Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Movies Media

Star Trek Nemesis Preview Online 288

Posted by michael
from the to-boldly-view-what-no-man-has-viewed-before dept.
T-Kir writes "Originally from a news link at Trekweb, iFilm has a preview of Star Trek Nemesis in WMP, Real and Quicktime formats, it is also recommended you view with a broadband connection. [ed. snip] All in all a nice piece of eye candy until the films release on December 13th." This is a long trailer with lots of spoilers - you've been warned.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Trek Nemesis Preview Online

Comments Filter:
  • by masonbrown (208074) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:29AM (#4722935) Homepage
    How cool is that - the anti Picard. Wonder if that can be used to power some kind of warp drive....
  • by gregor_b_dramkin (137110) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:32AM (#4722963) Homepage
    "A long trailer with lots of spoilers"

    Sounds like a NASCARedneck fixed hisself a mobile home that's ultra-stable on the freeway.

  • by boy_afraid (234774) <Antebios1@gmail.com> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:32AM (#4722964) Journal
    Dammit, dammit, dammit. I have no control. Must - watch - trailer - or - brain - will - collapse.

    Did it. Are you happy now? No use to go see it.
  • blah (Score:2, Funny)

    by grub (11606)

    scotty: Cap'n! The slashdot effect is hammerin' the servers!

    kirk: Scotty.. if.. you.. can't.. get.. more horsepowertotheserverswe'llcrashandburnandI'llneve rgettobanganymoregreenchicks!

  • Advertising (Score:5, Interesting)

    by EyesWideOpen (198253) <curtis@cusmit h . c om> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:33AM (#4722974) Homepage Journal
    I'm surprised that I haven't seen more (any really) previews on television for Nemesis. Maybe I just haven't caught them but I usually catch at least one television preview for any given big-budget movie during it's marketing time. The only advertisements for Nemesis that I've seen have been posters in theaters when I'm out seeing some other movie. Am I the only one who thinks that this film may suffer from a poor marketing campaign? Heck, I didn't even know when this film was slated to come out until this ./ story!
    • Re:Advertising (Score:3, Interesting)

      by TeeWee (98278)
      The lack of PR is strange, even more when you consider it's stuck between a couple of heavy hitters like James Bond, LotR and Harry Potter.

      Sure, ST will get its traditional crowd to the theaters, but to get the mainstream to watch, it needs to contend with the aforementioned which are well hyped up. If people decide to go to one movie this Christmas period, it would probably be a toss up between LotR (great movie last time round) and Harry Potter (for both kids and adults). It looks like ST will lose out big time...
      • From my point of view, no Next Gen movie has ever received the PR hype that used to occur with the Original series movies... Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock in particular garnered a whole bunch of media attention... all the next gen movies seem to receive is "Oh, its a star trek movie, how nice"

        Like everyone else, I blame Berman and Braga, who have single handedly destroyed one of the best franchises in Scifi history. - And I'm not even a rabid star-Trek fan, I just like good TV and Good movies, and since B&B took over, its all been lacking.....

    • Maybe it's a turkey (Score:5, Informative)

      by GuyMannDude (574364) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @12:55PM (#4723725) Journal

      I'm surprised that I haven't seen more (any really) previews on television for Nemesis.

      I've been thinking the same thing but I'm starting to worry if the studio thinks the movie is going to be a bomb. As others have mentioned, there is stiff competition in the action/adventure genre from Bond and LotR. Perhaps they are worried that it just won't be able to keep pace and they are cutting their losses by not spending much on advertisting. The die-hard Trek fans will go to see it anyhow. A lot of people will go see any film just because they are tired of holiday shopping. The number-crunchers at Paramount may have calculated that negative word-of-mouth will override any benefit obtained by an aggressive marketing campaign.

      Just my thoughts. But I have already read one review for the movie that suggests that this film will not even come close to fulfilling expectations for a film billed as the "final TNG adventure".

      GMD

      • Not Informative Yet (Score:3, Informative)

        by GuyMannDude (574364)

        Gees, I'm not sure how my original post got a "+5 Informative" because I didn't even include the link to the review I read! I mean, "+3 Insightful" or "+4 Interesting" I can understand...

        Anyhow, here's the review [rottentomatoes.com] I mentioned. Needless to say, plot spoilers are featured. Like I said, the review makes Nemesis sound like an okay, but not great, Trek flick.

        GMD

  • I saw this trailer in the cinema last night, as it happens, and boy, do the effects look good on a big screen...

