Star Trek Beyond Trailer Has Enterprise Going Down in Flames

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Star Trek Beyond Trailer Has Enterprise Going Down in Flames

The third installment of the rebooted Star Trek movies is coming July 22, and Paramount has decided to give fans an early holiday treat with the first trailer for Star Trek Beyond.

With J.J. Abrams doing his Star Wars thing, the rebooted Star Trek films get Justin Lin's direction for the third movie Star Trek Beyond. And, with the release of a first trailer, it has a Fast and Furious feel to it.

The main cast and crew all make their return in time to see the Enterprise destroyed by what appears to be a swarm of thousands of small ships (thanks, Zontar). The crew gets scattered and the movie seems to follow them as they try to reunite. Idris Elba takes on the mantle of the newest Star Trek villain, hardly recognizable in alien makeup. And Kingsmen: The Secret Service's Sofia Boutella shows up as a friendly alien with similar markings to a white-faced Darth Maul.

The screenplay is written by Doug Jung and Simon Pegg, who plays Scotty in the rebooted films. From the trailer it looks like much of the movie will be more planetside than previous films, perhaps an attempt to be less techy and more appealing to the masses.

"They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them," Pegg said in an interview earlier this year. "I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y."

He said the goal of this script was to "make a western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it's more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent."

Add in the direction of Lin, who did Fast & Furious 6, and we get a film that may have more of a film that recalls the James T. Kirk shows of the 60's than the recent shows or films. The timing couldn't be better for that, though, as next year marked the 50th anniversary of original the TV series.

Permalink

the Enterprise destroyed by what appears to be a meteor shower.

Looked more like a swarm of small ships or missiles to me.

"They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them," Pegg said in an interview earlier this year. "I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y."

You know it's a bad sign when a problem a movie has it that it's too much like exactly what it's supposed to be like. I mean seriously, could it even be done to make it more apparent this is a lazy cash grab that had no one in the critical roles even attempting to make a good movie? Because Pegg seems to be the highest one on the totem pole who has given a singly shit about these movies. The director of this and the previous two monstrosities openly didn't care and made no attempt to hid this fact, and the best we got was a full one in three writers even being competent. Watching Into Darkness there's really no need to try and guess which scenes where written by the lone good writer in the mix vs the two incompetent buffoons who show that in some cases outcome is inversely proportional to skill.

God damn did this trailer and all the news relating to it piss me off.

Zontar:

the Enterprise destroyed by what appears to be a meteor shower.

Looked more like a swarm of small ships or missiles to me.

Fixed, with credit given. Thx

So it's generic trailer fodder, but IN SPACE!

...eh. I'll still see the movie eventually anyway, but...eh. This trailer doesn't do anything for me.

Well, the last one shamelessly ripped off WOK, I guess this time we're shamelessly stealing from TSFS.

Welp looks like they certainly went through with trying to make it like the current Marvel movies, perticularly Guardians of the Galaxy.

You know something is wrong here when Into Darkness had a more hype trailer then this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOQMXNwp8wo

Boy, The Enterprise can't catch a break can't they when it come to the ship getting hit?

Also, is it a trend now to show new trailers in December now? We had TNMT:OotS, X-men: Apoclaypse, Independence Days Resurgance and now this?

Scarim Coral:
Boy, The Enterprise can't catch a break can't they when it come to the ship getting hit?

Also, is it a trend now to show new trailers in December now? We had TNMT:OotS, X-men: Apoclaypse, Independence Days Resurgance and now this?

Did the latest Batman V Superman Dawn of Justice trailer came out this month?

I'd be more surprised if the Enterprise DIDN'T get destroyed in a movie.

Samtemdo8:

Scarim Coral:
Boy, The Enterprise can't catch a break can't they when it come to the ship getting hit?

Also, is it a trend now to show new trailers in December now? We had TNMT:OotS, X-men: Apoclaypse, Independence Days Resurgance and now this?

Did the latest Batman V Superman Dawn of Justice trailer came out this month?

