We all know Brannon Braga and Rick Berman ran out of ideas years ago.
I am looking forward to the latest Star Trek outing with slight optimism.

Re:New blood (4, Funny)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503985)

Well, you see, the Enterprise crashes on this planet, and all sorts of spooky things happen.
Meanwhile, these aliens, called "The Others" keep harassing the crew.
And there are lots of flashbacks to just before the Enterprise crashes.

Re:New blood (1)

TypoNAM (695420) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504349)

I think I've seen that before, oh wait I know....
Hold on give me a second here...

Ah now I remember, it's called Prison Break, right?
right?..... ;)

I know... I know... get lost, I see how it is!

Re:New blood (1)

iced_773 (857608) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504423)

You forgot the part about the Defiant coming along on an unspecified mission, taking some of them off the planet before blowing up, and the Federation Six encountering all sorts of international conspiracy before deciding they need to go back to the planet, and then going back in time to the 2190s when Section 31 has a base there.

And then there's the button you have to push before Omega particles are released, but I was never really clear on that one.

visually stunning (2, Interesting)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503907)

I like how the "visually stunning" link goes to a tech article about the equipment used for the Sydney showing. Maybe Soulskill can fill us in on how that ties in to ILM.

An awesome film-going statement! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27503915)

I suspect there were some Star Trek fans like myself at this screening. I do not worship all things Trek. As the fan that I am, I would not hesitate to criticize the film if they screwed it up and screwed with Star Trek too much. With that in mind, it's a safe bet the reaction of the audience is genuine, albeit emotional (Leonard Nimoy as a surprise guest [would that be an oxymoron (was he dressed in Vulcan prostitute garb?)?]?) because of the whole spectacle presented to them. Purple monkey dishwasher.

Still, the general release and the reviews thereof I expect will be manly positive and full of delectable man-sex.

-Dan East

Re:An awesome film-going statement! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27503953)

Your ability to use nested Parentheses and Brackets intrigues me.

Re:An awesome film-going statement! (2, Funny)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504071)

(Leonard Nimoy as a surprise guest [would that be an oxymoron (was he dressed in Vulcan prostitute garb?)?]?)

(loop (print (eval (read)))) ;-)

Review? (2, Interesting)

mikesd81 (518581) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503933)

It got an ovation, great. But are they allowing anyone to release any reviews? Was some of the ovation left over from the shock of what the actual movie was?

Re:Review? (1)

VShael (62735) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504375)

There are TONS of reviews. Mostly insanely positive.

The most negative I've seen ran along the lines of "It's good, but not great."

Re:Review? (5, Interesting)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504693)

It was a screening to people who would actually take time out of their lives to go see a remastered version of Wrath of Khan. Which isn't anything against those folk, that was a good movie. But in terms of objective "this was a good movie on it's own merits" reviews, do you honestly expect to see any?

This was a binary choice: either they all loved it because it was the next Star Trek movie. Meaning it didn't stink as bad as Nemesis. Or they burnt down the theater because it was the next Star Trek movie and it stunk as bad as Nemesis.

Idea shortage in LA (0, Troll)

Animats (122034) | more than 5 years ago | (#27503939)

Forty years on, and they're still flogging this thing. Hollywood has a major idea shortage.

I'd like to see any of David Weber's space operas turned into a series. Or Bujold's. We need some new thinking. Not rehashes of dead TV shows and old comic books.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504027)

I personally think David Webers Safehold series would be excellent for a movie series :)

Re:Idea shortage in LA (3, Interesting)

J-1000 (869558) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504067)

While I'll never get tired of seeing new Star Trek movies, you do have a point. 90% of what we see today is either a sequel, a retread, or a copycat. The fat cats are mostly interested in safe bets.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (4, Insightful)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504135)

Personally as long as something is done well it don't have to be new. If the new incarnation of Star Trek is well made and entertaining, then I nothing is better than that. It is far easier for "established" licenses to get the budget movies like this get. Of course I wouldn't mind seeing something darker and more gritty than Star Trek within the realm of science fiction. But at least a well made movie constructed on an old concept is better than a crap movie based upon a new concept.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504323)

Personally as long as something is done well it don't have to be new. If the new incarnation of Star Trek is well made and entertaining, then I nothing is better than that. It is far easier for "established" licenses to get the budget movies like this get. Of course I wouldn't mind seeing something darker and more gritty than Star Trek within the realm of science fiction. But at least a well made movie constructed on an old concept is better than a crap movie based upon a new concept.

"Stranger in a Strange Land," perhaps?