    But isn't it about time the Next Gen crew went off into quiet retirement and someone else got a shot at a Trek movie? At least this one looks darker and more interesting than some of the recent output...
    • by Accipiter (8228) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:48AM (#4723115)
      This may very well be the last TNG movie, as the trailers say "A Generation's Final Journey". Seems to hint that this is the cap.

      I always believed that after DS9, Trek as a whole should have taken a long hiatus. The gap between TOS and TNG was huge, and TNG turned out to be a fantastic series. But since TNG ended, it's been nothing but rapid-fire Star Trek, most of which can't hold a candle to TNG.

      Now they're milking the franchise, and we get crap like Voyager and Enterprise. Insurrection wasn't that great either. I'm hoping Nemesis does something to redeem the TNG movies, as Insurrection kinda put it on a low note. Generations is the best TNG movie so far.

      I'd like to see them put the entire franchise to a rest after Nemesis (and kill off Enterprise before the 7 season mark), and let it lie in wait until a team with a GOOD idea a few years down the line can put a fresh and interesting spin on it.
      • by jeblucas (560748) <jeblucas&gmail,com> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @12:25PM (#4723438) Homepage Journal
        I'm hoping Nemesis does something to redeem the TNG movies, as Insurrection kinda put it on a low note. Generations is the best TNG movie so far.
        Apparently, you are not familiar with the "Even-Odd" rule of Star Trek [ezboard.com] movies. This is an even-numbered movie, and thus, will rock. Think about it:
        1. The V-ger debacle.
        2. KHAAAAAAAN!
        3. The Spock debacle.
        4. The whale one--rocked.
        5. Worst...Debacle...Ever--search for Jebus.
        6. Klingons, in-jokes, etc.
        7. Cross-generation debacle.*
        8. BORG QUEEN.
        9. Zzz..debzzzaczz..zle.zzz...
        Obviously, this movie will kick some ass. Go out on a high note!

        *I find it odd that you thought -Generations- better than First Contact. Really, that struck me. I know plenty of folks that like Generations, but those folks LOVE First Contact. Borg Queen man! Time travel! Wow. Did you like Search for Spock more than Wrath of Khan (shudder)?

        • I thought 1 was good, it just didn't really fit in with the rest of the series. It had a much more sterile feeling to it, but it and 3 were MUCH better than 5, which reminded me of sucking shit through a straw. And then dying.

          In my opinion, 3 was actually a little better than 4. It was a little anti-climatic, though.

          PS, did anyone notice how busy Kirk and co are starting at Khan? Immediately after Khan dies, they go to the starbase (Trek 3), they bring Spock to Vulcan, and on their way home (Trek 4) they have to take out that probe.

          Busy couple of days!
      • "TNG turned out to be a fantastic series"

        "Generations is the best TNG movie so far."

        Someone has been drinking way too much Jonestown Kool-aid.

        First Contact was the best TNG movie. Insurrection was also pretty good. Generations was by far the worst.

        Still none of them compares to Star Trek 2, 4 or 6. Even Star Trek 3 was better than any TNG movie.

      • This may very well be the last TNG movie, as the trailers say "A Generation's Final Journey". Seems to hint that this is the cap.

        First Contact was supposed to be the final TNG movie, but Berman had dollar bills in his eyes and sold the rest of the Paramount crew on it as they were still trying to hang on to the good old TNG days.

        In my opinion, that was a good move. First Contact was shitty and predictable from beginning to end.

        I always believed that after DS9, Trek as a whole should have taken a long hiatus.

        Agreed. I don't even think of some DS9 seasons as being part of the Star Trek franchise, since towards the end of the TNG all of the Paramount Trek-Heads were of course working on TNG which let some of the younger but more creative people have a crack at DS9. And the result was surprisingly good! I only wish more stations ran reruns of DS9 so I could see it more often.

        But since TNG ended, it's been nothing but rapid-fire Star Trek, most of which can't hold a candle to TNG. Now they're milking the franchise, and we get crap like Voyager and Enterprise.

        I agree once more. When DS9 premiered, I thought it was going to be a sucky spinoff, but it held it's own as an interesting television show during the time that I watched it. Voyager I knew was going to suck. TOS, TNG, and DS9 all had a cool story that shadowed the plots of the day-to-day episodes, but Voyager brought it right out in front in almost every single episode and it got boring quickly. I didn't look forward to the final Voyager episode at all because I knew EXACTLY what was going to happen EVER SINCE THE PILOT AIRED. Another strike was when midway through the series, they starting writing episodes with more action, flimsy effects, and fist fights because they were trying to sell the series to the Joe Sixpack viewers who could give a crap about plot development and actual character depth.

