Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

First Official Photos From New Star Trek Movie

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Oct 16, 2008 07:39 AM
from the please-jj-don't-hurt-em dept.
Philias Fog writes "The most secret project in Hollywood is finally lifting its skirt. Today Paramount released a number of images for their new Star Trek movie directed by JJ Abrams. Shots include images of the bridge of the Enterprise, the villain Nero, a ship (not the Enterprise) and all of the crew in uniform. TrekMovie.com has a complete set of photos and links to all the new shots."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Spock (Score:5, Funny)

    by gijoel (628142) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:45AM (#25398195)
    I can't get over the fact that Zachary Quinto (Sylar) from Heroes is Spock. I keep expecting that the plot will be about a bunch of scalped corpses being found all over the Enterprise.
    • Re:Spock (Score:5, Funny)

      by Alicat1194 (970019) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:51AM (#25398261)
      Mind-meld, mind removal, it's all the same.
    • Re:Spock (Score:5, Funny)

      by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:57AM (#25398345)
      Yeah, no kidding. Poor Quinto has pretty much a ruined career, because EVERY time I see him on screen I'll be thinking, "Can't trust him! That's Sylar! Kill him now or it's gonna get worse!!!"
      • by RulerOf (975607) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:17AM (#25398539)
        That honestly depends on how good of an actor he is.

        I had no idea that I would end up loving Leonardo DiCaprio as much as I do now when I saw him in Titanic. But after seeing movies like Catch Me if You Can and The Aviator, you'll understand how simply being a good actor can negate these kinds of labels.
        • by mdielmann (514750) on Thursday October 16 2008, @11:09AM (#25401183) Homepage

          Having watched a few episodes of Heroes this season, I'd say Quinto is a better actor than the character of Sylar called for until this season. I'm prepared to lay all the shitty lines he's had on the writers at this point, and not his two-dimensional acting. In two episodes, thanks to the joy of time travel, you see him as the classic psychotic villain, someone who's looking at his life and wondering if perhaps there's a better way, and a father who's desperately fighting his demons to give his kid the life he never had. And they were convincing, to me anyway.
          I think he'll play a Vulcan a million times better than what's-her-name from Enterprise, and give a respectable portrayal of Spock. His biggest problem is going to be acting in the shadow of Leonard Nimoy.

  • by Splab (574204) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:48AM (#25398221)

    leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      leaves me wondering why they put a kid in charge of a space ship...

      It's obvious. Galloping around the cosmos is a game for the young, Doctor!

    • by dkleinsc (563838) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:00AM (#25398377)

      I would think CleverNickName would be the best person to answer that one.

    • by pmontra (738736) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:14AM (#25398505) Homepage
      Shatner was 35 when he started acting as J.T. Kirk. Pine is 28. He has about the right age for the role he has to play in the story of the Kirk character. Furthermore people at 28 can already be everything they'll ever be if they're really good.
        • by falcon5768 (629591) <Falcon5768.comcast@net> on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:28AM (#25398663) Journal
          Im almost 30 and guess what, not for nothing but I look a hell of a lot more like Pine than I do Shat when he was Kirk. Back then hollywood tended to have older actors play younger characters, to the point that once you have actors who ARE the actual age of the characters play them, it seems jarring.

          You know another thing, I love how people call it Star Trek 90210, yet people fail to remember the entire cast of that show minus Brian Austen Green was like 25 when they started. They where 25 and playing 16 year olds.

  • Is it just me... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Darundal (891860) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:50AM (#25398247) Journal
    ...or were you expecting something closer to the series insofar as ship design is concerned? After seeing the pics of the shuttle (specifically, the control console) I figured that the ship interiors would be tastefully done updates, not complete redesigns.
  • Those uniforms (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Fri13 (963421) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:54AM (#25398301)

    ST:NG had good uniforms. All the uniforms looks like joggin suits on those shots. No style, no correct tags and rankings etc.