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

jojisan (465449) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504479)

I GROK THIS

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504597)

Not a bad idea. Though I was thinking more along the line of the Gap Series; that deserves to be made into several movies if you ask me.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (2, Interesting)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504607)

I still think they should make a movie of Zelazny's Lord of Light. One of the best damned SF books ever written. Besides, who wouldn't watch a movie with a talking monkey.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

PhxBlue (562201) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504157)

I'd like to see any of David Weber's space operas turned into a series.

I'd agree with this, by and large, but how would you incorporate Weber's 20-page digressions into the 500-year history of Manpower, Inc., etc.? I stopped reading "Storm from the Shadows" because Weber's en media res divergences into the Honorverse -- while fascinating -- was getting in the way of the story. They needed to be in a glossary or on a Wiki or something.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (2, Informative)

tjonnyc999 (1423763) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504175)

Or Herbert's "Dune" saga. And no, a corny 80's cinematic abortion + a severely dumbed-down miniseries does not do the books any kind of justice.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504223)

Forty years on, and they're still flogging this thing. Hollywood has a major idea shortage.

I'd like to see any of David Weber's space operas turned into a series. Or Bujold's. We need some new thinking. Not rehashes of dead TV shows and old comic books.

Where I tend to agree with your sentiment, there is value in already being familiar with the history of the characters and "getting on with the story".

Re:Idea shortage in LA (0)

Anonymous Monkey (795756) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504247)

Great, hear I go with a "Me Too!" post. Yea, trek is dead for me. I remember the original Star Trek and how it came off as just a kind of fun space show, and then about six to twelve hours my juvenile mind would get the social commentary about racialism or genocide or what ever and suddenly feel like 'eww, that was kinda sick.' And then I would spend the next few days wondering if a better decision could have been made. Half way through TNG it seemed like everything just got to comfortable. If Picard made a decesion it was the right one, and everything was happy after that. By the time of Enterprise the show lost it's ability to moralize. Now it's just gone. Ok, end of rant.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504259)

Am I the only one to see the irony in someone claiming that the solution to the lack of original ideas is to copy ideas from books?

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

WillAdams (45638) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504339)

The Greeks invented everything --- all else is variation.

William

Re:Idea shortage in LA (5, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504389)

Let's not fool ourselves here-- if you think Hollywood has an idea shortage because they're recycling old ideas, stories, and characters, then all of humanity has had an idea shortage for a few thousand years, at least. And I say "at least" because the writers then may have been stealing ideas, but we just don't have records of the ideas they stole.

This era of reboots is fantastic in my opinion. It's what cultures do when they have a rich culture to draw from, which is that they take the old ideas and stories, and reinvent and reimagine them in a way that makes them relevant and poignant for the time. The original series was great for its time, but yeah, it's becoming increasingly dated as a relic of the 60s. The general setup of a band of explorers and the characters themselves, however, still have relevance.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504397)

This is your big opportunity! Go fot it Mitchell!

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

Cube Steak (1520237) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504417)

We need some new thinking. Not rehashes of dead TV shows and old comic books.

So your solution to the rehashing of dead TV shows and old comic books is to rehash novels?

Re:Idea shortage in LA (1)

Daswolfen (1277224) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504453)

Honor Harrington would probably be better suited as a series. While the ship battles would be impressive (who wouldnt love to see ships of the wall being destroyed by X-Ray laser warheads on IMAX), its the personal interactions that make the series stand out above regular sci-fi.

On a side note, Id love to see the Flint/Weber Ring of Fire get the movie treatment.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (2, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504475)

Oh heck, if you want space opera, it would be great to see something - anything by E.E. Doc Smith turned into a movie. In order to not be downright ludicrous, it would need to be done with tongue heavily in cheek, like "Big Trouble in Little China". (How anyone could say some of those lines, keep it straight, and not crack up on the spot is beyond me.)

On the mildly more serious side of space opera, I seem to remember hearing that someone is taking on "The Foundation Trilogy".

Or for newer space opera, any of Alistair Reynolds or Peter K Hamilton stuff would work well. I don't think general audiences are ready yet for Iaian Banks or The Culture.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (2, Funny)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504617)

Dude, you would complain about a blowjob.

Re:Idea shortage in LA (0)

corbettw (214229) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504647)

Taking ideas from other mediums and rehashing them for the screen is different from rehashing old movies how exactly?

bastard australians (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27503959)

bastard australians

IDL (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504131)

Apparently, they get to see the movie a day earlier, not including those extra few hours they get from being just on the other side of the International Date Line. Or do I have that backwards?

