Okay, so everyone that even remotely gives/has given a damn about the Star Trek franchise must be aware of this movie by now:

On May 8th, the J.J. Abrams directed Star Trek movie comes out. From the trailers, you'll notice three things right away.

1. The plot appears to revolve around the characters of the Original Series, but as children and young adults. (Captain Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Etc.)
2. None of the original actors are present (Although, I'd put ten bucks down on at least a Shatner cameo)
3. It looks very Hollywood --> Moreso than previous movies.

I've spoken to a few people now (fans of the series) who, for one or more of the reasons listed above, do not intend/refuse to see this movie, or think it's going to turn out horribly.

I was wondering what GF thinks.

I wouldn't consider myself Trekkie because I've only watched the feature films and red some of the books. Fans have to accept that the film is intended for a new generation who have no idea who said, Beam me up Scotty.

I like the franchise but mostly before Deep Space Nine. My husband likes them all. He's particularly interested in this modernised version of Star Trek. We would both we watching this movie but since we don't really go to the cinema, we're just buying the DVD when it comes out.

I'm not a fan of Star Trek, but the movie looks pretty good. I probably won't go see it in the movie theaters, but I'll definitely rent it when it comes out on DVD. It looks like a pretty entertaining movie with lots of action.

Me and my wife are Star Trek fans and have been looking forward to seeing this movie. It will be interesting to see how they do this one.
I'm not a big fan of the going backwards in movies so it will have to be something real impressive for me to like, but as Star Trek fans we will give this one a shot.

Paramount, as owner of the IP, may make anything they want and call it "Star Trek" and make it official canon.


More Star Trek: John Cho is Sulu + $160 Million Budget?! FirstShowing.net

None of this obliges anyone to patronize or otherwise accept it.

Given the budget versus the likely box office performance, this appears to be a bad business move.

May 15 (one week later) "Terminator Salvation" is supposed to be released.

Yeah, I've been telling people that the main reason I want to go on opening night isn't because I think it's going to be the best film ever made --> It's because if I don't go, it'll flop, and they'll stop making Star Trek films (including the good ones).

Movie producers aren't supposed to be morons --> The high budget either means it's a half-decent script, or else.... well... or else it means the movie producers are morons.

Do you think they should play "Taps" or "Amazing Grace" at a funeral for the Star Trek movie series?

It doesn't matter how "decent" one thinks this script is, Star Trek has always had limited appeal.

The previous movies had established casts with lesser budgets and they did what they did at the box office (some profits were seen). This one is re-casting established roles and the budget is beyond anything any "Star Trek" movie (even if they weren't re-casting established roles) would be likely to be able to recoup at the box office.

Yeah, they seem to have traded spacepolitics and ethical conundrum for explosives and mainstream appeal --> Call it a 160 million dollar experiment?

Could potentially still be good...

Or it can be called stupidity. There was a prequel series called, Star Trek Enterprise, which was not embraced by the core audience. Now they propose to not only do a prequel but to recast established roles. (Not to mention what is likely to happen with the canon.)


How?