    Check out the Star-Trek Next Generation season 5-6 uniforms what example a Jean-Luc Picard had.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Luc_Picard [wikipedia.org]

  • Plot synopsis (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:55AM (#25398315)
    It's JJ Abrams, which means we get to start out in the middle of the story, backtrack to "where it all began," and finish up with a fun-filled exciting resolution!

    MI:III I'm betting was just a rehash of an unused ALIAS script.

    Not that he does bad work, it's just a little repetitive after a while.
  • Why!?! (Score:4, Interesting)

    Why oh why are they doing a remake of the old generation? I would much rather see something fresh and new. There is no way I will accept this "Spock" as being the Spock I grew up with!!!!!!!!!!
  • Speaking... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DougF (1117261) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:08AM (#25398453)
    As someone who watched TOS on a black and white 9" TV with a towel under the door to hide the light from my parents (it was on after bed time)...I welcome a "refreshing" of the Star Trek ensemble. The key to success will be the script, not the special effects, a lesson not learned in a few previous Star Trek and most Sci-Fi movies...
  • Hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ZDRuX (1010435) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:52AM (#25399023)
    I looked at the vidcaps and didn't see Picard. This movie has failed already.
  • Alternate (Score:5, Informative)

    by waveformwafflehouse (1221950) on Thursday October 16 2008, @09:11AM (#25399341) Homepage
    More here [trekweb.com]
  • Question (Score:4, Funny)

    by rlp (11898) on Thursday October 16 2008, @12:15PM (#25402153)

    I lost track, is this an even or odd Star Trek movie?

    • Re:no comment (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bpjk (305635) on Thursday October 16 2008, @07:48AM (#25398227)
      OK, here ya go:

      How on earth can the entire command staff of the Enterprise be that young? They don't require people to have serious experience (time in the field) before they can get to positions of that much responsibility?

      An adolescent captain just looks wrong...

      At least they got that right in (most) of the other Treks.

      Other than that, nice pics; love the angry Spock one :-)
      • Re:no comment (Score:5, Insightful)

        by dnoyeb (547705) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:03AM (#25398399) Homepage Journal

        It looks like High School Space Capades. These kids are way too young and they all look way too much the same. AND William Shatner IS Captain Kirk. There is no way you can cast anybody as Kirk but Shatner. Why even go there? If they want to appeal to new younger croud, then just call it Star Trek: ABC or something. They don't know Kirk anyway. I don't think any trekkies will be happy with that.

        I seriously had to check if it was April 1.

      • Re:no comment (Score:5, Informative)

        by falcon5768 (629591) <Falcon5768.comcast@net> on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:23AM (#25398609) Journal
        Pine is 28. Kirk was 30 when he took command of the Enterprise. Its not that they are so young its that Shatner was so OLD when he played Kirk (over 35 during the series) and your miss remembering how young Shatner really was in WNMHGB in comparison to the series proper which was filmed almost a year after the second pilot.
      • Re:no comment (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ajs (35943) <ajsNO@SPAMajs.com> on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:40AM (#25398837) Homepage Journal

        Adolescent?! The guy's 28 years old. Check IMDB, at 28, he's the youngest member of the cast which averages in the mid-30s.

        You've been watching too much 90210, and may have actually come to believe that good looking mid-to-late 20s actors are teens. ;-)

      • Re:no comment (Score:5, Informative)

        by Bandman (86149) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:42AM (#25398881) Homepage

        Not to be the trek fanboy I used to be, but Kirk was the youngest captain in starfleet history. I'm assuming this is before he was legendary, and I'm sure they're going to be making the movies about how he /became/ legendary. Anyway, carry on.

        PS - The Klingons didn't have a word for surrender...until they met Kirk

      • Re:no comment (Score:4, Interesting)

        by rezalas (1227518) on Thursday October 16 2008, @08:57AM (#25399111)
        Well, some people just *look* young. My ex is 27 and when she went to pick up a job application she was told "you have to be at least 16 sweetie". I've been carded in movies, and I'm 25. Its not uncommon for people that are healthy to appear young. Also, if you look at the time line for star trek, its all after a big war when we are recovering as a civilization. Even today the young are the ones who serve (at 23, you are considered an "old man" in basic training even today). Who is to say there are that many capable old soldiers left to command a starship AND run a whole fleet of them? Perhaps the oldest and most veteran are needed elsewhere, so they let the younger generation carry the front lines (also, not uncommon).
      • Re:no comment (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Like2Byte (542992) <[moc.oohay] [ta] [etyB2ekiL]> on Thursday October 16 2008, @09:28AM (#25399599) Homepage

        Too young, huh? Here goes. I'm an ex submariner. As near to a futuristic, fully-operational spaceship as we're likely to see in our lifetime is a naval submarine.