Oh yeah that's true but I kinda mean new movie announcement (but I guess it's still count per say and there#s also The Jungle Book) and I just remember The BFG.

Samtemdo8:

Scarim Coral:
Boy, The Enterprise can't catch a break can't they when it come to the ship getting hit?

Also, is it a trend now to show new trailers in December now? We had TNMT:OotS, X-men: Apoclaypse, Independence Days Resurgance and now this?

Did the latest Batman V Superman Dawn of Justice trailer came out this month?

I believe so yeah.

OT: While I'm not into Star Trek, I gotta say the trailer was mildly amusing, although it's typical of Hollywood to use CGI, and explosions as a marketing tool these days, so what else is new here?

Zontar:
You know it's a bad sign when a problem a movie has it that it's too much like exactly what it's supposed to be like.

I had the same thought. What's the point in even using an established franchise if you're just going to eject the fan base?

I...I don't...I can't...

Okay, confession time. I'll put my hand on the computer that verifies claims (see TOS) and say that the Star Trek 2009 film was actually my first real introduction to Star Trek (unless you count Sfdebris). Sure, I'd seen some episodes before, but it was the point where I actually got a grip on the franchise. Since then I got into series such as TNG (favorite), TOS (holds up surprisingly well) and Enterprise (bleh), but I honestly enjoy the films. Heck, I like Into Darkness more than the original. The original is a fun adventure/action movie. Into Darkness (controversial opinion time), while it riffs off Wrath of Khan, actually has some thematic resonance (family, accountability, betterment vs. aspiration, etc.). Like I said, controversial, but ST'09 and STID stand as no. 4 and no. 3 on the best to worst list of ST movies.

But this? Even by the standards of these movies (which I can readily admit have a shift towards action,), this is going to another level entirely. We have:

a) Rock music

b) Motor cycles

c) Martial arts

d) Aliens invading Earth. Again.

Speaking in my humble, "dirty newbie opinion," I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that no fan, old or new, would immediately associate those first three points with Star Trek, and while point d has a bit more latitude (heck, see the Motion Picture, The Search for Spock, Nemesis, etc.), it doesn't really scream "frontier." For instance, look at the 09/STID trailers. They have action, but there's a kind of granduar about them as well. This has far more in common with Guardians of the Galaxy. In way, as someone who likes the Abramsverse, I'm kind of hoping to be in a position to say "see? Those first two films weren't nearly as far away from the Star Trek 'essence' when compared to Beyond.

And yet I'll still see it. :(

Edit: Looking at the swarming fighters, anyone else reminded of Ender's Game?

I... Heard... SPOCK...say... "Let's find hope in the impossible" ...a semi-VULCAN, scientist, proud of his vulcan heritage, says THAT? Old spock lifted an eyebrow and looked at you Simon Pegg, lips almost disappearing in disappointment and disapproval

And two-stroke dirt bikes surely are explainable by parallel evolution, right? right? Evolution between Chris Pratt and Chris Pine, I mean

Nope... doesn't work for me.

Hawki:
I...I don't...I can't...

Okay, confession time. I'll put my hand on the computer that verifies claims (see TOS) and say that the Star Trek 2009 film was actually my first real introduction to Star Trek (unless you count Sfdebris). Sure, I'd seen some episodes before, but it was the point where I actually got a grip on the franchise. Since then I got into series such as TNG (favorite), TOS (holds up surprisingly well) and Enterprise (bleh), but I honestly enjoy the films. Heck, I like Into Darkness more than the original. The original is a fun adventure/action movie. Into Darkness (controversial opinion time), while it riffs off Wrath of Khan, actually has some thematic resonance (family, accountability, betterment vs. aspiration, etc.). Like I said, controversial, but ST'09 and STID stand as no. 4 and no. 3 on the best to worst list of ST movies.

But this? Even by the standards of these movies (which I can readily admit have a shift towards action,), this is going to another level entirely. We have:

a) Rock music

b) Motor cycles

c) Martial arts

d) Aliens invading Earth. Again.