        Enterprise is nothing more than a soap opera in space. And no, I won't forgive them for introducing "legacy" technology (transporters, phasers) and species (Ferengi) centuries before they're supposed to be around. Guess they pay their writers by the hour with no overtime.

        Insurrection wasn't that great either. I'm hoping Nemesis does something to redeem the TNG movies, as Insurrection kinda put it on a low note. Generations is the best TNG movie so far.

        This I don't agree with. I actually liked Insurrection a great deal because it felt much more like the TNG episodes I remember with the added benefit of a movie-sized budget. I liked the fact that it wasn't an epic tale of the Humans vs. the Borg (for the nth time) and it wasn't a lousy excuse to get ancient TOS characters back onscreen again (as well as crash a starship or two). The story wasn't entirely original I'll grant you, but the acting was superb and the characters that we're familiar with remained interesting and fun.

        I'd like to see them put the entire franchise to a rest after Nemesis (and kill off Enterprise before the 7 season mark), and let it lie in wait until a team with a GOOD idea a few years down the line can put a fresh and interesting spin on it.

        That would definitely be nice. I really do love Star Trek, but IMHO, the Star Trek series' should have ended in dignity with DS9. I can't blame them for wanting to do movies, but hopefully Paramount will realize that it's time to give someone else's TV-show idea a chance. Gene was a brilliant man, but this milking of his creation has already taken its toll on his name.
    • by Pii (1955)
      You don't need to see the trailer to determine whether or not it will be a good Star Trek movie. You need only count it's place in the series.
      • Odd numbered Star Trek movies suck.
      • Even numbered Star Trek movies are good/great.

      This edition is 10 in the series, and is therefore, a must see.

      Behold:

      1. ST: The Motion Picture - Practically unwatchable.
      2. ST: The Wrath of Kahn - Kick Ass!
      3. ST: The Search for Spock - Zzzzzzzz...
      4. ST: The Voyage Home - Pretty Good.
      5. ST: The Final Frontier - Yuck.
      6. ST: The Undiscovered Country - Loved it.
      7. ST: Generations - Ok, but not good.
      8. ST: First Contact - Rocked! (My favorite so far)
      9. ST: Insurrection - Tolerable
      10. ST: Nemesis - Care to take a guess?
      • The numbering system doesn't work for the movies if you're interested in space babes, though:

        1: Sexy bald chick
        2: Space skanks
        3: Were there any chicks in this one besides Savvak and Uhura?
        4: Kinda sexy whale-lovin' mama
        5: Muscle-bound klingon
        6: Iman. 'Nuff said.
        7: Whoopi Goldberg? Gees...
        8: When chicks do that abdomen wrigging thing, it's sexier if they're actually connected to their hips at the time...
        9: Sexy mature quail who's read one to many "live life to the fullest" self-help books
        10: Who knows? But originally 7 of 9 was going to cameo [imdb.com] and they decided to go with Janeway. Doesn't look good...

        GMD

        • Your point is well taken, and duly noted.

          7 of 9 allowed that show to stay on the air much longer than it had any right to. Jerri Ryan was Voyager's salvation.

    • by Bonker (243350) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @01:58PM (#4724308)
      1. The Holodeck is strictly off limits. It may not be metioned, alluded to, or featured as a plot element.

      2. Only the badguys quote Shakespear.

      3. NOBODY quotes or signs songs from musicals. Not Rogers and Hammerstein. Not Andrew Lloyd Webber. ESPECIALLY not Gilbert and Sullivan!

      4. Everybody who dies stays dead.

      5. Time-travel is permitted, but must be used as a humourous plot element, and not as part of the denoument.

      6. Villans must be sane, intelligent, calculating and preferrably vengeful. Regardless, all villans must have beleivable motivation. Insane, god-like beings need not appear.

      7. Little or no new technology should be introduced in the course of the movie, epecially technology relating to time-travel or the holodeck. If technology is introduced it should be treated with care-- do not show a knife on screen unless it's going to end up in someone's back!