        The CO (That's "Commanding Officer") of our boat was a late thirty to a forty-something. An early forty-something. The remaining officers were (junior) sub thirties - One as young as 25. Ranking officers in US submarines tend to be younger than their surface fleet counterparts. Submariners are also a heck of a lot smarter. As a matter of fact, submarines are not run quite like surface fleet ships. Knowledge tends to drive submariners - not rank, so much. I've told junior to mid-ranking officers to go eff themselves after they've issued me a command to do something that they didn't realize would have disastrous consequences. When they complained, the senior officers told them to shut it, lest the rest of the crew loose more respect for that officer because of their lack of knowledge.

        Here's another little thing: My first CO and XO (Late 30s to early 40 (sub-43)) were the most charismatic leaders I've ever worked under. I would have followed them to the bottom of the sea. My next CO/XO combo (early 50s/late 40s) were, IMHO, more concerned with book-keeping. It was a very unhappy three years for the entire crew under the command of those asshats. Several ranking CPOs lost the ability to advance because of bad fit-reps these two shitheads issued - our COB committed suicide on board our boat for Christ's sake. The 'official' report said the command had nothing to do with it. Sure, right. I don't believe anyone believed it. The next CO I didn't stick around long enough to get to know.

        So, as for being too young? Not buying it. There are many ranking officers that are much younger than their ranking CPOs (high ranking enlisted) on board. Subsequently, junior officers are much younger than the Chief's on-board.

      • by Neoprofin (871029) on Thursday October 16 2008, @11:02AM (#25401069)
        They gave Janeway a ship and she got lost on her first day. Clearly Starfleet aint what it used to be.
            • by name_already_taken (540581) on Thursday October 16 2008, @09:55AM (#25400069)

              You'd be suprised how little time it takes for the air to escape from a relatively small container such as the Enterprise into a practically infinite vacuum through a hole a few inch in diameter.

              What bothers me more is the smoke in the left side of the picture. Anyone here knows how smoke 'should' behave in space?

              Let's be generous and say a 10 cm hole - that's just under four inches.

              Well, I don't know the math, but I've worked around compressed air systems a little, and I found a little chart for gas flow through pipes of varying diameters and lengths. Air at atmospheric pressure is at 14.5 pounds per square inch - not very high pressure. This is not very high, so it's not like punching a hole in a compressed air tank.

              If we guess that the hull is 3 cm thick, and the hole is 10 cm in diameter (the hole is effectively a pipe), according to the ancient looking chart I found, the flow rate is 748 liters per second. (This is assuming I'm interpreting this correctly).

              I can't be bothered to do too much googling for this, but a Constitution class starship is 305 meters long. Let's just guess that it's 120 meters wide and an average of 20 meters thick. I know rabid trekkies will correct all this, but it's not important to be all that accurate. 305 x 120 x 20 = 732,000 cubic meters. That's 732 million liters, for those still reading. 732 million liters divided by 748 liters per second is 978,609 seconds to empty the ship to vacuum.

              That's 11.3 days to empty the ship through a 10 cm diameter hole. All based on guesses and an old chart from an engineering handbook, but it's better than just saying "little time".

              Of course, I could be wrong.

              It might take longer; especially when you consider that as the ship empties, the internal pressure drops - when half the air is gone, the atmospheric pressure inside is only 7.25 psi, so the flow rate is also reduced in half - so it might take a month or more to completely equalize the internal and external pressures (external being close to zero).

