if he is romulan, they better have a good excuse for him not having pointy ears...

Quinto is PERFECT, he looks like a young Nemoy, and the young Kirk looks good as well.

Bana looks like Batista, a WWE wrestler mixed with a little Darth Maul

[quote=""BladeCollector""]if he is romulan, they better have a good excuse for him not having pointy ears... [/quote]

Maybe he had a run-in with Mike Tyson....

[quote=""BladeCollector""] Bana looks like Batista, a WWE wrestler mixed with a little Darth Maul[/quote]

You know, I'm a bit bothered by the tattoo thing. Sure, it looks interesting, but it just seems a little too 1990s/2000s Young America. I think it will date this movie (and not in a good way, like miniskirts dated TOS).

I like the photos, Spock looks dead-on. As for Nero's ears, they don't look pointy, you're right, but they also look somewhat deformed, like a chunk is missing, so I'm sure there is a story behind that which won't neccessarily negate the fact that he is Romulan.

The official site (http://www.startrekmovie.com/) has been updated (first time since it launched, I think) and has each of the four images as a downloadable wallpaper. Yes, the top of Nero's ear does look funky, like it was chewed or burned off. He also has a very upswept, Vulcan/Romulan eyebrow, so....

Jolene Blalock ("T'Pol") adds her two cents' worth of disappointment that Shatner won't be in the new movie. Also, I will state my disappointment that she has apparently been reduced to being in direct-to-DVD stuff like Starship Troopers 3. I thought she was a good actress and certainly was a hit in the eye candy department, so I'd have thought she could get better parts. Maybe she needs a better agent. Anyway,

http://trekmovie.com/2008/07/22/blalock ... #more-2194

From Trekmovie.com:

Kurtzman Answers The Question - What Is Up With Nero’s Ear? July 23, 2008

Last week in our first article about the new Star Trek posters which revealed characters for the first time, TrekMovie.com asked "what is up with Nero’s (Eric Bana’s) ears?" Today our friends at UGO point us to a new interview with Star Trek co-writer and exec producer Alex Kurtzman, where they ask him that question. [SPOILERS]

From the UGO article:We asked Alex Kurtzman what was up with Nero’s ears! If you’ve seen the recently released Star Trek poster, you’ve seen Eric Bana, who is allegedly playing a Romulan, with what looks like war paint or a tattoo on his face and NO POINTY EARS. What kind of a Romulan doesn’t have pointy ears? “Nero isn’t necessarily a Romulan,” Kurtzman said, but wouldn’t give anything further than that. He simply smiled and said, “It’s all part of the plot.”More from Kurtzman at UGO.

Not Romulan?
TrekMovie (and other sites) have reported that the film’s villains are Romulans. For our part, this has been confirmed by multiple sources who worked on the film, including some who played Romulans. It isn’t clear if this is a ‘non denial denial’ from Kurtzman, a head fake, or possibly revealing that maybe there is something different about Nero. I hate to bring it up as a precedent, but Shinzon (Tom Handy) was human (or a human clone) and leader of the Romulans and Remans in Star Trek Nemesis. It all goes into that big thing that is the mystery of this movie, which is exactly how Kurtzman, Abrams, Orci, Lindelof and Burk like it.

Eric Bana as Star Trek’s Nero…
still wondering what is up with that earhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0019M ... B0019MFY3Q

Here's something else from Trekmovie, Pt. 1 of an interview they've done with Leonard Nimoy. Enjoy:
Exclusive Interview: Leonard Nimoy - Excited To Be Spock Again July 23, 2008

Possibly more than anything else, the inclusion of Leonard Nimoy has given Trek fans a sense of security for this new Star Trek film from JJ Abrams. In his second interview with TrekMovie.com, the once and future Spock talked about what it was like to return to the role he made famous, and also provided his thoughts on the new film (including some interesting new tidbits).

TrekMovie July 2008 Interview with Leonard Nimoy Part 1 - The Return of Spock

TrekMovie.com: You have witnessed multiple declarations of death of the Star Trek franchise, yet it continues to defy the critics. Why do you think it remains relevant today.

Leonard Nimoy: We are going to find out how relevant it is aren’t we? [laughs] I have high hopes that this picture will inspire a whole new generation of viewers and reinvigorate the old fans. I think the relevance always has to do with interesting characters and good stories and a positive view of mankind and hope for the future. We just saw this movie Wall-E, which is a wonderful movie and deals with excessive consumerism and neglect of the planet leading to a pretty dreadful kind of result. But even in that movie there is this one ray of hope, there is this sprig of a plant is found which informs people something can be done. I think Star Trek has always had that message, that something can be done. It has always been a vehicle where we solve problems. I think the audiences enjoy that, I think that has always been relevant. The idea that a group of people, very dedicated, very professional, and a close-knit family, set out to solve problems. I think that will always be relevant.