      8. Redshirts must die by the score.

      9. There must be at least 25 minutes of space battle footage in which at least one ship is violently and graphically ripped apart.

      and

      10. The Enterprise must suffer heavy, even crippling damage in the course of the fight. It may even be destroyed.
  • Worried!?! (Score:3, Funny)

    by jaredcoleman (616268) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:37AM (#4723002)
    Oh no... I hope they don't really make it to earth and kill everything!

    Wait, Enterprise could just sling-shot around the sun for a do-over... never mind.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:38AM (#4723007)
    You know what that means, get your questions ready! Slashdot interview with Patrick Stewart in 7 years!!
  • Direct Link... (Score:3, Informative)

    by justdisguyyaknow (568860) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:39AM (#4723011)
    mms://wm.ifilm.na-central.speedera.net/wm.ifilm.na -central/portal/2446661_200.asf

    Enjoy.....

    • Oh, joy, ifilm.com is one of our customers. The horror, the horror....


      Anyway, careful with the direct links, please. Speedera is probably okay, being a Content Delivery Network; but last 11 Sept. a bunch of people gave out deep links to a site [politicsandprotest.org] we were trying to put onto a CDN, [globix.com] and so the deep links didn't help anyone. (Yeah, we should have put it up on the CDN earlier... but some people had bookmarked it the year before. Duh.)


      Give the webmaster a chance to give you a redirect, please. They probably want you to have the content as much as you want to see it.

    • http://anon.ifilm.speedera.net/anon.ifilm/qt/porta l/2446661_200.mov
      http://mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/tech/q t-libwine-howto.txt

      watch for speed bumps : "...qt/porta l/22..." (remove space)
  • I didn't notice you in the trailer ... did they edit you out of the movie or something ;-p

    Seriously - what was your characters role in the plot, since they decided they cut remove him?
    • Re:Yo Wheaton ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by GoofyBoy (44399) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:57AM (#4723207) Journal
      He was in the script and shot scenes but he got cut on the editing floor.

      Its here in his web site [wilwheaton.net]

      • I know there are plenty of Wesley Crusher haters out there, but Wil Wheaton is a class act, and if people bother to read the link you posted, they'll be forced to come to the same conclusion.

        Sorry they cut you Wil. I'm glad you got to have a good time during shooting. Best of luck.

      • The link is an interesting read. However I was struck by two things. First he claims he is turning 30. Second he says his child is 13. 30 - 13 = 17. IMHO thats a wee bit young to be a dad. Then again him and his kid could sit around playing PS2 games and snarfing cheetos.
  • The minute I saw the unknown man at the console (helm?), I knew he was dead. Welshy!!!!
  • by dpilot (134227) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:45AM (#4723076) Homepage Journal
    so it should be a good one. Maybe they should make the odd-numbered Trek movies direct-to-video.
  • by pldms (136522) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:46AM (#4723082)
    http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/star_trek_ nemesis/ [apple.com] for those of you:
    1. Using Quicktime (on Debian in my case) and who
    2. found the iFilm interface baffling and 'auto-detecting' useless.

    (could be just me, of course)

    HTH

    • The 'auto-detecting' is useless. They told me that the video wasn't available at my prefered format and bandwidth, but they didn't tell me which ones they do support. Could they be any less helpful?
  • by Undaar (210056) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:47AM (#4723092) Homepage
    Is anyone else sick of trailers giving away key plot developments. To me a perfect trailer is more of a teaser. It should entice you. It should make you want to see the movie. But it shouldn't tell the whole story.

    Just my 2 cents (or non-cents *groan*)
    • Better yet, how about when the home video package [amazon.com] gives it all away?
    • by Longinus (601448) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @12:37PM (#4723547) Homepage
      I think the real problem is that most movies are so rehashed, uninspired, and predictable these days that we can easily tell what the entire thing will be like regardless of the trailer.
      • I think the real problem is that most movies are so rehashed, uninspired, and predictable these days that we can easily tell what the entire thing will be like regardless of the trailer.


        Agreed. When I came back to the US, after living in South Korea with no American radio or television, I went with my friends to a movie they wanted to see. The only thing I knew was it was called "Ghost and the Darkness [imdb.com]". I bought my ticket and watched the flick with the rest of them. When the realization of what was happening and why was revealed, I was just engrossed. 'Wow!' 'How wild is that?' 'Imagine!'
        My friends were very ho hum, and when we walked out at the end, said they didn't care for the movie, and that was it. To me, walking in totally blind to everything but the movie name, it was a great flick. They already knew what was going to happen because of the previews.