              • by TrekkieGod (627867) on Thursday October 16 2008, @10:41AM (#25400779) Homepage Journal

                I know rabid trekkies will correct all this

                I wasn't going to, but now I can't resist.

                a Constitution class starship is 305 meters long

                Well, after the refit, the Enterprise became 305 meters long. However, the refit happened after the 5-year mission, so this Enterprise is 289 meters long.

                Let's just guess that it's 120 meters wide

                That's probably overestimating quite a bit. Sounds about right for the saucer section, but the engineering section isn't anywhere near as wide.

                and an average of 20 meters thick

                Well, the ship has 24 decks, but it's not a cube. Actually, that's really the biggest problem with your estimate there. You'd arrive at a much closer volume if you divided the ship up between saucer, nacelles, and engineering hulls. Then sum them up.

                but it's not important to be all that accurate

                Blasphemy! I have to head to work right now, but I somebody else should take my recommendation and get on that.

                The rest of your calculations seem pretty good, though :)

                • by name_already_taken (540581) on Thursday October 16 2008, @10:49AM (#25400885)

                  At what point does the atmospheric pressure become dangerous to people inside the ship?

                  At 5.8 psi you become unconscious, but even at 90% of normal atmospheric pressure (13 psi) most people would be strongly affected by the reduced oxygen saturation.

                  You can imagine that the internal structure of the ship would slow the flow the further away from the breach you are, so pressure would be lowest in the breached compartment, and higher as you move away from it. Seems like automatic airtight doors are a staple of Star Trek, so chances are only that one compartment or an area of the ship would be affected anyway.

                  Plenty of time to get to an escape pod, transport out, or put on a space suit, anyway.

                  Unless you're standing next to the hole and get stuck to it. In which case you'd seal it nicely, saving the air and getting a nasty bruise.

                • by name_already_taken (540581) on Thursday October 16 2008, @11:30AM (#25401517)

                  A constitution class ship has neither an infinitely thin skin, nor is it 100% hollow, nor is it a perfect box. Your air volume calculation needs work.

                  More or less what I said in my post. So what's your estimate, captain pedant?

                  I guessed that the skin was 3 cm thick at the hull breach, but on TV it looks like several separate layers. I also remember what one of the "experts" said about the aircraft that hit the World Trade Center; that the aircraft had similar density to an empty soda can. Since aircraft and TV spacecraft seem to be somewhat similar in construction, I made an engineering decision to throw out the volume occupied by the material the ship itself is constructed from and it's contents.

                  Heck, I made the ship a rectangular box. It doesn't look like one, but I remember from a course I took on designing gating systems for metal castings (fluid systems to feed odd-shaped empty cavities) that simplifying the shape you're trying to feed (to or from, it doesn't matter) makes the calculations a lot simpler. A more accurate volume guess would be a set of cylindrical sections (the saucer is a very short, wide cylinder for example).

                  But, who has the time.

                  Even if I did that, people like you'd probably want me to factor in the effect of bedsheets and seat cushions, and liquid water that would flash to steam from the sinks and toilets.

                  In short, you can't ever make a rabid fan happy, so why even try?

                  That was a rhetorical question, by the way.

        • Re:no comment (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Neoprofin (871029) on Thursday October 16 2008, @11:06AM (#25401131)
          So if we made the next James Bond movie and had him played by Dakota Fanning it'd be ok as long as she put in a good performance?

          It's just a movie after all. I hear 50 Cent is still into acting, maybe we can remake Schindler's List since Indian Jones already got the new Speilburg treatment.
          • Re:no comment (Score:4, Informative)

            by Stargoat (658863) <stargoat@gmail.com> on Thursday October 16 2008, @03:06PM (#25404535) Journal
            Nelson was a post captain at 23.
            John Paul Jones commanded his first fighting ship at 29.
            Cochrane took a 32 gun frigate with a 16 gun sloop at the age of 26.
            Steven Decatur fought the Barbary Pirates in a sloop at 24.
            Edward Pellew was made post at 23. His brother Israel was made a commander at 32.
            I could go through most of the list of captains at Trafalgar and do the same thing.