Re:bastard australians (1)

interstellar_donkey (200782) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504319)

No kidding. What's the deal here. Kirk? Grew up in Iowa or something. Original Enterprise crew? Some Americans, a Russian, an Asian and a Scott.

Australians? I think there was one episode in TOS where a doomed red shirt looked like he might be Australian, but that was about it.

And despite being relatively new to the Federation, they decide to place their headquarters on Earth. Did they pick Sydney? No. They picked San Francisco, USA.

So why the heck do Australians get to see this movie first? Star Trek has nothing to do Australia.

All this means is that the first cam torrents to come out the day before the rest of the world's opening will be from a guy sitting behind some bloke who shouts out "Crike! 'ats some bloody good special effects!" every five minutes.

Sounds awesome.. (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504003)

Wish I could have been there. Didn't even know about the showing here in Austin till after the fact.

All trekkies (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504007)

The audience consisted of trekkies, but I'm wondering; does that make the 5min. standing ovation more, or less impressive?

Re:All trekkies (2, Interesting)

ultraexactzz (546422) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504241)

It's an odd-numbered film, so I'm thinking it would be more impressive. Uphill climb, and all that.

Re:All trekkies (2, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504337)

The guy from Spaced [wikipedia.org] (I think his name was Simon Pegg) always used to say that odd-numbered Trek's ALWAYS sucked. He was a wise man, that one.

Re:All trekkies (5, Funny)

BobNET (119675) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504637)

Just as there are no sequels to the Matrix [xkcd.com] , Insurrection is the most recent Trek movie made. That makes this the tenth, so the odd-even rule still stands...

Re:All trekkies (1)

Fallus Shempus (793462) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504715)

You mean the guy who is actually playing Scotty in the new film?

Re:All trekkies (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504355)

That pattern may be broken, because the last even-numbered film sucked like an odd.

Re:All trekkies (4, Funny)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504331)

More. How many trekkies do you know that can stand for 5 minutes?

We can all move on as soon as... (1)

Xistenz99 (1395377) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504041)

the original series fans admit, that while being a great show, it was pretty cheesy. I love the original series movies and was always a big fan of The Next Generation tv show. I am glad that they brought in somebody new, that may not have been a huge fan, but still respects the material because Star Trek before this movie is dead.

Always a bride's maid, never a bride (1)

LoadWB (592248) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504057)

Man, nothing cool like that ever happens around here.

Alamo Drafthouse is awesome (1)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504059)

I love the (original) Alamo Drafthouse. Austin is the center of the Texas film industry, but that industry is in danger due to poaching from states like Lousiana and New Mexico. If you live in Texas, write your state representative and senator and get them to support Representative Dawnna Duke's economic incentive bill. [boston.com]

You'll be glad you did!

Re:Alamo Drafthouse is awesome (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504145)

It's not poaching, it's called 'lower operating costs.'

Or are people from other states literally coming in, grabbing film crew, and dragging them away?

Hollywood needs to have some more incentives for filming their. Sadly people think taxing business is the way to go, when all it does it drive jobs away.

Re:Alamo Drafthouse is awesome (2, Insightful)

Zordak (123132) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504187)

write your state representative and senator and get them to support Representative Dawnna Duke's economic incentive bill.

Or you could just let them succeed or fail on their own merits like every other industr...

Never mind. Apparently, that's not how we do things anymore in America (or Texas). So yeah, give 'em a handout. Just make sure it's tied to some venue tax in Austin, so I don't have to pay for it.

Re:Alamo Drafthouse is awesome (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504669)

I am all for good movies, but they should have to pay taxes like everyone else. Not sure how giving free money away to people who make movies is helping the people of Texas?

These are fans (2, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504103)

there opinion needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

I hope it is worth it.

Re:These are fans (4, Insightful)

mea37 (1201159) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504447)

You mean like how Star Wars fans went easy on Lucas for Episodes I-III?

Nuclear wessels (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504159)

FTFA:

Anton Yelchin's Russian accent in his portrayal of Chekov does get a bit annoying.

What do you expect Yelchin to do with that part, now that Koenig completely immortalized bad accents for Chekov?

Christopher Pike? (4, Interesting)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504171)

Just curious, is Christopher Pike the captain of the enterprise? I saw some guy introduce himself as Kirk in the trailer. However since this is supposed to be predating the early series, Kirk wouldn't be captain yet. Pike would. Or is this yet another one of the billion plot holes?

Re:Christopher Pike? (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504269)

Might be Robert April if it's that early, if RA is actually canonical and not just for the novels.