        Even better was when I happened upon "Horror Planet [imdb.com]" one day while surfing the UHF. I watched it from beginning to end, and when it did end (no spoilers here) I just sat there in my chair totally dumbfounded. 'That's not how movies end' 'WTF?' Then about an hour later, it hit me. How incredibly cool was that? Not only was it not predictable, but it completely threw cinematic convention out the window. Terrible movie, but hey, you should watch it just to see it all the way through. Don't read any spoilers though, it'll take away from the experience.

  • by vjmurphy (190266) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:49AM (#4723127) Homepage
    Let's see: a big bad something threatens the Earth/Galaxy and Picard and Data and some other guys have to beat up the big bad guy and save the day.

    Along the way, various minor cast members will have short/throwaway scenes, but most of the real meat of the plot will involve Picard and Data.

    There will be a Worf joke.

    Not like we haven't seen 3 of these already, you know.
  • by LWolenczak (10527) <julia@evilcow.org> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:57AM (#4723206) Homepage Journal
    As of right NOW... its not working... i get a page not found error when trying to load the trailor or the preview...... So... did slashdot /. ifilm? will this mean the mpaa going after the evil slashdot hackers for DoS'ing ifilm's website?
  • by ProtonMotiveForce (267027) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @11:58AM (#4723214)
    Criticizing the plot of a Star Trek movie is like going out and buying a "Fat Chicks with Huge Jugs" magazine and complaining about the lack of literary value.

    It's a Star Trek movie. Of course it's going to be mindless action and sci-fi. Duh. Doesn't mean it's not worth seeing (though it may well not be :).
  • *Spoilers* (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OneFix (18661) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @12:10PM (#4723308)
    For those that don't already know... this movie is rumored to be the starting point for a new series ("Fall of the Federation") to star Riker, Troi, etc (no Picard or Data)... Read about it here [thmedia.net]...which would explain the comment Picard makes in one of trailers...
    • Re:*Spoilers* (Score:2, Interesting)

      by vaguelyamused (535377)
      A "Fall of the Federation" series could be interesting if done correctly. Maybe have the Federation imploding into civil war with all the other factions (Romulans, klingons,etc) taking and changing sides. It helps that FX technology has improved dramatically. I like TNG but a lot of the lame episodes (holodeck episodes for example) seemed to come at the end of a season when the FX budget was running dry. I also liked the idea of Enterprise but detest Bakula as the captain.
      • Ok, anyone who quotes Ramanujan in his sig deserves to be modded up.
        But this rumor is as likely as the claim that series 5 was going to be "Starfleet Academy."

      • A "Fall of the Federation" series could be interesting if done correctly.

        I said the EXACT SAME THING when I first heard about Enterprise. I wish I could dig up the slashdot comment link, but it said basically that Enterprise stood a decent chance at revitalizing the Star Trek franchise if they could do two things:
        • Stay away from anything added to the show simply in an effort to get higher ratings from Joe Sixpack viewers (such as phaser fire, fist fights, space battles, soap-opera scenes, and soft-core porn).
        • Not introduce technology and species that are known to have been introduced much later in the Star Trek timeline. (Such as phasers, ferengi, etc.)

        And we see just how well they did on both counts... OTOH, I think I would trust Jonathan Frakes a lot more with a new Star Trek series than I would Rick Berman and Brannon Braga.

        I like TNG but a lot of the lame episodes (holodeck episodes for example) seemed to come at the end of a season when the FX budget was running dry.

        I never understood this line of reasoning. Some of the "holodeck episodes" were my favorites and might I remind the general public that while conjuring up a holodeck scene is trivial in the 25th century, it costs actual money, time, and effort here in the 21st to design and erect elaborate sets that are supposed simulate a simulation. Therefore, I don't think lack of money had anything to do with the placement of a "holodeck episode."
    • Yeah they tried the pilot series on fox a while back.... wasnt it called firefly?

      Ow....ow OW OW! stop it with the rock throwing!
    • by CaseyB (1105)
      to star Riker, Troi, etc (no Picard or Data).

      So, they took the inverse of the set of good TNG actors. Wonderful.

      • So, they took the inverse of the set of good TNG actors. Wonderful.

        Well...kinda, I won't tell you why Data isn't gonna be in it...because that would give away a whole sub-plot of the film...