Speaking in my humble, "dirty newbie opinion," I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that no fan, old or new, would immediately associate those first three points with Star Trek, and while point d has a bit more latitude (heck, see the Motion Picture, The Search for Spock, Nemesis, etc.), it doesn't really scream "frontier." For instance, look at the 09/STID trailers. They have action, but there's a kind of granduar about them as well. This has far more in common with Guardians of the Galaxy. In way, as someone who likes the Abramsverse, I'm kind of hoping to be in a position to say "see? Those first two films weren't nearly as far away from the Star Trek 'essence' when compared to Beyond.

And yet I'll still see it. :(

Edit: Looking at the swarming fighters, anyone else reminded of Ender's Game?

You're wrong on the martial arts. That is a staple of fighting between Kirk and the Gorn or Spock and just about anything. Just because they're using more modern trained Hollywood martial arts rather than old 1970's "white" martial arts does not dis-include it from the series. (Google "Star Trek stuntmen" and you'll find tons of 1960's and 1970's photos of stand-ins doing crazy stuff for Shatner).

The motorcycle...eh, I don't mind them adding in vehicles. It's not like you can just go into space and act like a spaceship is the only vehicle people use.

As for the music, it is "classical" considering the set time period.

Maybe the movie will be alright but by god that was a really shit trailer.

I'd be more surprised if the Enterprise DIDN'T get destroyed in a movie.

The Enterprise will be destroyed in this movie, did no one tell you the 'reboot' has clearly decided that it wants to retell the original frnachise movies stories and plot lines but with a made for the lowest intelligence twist.

So the original franchise had The Wrath of Khan as it's second movie, the reboot had Khan appear as the bad guy in it. The third movie in the original franchise, The Search for Spock had the Enterprise destroyed around so safe to say that will happen in this movie as well.

The worst aspect of the entire thing though is just how wank the whole thing looked. No hook, no sneak peaks, nothing, I can't even tell what the story is meant to be about. The Enterprise gets destroyed by someone who doesn't like them for reasons, fuck even the real Kirk managed to complete their five year mission before he got his first ship blown up.

enginieri:
And two-stroke dirt bikes surely are explainable by parallel evolution, right? right? Evolution between Chris Pratt and Chris Pine, I mean

Twin tips and no expansion pipe, it no two-stroke

OT: the reboot franchise has been good action but poorly written science fiction, more going to science fantasy spectrum of things.

Scarim Coral:
Boy, The Enterprise can't catch a break can't they when it come to the ship getting hit?

Also, is it a trend now to show new trailers in December now? We had TNMT:OotS, X-men: Apoclaypse, Independence Days Resurgance and now this?

They want their trailers to be in the opening of the new Star Wars.

I don't know why this is a surprise, in most of the trek movies the Enterprise (Whichever one) gets a beating or damaged in some way, the only exceptions are the motion picture and a voyage home.

Was that a Star Trek trailer I just watched? If it didn't have a title, I'd think it was an adaptation some completely different (purely action focused) scifi franchise.

It seriously does feel like they are dumbing Star Trek down. But hey, China is Hollywood's hip new target demographic, and it's easier to just subtitle and sell a dumb action movie to non-English speaking audiences than to do the same with a slower, thought provoking story.

Laughing Man:

I'd be more surprised if the Enterprise DIDN'T get destroyed in a movie.

The Enterprise will be destroyed in this movie, did no one tell you the 'reboot' has clearly decided that it wants to retell the original frnachise movies stories and plot lines but with a made for the lowest intelligence twist.

So the original franchise had The Wrath of Khan as it's second movie, the reboot had Khan appear as the bad guy in it. The third movie in the original franchise, The Search for Spock had the Enterprise destroyed around so safe to say that will happen in this movie as well.

So, does that mean the next movie will involve time travel and have Zachary Quinto swimming with whales? I'm starting to take bets right now.

John Keefer:

"They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them," Pegg said in an interview earlier this year. "I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y."