TrekMovie.com: You mentioned Wall-E, which has a very overt environmentalist message. Last year your film Star Trek IV was put on a top environmental films list by an environmental group, because it has a very overt environmental message. Do you feel that this new Star Trek film has any specific overt message?

Leonard Nimoy: I think it is an entirely different movie. It is more of an adventure story than a social comment movie. I would say if there is one major driving emotional force to it, it has to do with the concept of revenge and the damage that the desire for revenge can cause. And I have always been interested in that as a concern. I think that we have seen in our time, various political factions, various political leaders, various political peoples want to get revenge for what they feel has been an unjust attack and the cycle goes around and around and it doesn’t stop. Somebody has to say "lets quit this, we are just destroying each other." So I think, if anything, I come way from this movie with that concept.

TrekMovie.com: At last years Creation Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas, you said to Bill [Shatner], and I will quote you "I have to examine where [Spock] is now, what are his thought processes? Is he more logical? Is he less logical? Is he more precise? Is he calm? Is he mellow? Has he got cranky?" So were you nervous, and was that justified? And did you answer those questions of where Spock is?

Leonard Nimoy: I was concerned stepping into a character that I have been out of for eighteen years. I was concerned as an e xp erience, what I might find as a handle. What I might find as an entry point into the character. I really believe those concerns went away when I got on the set and started working with JJ Abrams and my fellow actors. That has always been the touch point — how is it working with the director and my fellow actors, and the script of course. If we are given opportunities and set up in such a way — the set, the directors, the cameras and so forth — that the actors and establish and successfully their relationships with each other, find their dramatic and comic moments in the scene, then everything falls away and I think that was certainly the case with this movie. I had a wonderful time and I felt totally secure in the hands of the director and the script and I worked with some terrific actors. These are very very good people. I really came way extremely pleased. I think the audience is going to find these actors really quite wonderful and they are going to be extremely well liked. I think the audience is going to take them into their hearts.

TrekMovie.com: You have now worked with four directors, in addition to yourself, on Star Trek features — [Robert] Wise, [Nicholas] Meyer, [William] Shatner and JJ [Abrams]. How do you feel that JJ’s approach differs from the previous directors, and what way does that affect your performance as Spock?

Leonard Nimoy: I think the previous directors all brought something that was valuable to the project, but none of them had the size or the scope of production to deal with that this picture offered…

TrekMovie.com: …including Robert Wise? [Star Trek: The Motion Picture]

Leonard Nimoy: Yeah, even Robert Wise. That movie, by comparison, was a less complicated film to shoot. It was sizable, there were large images, but it was not as complex in its imagery and in its story, as this one is. And I think that is a major difference. By the way, that Robert Wise picture had very little opportunity for any kind of meaningful interaction between the characters. The script was designed in such a way that it wasn’t about the characters, but about the concept and the ship. That being the case, I don’t think we had much of an opportunity as actors to bring to the screen the characters the audience found so enjoyable in the TV series. In this movie it is quite the opposite. All the character relationships are in place. The humor, which was terribly lacking in that first movie, is constantly present — a sense of fun, of adventure. And the scope and level of the production values is gigantic by comparison. …You got to believe me that I have been involved in film and television for fifty-seven years, and I have never ever involved in a production of this scale and scope. I don’t know if Star Trek IV still holds the box office record for the largest box office of these movies, but this film is going to obviously run away with that record.

TrekMovie.com: In his book "Star Trek Movie Memories," Bill Shatner talked about going from Star Trek VI to Star Trek Generations.In Generations everyone was new and everything looked different, he felt like a guest star than in his own movie. In this new movie, things look different, everyone is new, did you have a similar feeling or did you feel at home?

Leonard Nimoy: No, because I felt very much at home. Bill was dealing a set of characters and actors that were totally foreign to him. I had a quite a different e xp erience in this movie. I was acting opposite characters, although they were being played by new actors, I was acting in scenes with characters that I recognized. I felt very much at home.

TrekMovie.com: You helped guide Kirstie Alley (Star Trek II) and Robin Curtis (Star Trek III) in their performances as Vulcans. How was it different mentoring Zachary [Quinto] when he was not just playing a Vulcan, but playing yourself, or your former and current character.

Leonard Nimoy: Well I did not direct Kirstie Alley, she was directed by Nicholas Meyer, but I did direct Robin Curtis, but the mold for that character was already set. We were breaking new ground with the pon farr scene and some other elements, but those were elements I was quite familiar with. All I can tell you is that Zachary Quinto watched enough of my work as Spock, and we spent enough time talking about the essential ingredients of the Spock character, that he was able to fly with it. I think he is going to come off wonderfully. He also happens to be an extremely intelligent and gifted actor and you can go a long way on those qualities.