        BTW, I'm sure that everyone knows that Spiner is really getting too old to play Data (we're talking like 15 years or so (1987) since the first episode of TNG)...and for those that follow even closer, they will know what Spiner's contract for Nemesis said...
  • by XaXXon (202882) <xaxxon@gmail . c om> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @12:16PM (#4723348) Homepage
    Cuz even in the 24th century, they still can't handle a good, old-fashioned slashdotting...
  • The last Star Trek movie, Resurrection, was released in 1998! That's a 4-years gap! All the previous movies were released every 1 or 2 years.
    Why the huge time gap?
    • They wanted everyone to forget Star Trek: INSURRECTION, which was so amazingly bad next to First Contact that I've been trying to block it from memory for the entire interval. Fortunately, I think I'll be clear by the time Nemesis is released.
    • They were actually going on a real life mission...(like in Galaxy Quest)

      They had to go fight klingons on uranus. :)

      (I'm sorry...I've been up for 36 hours working on this asm program, and I think I broke something in my brain.)
      nbfn
    • by omnipotus (214689) <jason.lunn@gmail.com> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @02:51PM (#4724816)

      One reason might be that Patrick Stewart [imdb.com] has been a litle busy, what with Prince of Egypt, X-Men 1 & 2, Jimmy Neutron, and a bunch of TV and video game appearances, not to mention stage performances on and off of broadway.

      Stewart, unlike Shatner, can deliver real dramatic performances, and is not type cast to even a fraction of the degree that any of the original crew was. It is not surprising that he has had other gigs, nor that he may not want to do so many Star Trek films when he doesn't need to.

  • A warp drive that goes to 11.
    • <geek domain="Star Trek">Between TOS and TNG, the warp scale was changed to an exponential one. Warp factor 1 - speed of light - is consistent between serieses, but as warp factor approaches 10, effective speed approaches infinity. TNG ships regularly move at or beyond what, in TOS, could have been called warp factor 11.<geek>

      • The warp scale must have changed again in the future (in the last episode of TNG) when Dr. Crusher ordered her helm officer to take the ship to Warp 13.

        In the Star Trek Technical Manual (an actual book... that I own), it is stated that if anything ever travels at Warp 10, it will occupy all points in the universe at once. That's the "official" reason that no ship can travel at Warp 10, but I think it's a little flimsy. I personally like yours better... Warp 10 would be infinite speed, but which would be impossible to achieve because it would take an infinite amount of energy. Sounds good enough to me...
        • The episode you refer to ("All Good Things ...") took place in a fantasy universe created by Q, and he's just the sort of jerk that would abuse the canon like that.

          I think tSTTM was trying to demonstrate the paradoxical nature of the idea of moving at warp factor 10 with the "all points in the universe" thing.
    • With the trans-warp barrier broken in an episode of Voyager, its a definite possibility. They only have to deal with that messy de-evolution thing.
  • have you watched any of the Star Wreck Episodes... they are rather funny.

    They evolved over time - so the newest ones are the best. Another thing by some crazy Fin.

    Star Wreck! [peliportti.net]
  • We'll be able to see the Weaton's part that got cut out on the DVD.
  • Go to Apple's site to get a better viewing of the Trailer. http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/star_trek_ nemesis/
  • I've long thought that Star Trek has been well used much of the time as a conduit for the Light Side to send its values, messages and warnings.


    -Fantastic Lad

  • by nexusone (470558) <nexusone@bellsouth.net> on Thursday November 21, 2002 @03:17PM (#4725047) Homepage
    I am a long time sci-fi fan.
    I seen almost all of the Star Trek movies in the Theater, except the last few of old ST movies. The movies got so badly written, I could not bare to watch, even on video.

    Even with the TNG movies, Generations was maybe the best. I think from the trailer, that I watched before Harry Potter 2. I need not watch the movie, since the plot and everything we given it.

    The only really cool space shows of late have been Babylon 5, Farscape, first season the Andromeda, Lex (though it is just a bit weird) reminds me of some of the old British sci-fi shows.

    I do not know why TV executives think shows need to be dumb down, but to me it is killing sci-fi not helping it and nether does being over PC help.....
  • http://anon.ifilm.speedera.net/anon.ifilm/qt/porta l/2457975_200.mov [speedera.net]

    they might change it but it's working now
  • Again? (Score:4, Funny)

    by TekPolitik (147802) on Thursday November 21, 2002 @05:39PM (#4726417) Journal
    They crash and destroy the ship again? These guys are never going to be able to get insurance now.

"The value of marriage is not that adults produce children, but that children produce adults." -- Peter De Vries

Working...