.... I.... I don't actually know what to say to this. It just sounds so horrible sounding in my head, I'm mainly confirming that it exists, and that these people are still going to be rewarded for continuously homoginizing everything due to the popcorn munching standard consumer base.

Then again, I may be part of the problem, since due to my childhood I've been on my knees, mouth open, tongue out, for everything the Marvel Cinematic Universe spurts all over my face. But still, at least those movies are good. Into Darkness was bland as hell, and considering this quote, I don't imagine this improving on that.

... the fact that they've already got a sequel green-lit for 2019 probably doesn't help.

what did i just watch?
please tell me this is just a test project and JJ is actually directing the third movie after completing star wars.
this trailer is terrible with this music and the huge amount of action. why the hell they choose a director for the fast/furious movies? this doesnt seem to have anything with politics and diplomacy as the last previous movies. hell, into darkness was far better then the 2009 version of star trek.
i think i might skip this one.

so like..the trailer for the 20 years late necessary sequel to a destruction porn vapid summer popcorn flick looked better than that

Ukomba:
I'd be more surprised if the Enterprise DIDN'T get destroyed in a movie.

Many years ago, when I saw the trailer for Search for Spock, I was horrified. "No, they wouldn't...".

The actual scene was pretty powerful. Fires inside the Enterprise were slowly eating away at the iconic "NCC 1701-Enterprise" written across the saucer. Then, the saucer blew up and it slowly started falling into the planet's atmosphere. Kirk and Bones even took a moment to morn the old girl.

I doubt they will even pause for a moment after they blow up this Enterprise. It will just be another empty pew-pew lightshow scene and then on with another pew-pew lightshow scene.

So - what star trek movie plot is this one a rehash of? I couldn't tell...

I love it. A dire scenario on a foreign planet with the odds stacked against the crew?

Sounds like an episode of Classic Star Trek, if you ask me. And now the action will actually be GOOD.

I have more faith in this than I ever would under Abrahms

Wait... That was supposed to be Star Trek? It looked nothing like a Star Trek movie.

John Keefer:
"They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them," Pegg said in an interview earlier this year. "I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y."

He said the goal of this script was to "make a western or a thriller or a heist movie, then populate that with Star Trek characters so it's more inclusive to an audience that might be a little bit reticent."

Ah that's why, sounds like they don't want to make a Star Trek movie.

I just hope that Star Wars doesn't start to go the same way, being a generic movie with brand items tacked on.

Hasn't the "enterprise going down in flames" been in every JJ star trek trailer?

Eeeyup. Fuck that. And fuck you, Paramount.

When your producers are complaining that your fucking Star Trek movie is too "Star Trek-y", you've lost your minds.

What the hell's the point of using an established brand, one with an established lore and fan base, if you're just going to produce something that is both generic and completely different from the source material? All you'll end up doing is alienating the fans and bringing in no one new.

Well done, Paramount. You're fucking worthless.

Why are these new treks still being made? I turned off the 2nd one after 3 min it was so stupid and lens flarey.

Hawki:
But this? Even by the standards of these movies (which I can readily admit have a shift towards action,), this is going to another level entirely. We have:

a) Rock music

b) Motor cycles

c) Martial arts

d) Aliens invading Earth. Again.

Given that the first reboot kicked things off with rock music, vintage cars and people punching each other, I'm not sure why you'd think that's suddenly a problem now. And as Deathfish notes, Kirk getting in fights with virtually everyone he meets (and sleeping with most of the rest) was always a running theme of Trek.

As for the shift towards action people keep complaining about, that's nothing new either. One of the big complaints about every film since TNG started has been that there's basically no connection between the TV show and the films. Picard in particular is two entirely different characters that just happen to have the same name - in the TV show he's a highly competent diplomat who will always talk rather than fight and do everything to save even his enemies from harm, while in the films he's a psychotic thug who happily guns down his own people when he already knows how to save them, let alone anyone who actually opposes him. Whatever flaws the reboots might have, being more action-oriented than the TV series is not something that started with them.

