Star Trek Trailer Mania!

Published 6 years ago by , Updated November 17th, 2008 at 1:13 pm,

uss kelvin star trek trailer Star Trek Trailer Mania!

Holy cow… it’s looking like J.J. Abrams may actually accomplish what many thought was impossible: The revival of the Star Trek franchise.

Why do I say this? Because people are freaking out about the new Star Trek movie trailer. In a good way.

The trailer was released yesterday, attached to most copies of Quantum of Solace. People who’ve seen it at the theater have described it using phrases like “it gave me chills” and “it sent shivers down my spine.”

Now of course not everyone is sold on the movie based on the trailer – I’ve seen a very few comments saying that they either don’t like it outright or that they’re still uncertain or it was just “pretty good.” But by FAR the reaction has been combination of:

“Holy crap, that was AWESOME.”

and an incredulous:

“That’s Star Trek?”

You can watch the official trailer either here at Screen Rant or in HD at and

A Little History

Sure, there was the requisite buzz when it was announced that Abrams would not only produce but would in fact be directing a new Star Trek movie. It was known for a short while as Star Trek 11, but Paramount never referred to the new film with that title since this was to be a clean “reboot” (or as they prefer, “re-imagining”) of the series. Abrams is “hot” right now and it was a smart choice for Paramount to not use the same folks to helm the film as the movies continued to deliver diminishing returns and increasing disdain from long time fans.

Then came the casting choices: Relative unknown Chris Pine for Kirk (good call on not going with a big name star for that role), also currently “hot” Zachary Quinto, who plays Sylar on NBC’s Heroes. While Quinto is now very well known, he looks like he was born to play the part of Mr. Spock. Then came the others – Karl Urban who looks like he’s channeling DeForest Kelly, Simon Pegg as Scotty (not my first choice, but I think he’ll work) and semi-exotic-looking Zoe Saldana as Uhura. To round things out John Cho (of Harold and Kumar) and Anton Yelchin were thrown in to attract the younger crowd who might stay away in droves from a Star Trek movie. Throw in a few bigger names like Wynona Ryder, Eric Bana and Bruce Greenwood and you’re talking a pretty damned well rounded cast.

early star trek poster Star Trek Trailer Mania!
Star Trek teaser poster

First came a few partial-face posters which were more of a tease than anything else, but then came the first images of Pine and Quinto as Kirk and Spock. Some of the words that came to mind to describe those pictures were “plastic” and “metrosexual.” Unfortunately for the much publicized magazine cover shots they chose a photographer known for doing uber-Photoshop work on her photos and portraying people as almost mannequin-like.

chris pine zachary quinto star trek Star Trek Trailer Mania!
Kirk and Spock as Star Trek mannequins

Ah, but recently came a couple of posters to counteract that vision: Black and white versions of Kirk and Spock that looked much more “old school” and rugged.

new kirk spock posters Star Trek Trailer Mania!
“Old School” Kirk and Spock Star Trek posters

Of course in addition we had a series of images from the film which looked pretty darned good (unless you were a long-time “Trekkie” in which case you may have had some issues with what’s come to be called the “iBridge” and the somewhat odd, organic look of the new USS Enterprise).

star trek ibridge Star Trek Trailer Mania!
A look at the new Star Trek ‘iBridge’

new star trek movie cast Star Trek Trailer Mania!
The cast of the new Star Trek movie

The recently released image of the redesigned NCC-1701 caused a furor online – old fans vs new fans vs non-fans, all arguing either in defense of or agahst at the new design. Over at the post that premiered the ship accumulated over two THOUSAND comments in a couple of days! Abrams has said that “this is not a movie for ‘Star Trek’ fans – it’s a movie for movie fans.”

new enterprise first look Star Trek Trailer Mania!
The new USS Enterprise – NCC-1701

So, there was kind of a mild interest in the film outside of the Star Trek fan community – but that’s all about to change with this first full trailer for the film. All of a sudden people who weren’t even giving the movie a second thought are saying “hey, this looks pretty good – I might have to check it out.” I think that with this film Abrams is going to throw off the stigma (and yes, there is one) associated with “a Star Trek movie.”

This film looks like it is going to be epic, fast paced and action packed. Some classic Trek fans may be outraged, but I think it’s time for a change and this is the right way to do it. I’m actually quite excited by the prospect of this film because TOS (The Original Series) has always been my favorite. More “wild west” in style and less stuffy and politically correct than TNG (The Next Generation). Going back and exploring the very foundations of the original series, if done well, leaves me feeling as giddy as a kid in a candy store.

Fine, it’s not the original actors – but if Abrams and writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtman remain faithful to the spirit of the series, I’m open to change. I don’t like the bright white interiors of the ship, and I’m not sold on the new exterior Enterprise design, but when I see the attention they’ve paid to the original uniforms that tells me that they are not “slapping fans in the face” as many have suggested.

So as a long time “Trekkie,” Star Trek is one of my most anticipated movies of next year – right up there with Watchmen, and something tells me it’s going to be one of the biggest films of 2009.

So have you seen the trailer? What do you think – are you more or less excited about the movie?

Star Trek opens on May 8, 2009

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I come from an engineering background so let me put my two cents in on this. We cannot go backward in order to move forward. Star Trek promoted innovation and since it first began all those years ago much has changed, in some ways because of TOS ( ie cell phones, for those not supporting the iBridge blame Star Trek for helping to create the iphone in the first place). Star Trek is about science at its core, its what differenties it from the fantasy of Star Wars. So in order to start fresh with some grounding in our time (even a few hundred years) thigns are going to have to look like OUR time, not the 60′s version of our time. There is a big difference and I admire JJ Abrams for taking that course. I can’t wait to see it, as a long time Trekkie (not that long i’m 24, grew up on Voyager and TOS) I cannot wait!