Re:Christopher Pike? (1)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504535)

I believe RA is in fact part of canon. I just know that in the Cage Pike hands off the enterprise to Kirk :)

Re:Christopher Pike? (4, Insightful)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504315)

Pike would. Or is this yet another one of the billion plot holes?

If, by plot holes, you mean elements they changed as part of the *reset that this movie represents*.

Honestly, what part of "not following cannon" do you people not understand?

Re:Christopher Pike? (2, Funny)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504407)

What exactly does not following large metal guns have to do with anything? Badum-ching!

Already covered (4, Informative)

Solr_Flare (844465) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504341)

It's actually, apparently, all well explained. Including other stuff like the Enterprise being built on the ground instead of in space.

Re:Christopher Pike? (2, Informative)

rpillala (583965) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504691)

If the small snips of reviews I've read are any indication, only spoilers can explain this. So we'll have to wait and see, or not see. I'm on the fence like I was with Watchmen.

Re:Christopher Pike? (2, Informative)

dtolman (688781) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504703)

Well - there's someone cast as Christopher Pike...

I would have rather seen Wrath of Khan (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504249)

I bet there were actually more than a few people pissed off that they had to forgo what is definitely the best of the series. Barring the new one being a true masterpiece, I would rather have seen a nice print of Khan.

Re:I would have rather seen Wrath of Khan (2, Insightful)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504697)

If they were pissed, they are morons. They've seen Khan a hundred times already in every format imaginable. Chances are good that the real event will happen again.

I mean, if this is actually a good film, who wouldn't want to be able to tell their friends that they got to see if first? With Nimoy, no less?

I doubt it's any good (4, Interesting)

realmolo (574068) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504333)

Remember, this was a screening attended by trekkies and Harry Knowles-type movie dorks. These aren't people that know what a good movie is.

Hell, the trailers for the new Trek movie seem to indicate that Abrams took inspiration from - God help us - the Star Wars prequels.

It'll suck. Like almost all science-fiction movies from the past 15 or 20 years. And I'm a sci-fi fan.

Re:I doubt it's any good (1)

ben0207 (845105) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504685)

Well that's quaint. You're a sci-fi fan, but you appear to have not watched any new sci-fi for 15 to 20 years.

What about Serenity / Firefly?

Re:I doubt it's any good (4, Insightful)

lessthan (977374) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504723)

These aren't people that know what a good movie is.

I don't get this sentiment. If the Internet has shown us anything, it is the fans are the most critical audience. If the movie had been bad, there would have been a riot.

Of course, the article could have exaggerated or outright lied.

clever PR move (2, Interesting)

SethJohnson (112166) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504351)



Most stuff like this gets previewed in Austin in order to buy Harry Knowles' endorsement. It's not a high barrier to entry. Studios usually just massage his ego with a visit to their set, an advance screening on his birthday, or bring him up on stage to introduce a screening [youtube.com] . As if he knows two shits about anything (that youtube link is to a video of him introducing the Star Trek premiere mentioned in TFA).

Seth

And in the back row... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27504513)

One lonely, obese man cries out for Kahn.

When will Shatner finally admit his defeat?

I'm not impressed (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504653)

"gave the film a five-minute standing ovation at the Sydney Opera House in Australia today."

The Star Trek fans did exactly the same at the end of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and that is one of the worst movies of the franchise. I suspect the applause had more to do with seeing Star Trek *return* than any relation to artistic merit.

On the other hand:

Maybe I'm just being cynical. Abrahms produces a lot of crap. Lost sucks (boring - slow as molasses), and Alias was also lousy except for the brilliant first season. I am not expecting anything from him.

Re:I'm not impressed (3, Interesting)

kalirion (728907) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504725)

The Star Trek fans did exactly the same at the end of Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and that is one of the worst movies of the franchise.

Well, they had nothing to compare the movie to other than the series itself....

I only forsee one problem in the movie (2, Interesting)

kalirion (728907) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504675)

When even I look at the new Spock, I see Sylar. I'm all for actors branching out, but Sylar is just too strong a character for me to forget him quickly, no matter how good the acting is.

bad polling? (2, Insightful)

Frosty-B-Bad (259317) | more than 5 years ago | (#27504721)

These were people coming to see a remake of Wrath of Khan, how hard is it to impress them when you show them a new Star Trek film? I mean it would be like going to a Republican convention and finding someone that would enjoy Rush Limbaugh's newest book, your not trying very hard. I would go as far as to say

FAIL.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?