Darks63:
Why are these new treks still being made?

Money. The last two films both made more money than any previous Trek film. You could argue they weren't more successful than all based on the ratio of profit to production cost, but a solid $100 million+ is not something film studios are going to turn their noses up at. And by any measure they have been far more successful that the last couple of TNG films.

On top of that, critical response has been better as well. Star Trek 2009 has the highest critical rating of all Trek films, and Into Darkness is (somehow) around 2nd or 3rd depending on how you count it. People can argue all they like that they're not proper Trek films or simply not good films at all, but the fact remains that not only do a lot of people like them and pay money to watch them, but they like them more and are willing to pay more than with previous Trek films. It may suck for those who want films closer to the TV series, but that's just how the market works.

Kahani:
Given that the first reboot kicked things off with rock music, vintage cars and people punching each other, I'm not sure why you'd think that's suddenly a problem now. And as Deathfish notes, Kirk getting in fights with virtually everyone he meets (and sleeping with most of the rest) was always a running theme of Trek.

Those are fair points, but in response:

-Rock music: Did rock music feature in any of the trailers for ST: 2009? I know it was in the film proper (Kirk's joyride and the bar), but the trailer, on the other hand, used an orchestral score. Everything about it says "this is an epic adventure" and, IMO, ST: 2009 is without a doubt an action-adventure movie (key word on "adventure" though). Point is, in terms of music, the trailers for both previous Abramsverse films have fit the tone of the movie. So in this case, the tone seems to be going for "kewl." It doesn't help that it also seems to be riffing off Guardians of the Galaxy in this regard.

-Vintage Cars: True, this was in ST: 2009. Difference is, the car in that case at least had a reason to exist (Earth, countryside, etc.), and the scene provides characterization for Kirk in that we're shown him as a child, see the seeds of his cockiness, and ties in with his overall arc of maturing as an individual (which STID kinda sets back a bit, but whatever). The motorbike, on the other hand, has far less reason to exist on the Enterprise. And while I'm lacking the context of the motorbike scene, its sole purpose for existing here seems to be the "kewl" factor.

-Martial Arts: Again, you're right, there's been fighting in the TV shows and previous films. But there's undoubtedly a focus on the fighting here, and flashiness to it. Now I admit I'm actually interested in the alien girl here (if only to see a main cast member who isn't a human (or in Spock's case, half-human), but again, there's far more focus here on what she can do, rather than who she is.

I suppose "focus" is the key word here. None of the above are out of place in Star Trek. I'd also argue that a Star Trek film doesn't need to have an overall theme or deep philisophical meaning to be enjoyable (see ST3*, 4, 11). But if we're operating under the assumption that the trailer is indeed indicative of the movie, then the movie is primarily an action flick. And I would argue that no other ST movie has ever been that first and foremost. Not even ST 2009 (which was adventure complimented by action), Nemesis (which did have a theme, albeit an under-explored one in the midst of said action), or STID (which had a trinity of themes, and, IMO, actually pulled them off). Here, I see action and little else.

There's also the sense that this is trying to emulate Guardians of the Galaxy, which is a film I admittedly enjoyed, but under the proviso that I had to turn my brain off. And, let's see:

-Leader of the group who's into rock music (Star-Lord/Kirk)
-Alien who takes things literally and is often unaware of the subtleties of humor (Spock/Drax)
-Wacky sidekick who's good with machines (Scotty/Rocket)
-Alien girl who's good with weapons and martial arts (Gamora/alien girl)
-Swarming ships and grey-coloured foot soldiers (both films)
-Climax that takes place on capital world of main faction (Federation/Xandar), involving said swarming ships

Not saying, but...just saying.

*I've heard it said that the theme of Search for Spock is "life from death" and "loyalty." That said, I don't personally agree, as I feel "life from death" is more in the realm of Wrath of Khan, and "loyalty" is stretching things a bit. Admittedly, I rank SfS lower than most people, so go figure.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here