  2. I know this will grate, but I’ll throw it in anyway.

    Maybe us old timers should rip a page out of the old playbook, and just pretend that all the differences are because of the accumulated time line corruptions, that have occurred over the life of the show. From the first time travel story in TOS, to the temporal cold war in “ST:Enterprise.” Maybe in the original time line you had a silicon plague that held advancement back, until duotronics were invented, and due to a history change, that never happened. Suppose transparent aluminum wasn’t suppose to be invented so early, etc.

  3. I do agree with the other posting on the Message board for 1st look at the enterprise pic on this site, there was one person that posted on that board about the fly in the jar and the lid screwed on what happens when you don’t let the fly out it stagnates doesn’t grow evove or anything it dies, now I fully agree with that if trek is to go on in whatever incarnation ect, you have to let it out evolve new ideas it can’t stay in the jar or it turns to dust, I for one got hooked into trek after seeing trek 4 on beta back in the day, but I agree it has to change in order for it to go on, you can’t have the same bridge as the fanbase wants it could not stand up to today’s digital age meening that detail wise it would look horrible also the enterprise exterior, would look like a plastic toy on the big screen, everyone has there opinions what they think enterprise should look like, but as Abrams stated he was taking the enterprise design from TOS and Trek Movies and making a hybrid of it, I for one don’t think it looks good nor bad as its a hybrid of the 2.
    If you look closely the deflector is the original dish from TOS with the blue of the movie enterprise the lines look different and it makes it look fine its meant to be a re imagining of original trek as Abrams put it
    To me the fan base should not be so nitpicking of everything it almost makes me think no matter what is done the fans will never be happy, you have to let the past be the past or trek will remain dead in the jar and turn to dust, the fans have to be open to new concepts and from what I have seen a lot are open to new concepts but for the ones that are not able to let go of the past and everything has to be that same, it makes me think there like old farts i.e in there 60′s 70′s and there set in there ways and they will not accept a different suggestion everything has to remain the same if they don’t like it they b**** about it complain non stop as that is what makes them happy,
    And for fans saying Berman and Braga should be gone I for one am glad there not associated with trek any longer or trek would be still dead, I am glad that someone else has taken over to breath new life into a dead franchise to get it going again.

  4. Well, it seems that everyone who thinks Trek should look the same as it did in the sixties, must think that the ’68 Mustang looks more advanced than the current one. As much as I love the old series, I just can’t imagine there being a bridge decorated with low res photos of galaxies and nebulae. And what was that crap that always fell from the ceilings when the ship was rocked by an explosion; concrete or drywall? They now have the budget, let’em do something with it. I just thought of soemthing else, too. This still part of the regular continuity no matter what it looks like. We’ll just have to pretend that the ship and crew have always looked like the current version. Matbe, it’s like in the excellent Star Trek V (NOT!) where the fake god says he appears in the form matching that of whomever is standing in front of him. Think of this new Trek in that way. If it wasn’t part of continuity, then what would be the point of having Leonard Nimoy in it? It’s not a marketing thing. They said this one is supposed to appeal to non Trekkers.o the original Spock has no influence on them seeing the film. You know, Voyager was lame, and the only people who really liked it were those who just couldn’t let Trek go. DS9 wasn’t half bad. I thoguht it was better than B5, but it just wasn’t good enough to keep me watching week after week. Government, movie making, storytelling, car design, architecture, computers, writing, and even Star Trek need to evolve in order to survive. Can you imagine where video games would be if Atari and Intellivision continued with their blocky graphics? New programmers had to come along and keep upping the stakes to keep the genre moving. Same here. Don’t be superficial by judging how the new movie looks,judge it by how good/bad the story is when you see it. You can see how it all gels together at that time. We need to get out of the 1960′s idea of the 23rd century. The 23rd century looks different here in the 2000s. Next, everyone will want fishbowl space helmets and scuba tanks. Later.

  5. To: J.L Nedbelek

    what was that falling from the ceiling lol I think it was burned pink insulation and trusses and drywall crushed concrete.

    now why they would have 20th-21st century construction material in the 23rd and 24th century is beyond me. lol
    must have been berman being a cheapo and not using his pee brain imagination… hmm thats why trek crapped out hehe

  6. Chicken wire embedded with dried wall spackle is more like it. LOL. Dust, too. I know these things were to blame on the budget and design of movie/television show sets back then, but still. 2001 was done with plastics and even cardboard planets (if I remember the Piers Bizony book about the making of 2001 correctly), but they made it look pretty convincing. I’d like to hear Gary Lockwood’s observations/comments on the quality of the sets from his appearance on Trek and in 2001.

  7. Ya know folks… people are MUCH more likely to get through your comments of you use paragraphs. I know it makes it very hard for me to read if you have a huge block of text without paragraph breaks.

    You make me work to hard and I’ll give up on reading what you have to say.


  8. I just seen the new trailer released March 6 2009 I am posting the link here to download it its in flash format (.flv) you can download many flash players

    Trailer LINK


    I definitely say JJ has definitely made a film worth Star Trek, if this is any indication of the movie I am gonna see it opening day I cannot wait, also I hope all the naysayers keep quiet till the movie comes out and then voice there opinions.

    Anyway all enjoy and post your comments on this 3rd Trailer

  9. It was great. I’ll pay 10$ just to see the trailer in a theatre when they start showing it.