Star Trek - In theaters May 08, 2009

thunda123

Premium Supporter
I most likely will not see it. I'm not really a star trek fan at all. I remember watching it when I was like 7 or 8 but then as I got older they played re-runs ALL THE TIME and I hated it. haha. Same goes with that show MASH.

I think I saw the last star trek movie that came out cuz my dad liked them.
 
Jan 30, 2009
1,562
England
Yeah never watched it on tv or the films. But this looks quite good. Maybe the people who never really watched it will enjoy it more then the fan boys
 

49ergirl

BANNED
Jan 28, 2009
1,598
Will definitely be seeing this!!! Love the new Captain Kirk and Spock! :D:D:D Plus I love JJ Abrams
 

Glen-BoB

Grampie Blu-Clan
Jan 28, 2009
3,641
Dartmouth, NS, CaNaDa
because it looks good :) plus my main reason for never watching Star Trek is that is old lol looks funky and just lack luster lol

This looks new and with today's special effects can't go wrong! :D
i gotta agree with you there. If I never grew up watching the original series I would never have watched it. it looks rediculous, haha. but I love it because i never missed it on saturday mornings, that's when they used to play it in the 70's I guess. There was also an annimated series that ruled as well, along with the Planet of the Apes, haha.
 
Apr 27, 2009
530
Pennsylvania
just incase while you are watching and wondering....WHY?

J.J. Abrams Admits Star Trek Lens Flares Are "Ridiculous"

I'm curious to hear more about why you decided to use so many lens flares, and exactly when you decided to use them?

[Smiles] I don't know what you're talking about. [Laughs] I'm kidding. I know what you're saying with the lens flares. It was one of those things... I wanted a visual system that felt unique. I know there are certain shots where even I watch and think, "Oh that's ridiculous, that was too many." But I love the idea that the future was so bright it couldn't be contained in the frame.

The flares weren't just happening from on-camera light sources, they were happening off camera, and that was really the key to it. I want [to create] the sense that, just off camera, something spectacular is happening. There was always a sense of something, and also there is a really cool organic layer thats a quality of it. They were all done live, they weren't added later. There are something about those flares, especially in a movie that can potentially be very sterile and CG and overly controlled. There is something incredibly unpredictable and gorgeous about them. It is a really fun thing. Our DP would be off camera with this incredibly powerful flashlight aiming it at the lens. It became an art because different lenses required angles, and different proximity to the lens. Sometimes, when we were outside we'd use mirrors. Certain sizes were too big... literally, it was ridiculous. It was like another actor in the scene....

We had two cameras, so sometimes we had two different spotlight operators. When there was atmosphere in the room, you had to be really careful because you could see the beams. So it was this ridiculous, added level of pain in the ass, but I love... [looking at] the final cut, [the flares] to me, were a fun additional touch that I think, while overdone, in some places, it feels like the future is that bright.




So now you know, and honestly after hearing his reasoning and his admission that maybe he got a little carried away in some scenes — like the above Spock meets Scottie moment — I can see what he's saying, especially about keeping it from looking too greenscreen or fake.

Full story from io9
 
Apr 28, 2009
426
Cali
Hahaha... ah, I can't wait to see that movie, I never watch anything Star Trek... I mean, other then the REAL old show.