TrekMovie.com: Some have noted, that with your report together, it seems as if you have adopted him as a son.

Leonard Nimoy: [laughs] That’s OK. I like that.


TrekMovie.com: You are headed to Vegas again. What are your thoughts about this year vs. last year and do fans have to look forward to

Leonard Nimoy: Last year was before we made the movie and this year is after we made the movie, so there is obviously we are in a different position. I am looking forward to meeting this audience and having an animated conversation about Star Trek and the new movie. I would certainly encourage everyone to come to this convention in Las Vegas. I think there are going to be some very interesting elements and audience pleasing.

See Leonard Live!
See Mr. Nimoy live at Creation’s upcoming Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas. The two Spocks, Nimoy and Quinto, will appear on Sunday August 10th. More info at Creationent.com.

[quote=""Olorin""]From Trekmovie.com:

Kurtzman Answers The Question - What Is Up With Nero’s Ear? July 23, 2008

Last week in our first article about the new Star Trek posters which revealed characters for the first time, TrekMovie.com asked "what is up with Nero’s (Eric Bana’s) ears?" Today our friends at UGO point us to a new interview with Star Trek co-writer and exec producer Alex Kurtzman, where they ask him that question. [SPOILERS]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0019M ... B0019MFY3Q[/quote]

I just assumed that he lost part of his ear, its clearly damaged... maybe he is rejected his Romulan heritage and cut his own ears off.. i cant tell, he could have a Romulan eyebrow ridge, but he could just be squinting.

Not too keen on the implications of all this regarding Nero, especially given Kurtzman's evasive answer, along with the dreadful parallel with Shinzon. This brings me back to a comment I made a few posts ago, in that (whatever Nero's racial origin is) I sincerely hope he is a renegade of some sort, and not a main power player in a high position of leadership in the Romulan Empire. I think the Romulans took enough of a beating after that sorry display in Nemesis.

One interesting possibility is that Nero may actually be a Vulcan, not a Romulan. Aside from his rumoured desire to kill Kirk, the possibility of Nero being Vulcan may account even more for the elder Spock's involvement in all this. Notice that in the interview with Nimoy he lets slip that there is a strong theme of revenge in this new movie, and I'm certain that comes from the Nero character, but is it revenge against Kirk, Spock, or even the entire Federation?

PS. Olorin already posted that it has been confirmed the Romulans will be TOS-era, and will not have those stupid Neanderthal bumpy foreheads and thus no eyebrow ridge, as you were thinking.

The make-up continuity issues drive me insane with Star Trek... the newer series of tv shows and movies have made canon the Romulans/Klingons ridge-ness, and as for the Klingons have been e xp lained. If time travel is involved and if Nero is from the "present" timeline of Trek and goes back, then that is going to rewrite the forehead ridge issua again, correct? I am not opposed to Romulans having forehead ridges. I am just concerned about continuity of the "present" trek timeline... are we going to see any Romulans from the "present" or is the only "present" timeline character appearing is Spock, or is Nero a present timeline character going back? If so, we are going to have a HUGE continuity flaw in the movie right off the bat.... and what about Enterprise, didnt they have ridged foreheads that series as well.

all I have to say is Abrams and co. has some 'splainin to do (as Ricky Ricardo would say).

on another board, someone is trying to propose that Nero is a Klingon, but I would doubt that.

The ridges should/could have never been a continuity issue, and never been brought up.... just a simple "we wanted Klingons and Romulans to have ridges in TOS, but budget wouldnt allow for it, so we added them into the latter series" done.

When was the last time you saw a bald-headed Romulan, apparently according to trekmovie.com... all Romulan main actors as well as background characters are bald... Romulans have never been bald.

I, for one, hate the TNG-era bumpy-forehead Romulans. I think it was a really stupid decision on someone's part, did nothing to enhance the Star Trek universe in any way, and it just created another continuity issue between TOS and TNG. Why was this done? No doubt some moron (like all those who think the viewers are simply too stupid to tell the difference,) figured people wouldn't be able to tell a Romulan from a Vulcan, and thus opted for the new look. People got the idea just fine in the old series, the TOS movies showed Romulans without bumpy heads, and never once did anyone complain. Two lines of e xp ositional dialogue in the first TNG episode that shows Romulans e xp laining their relation to Vulcans would have been more than sufficient to remind people and enlighten new fans alike why it is the two races look identical. No need for the cosmetic change, period. They opted to e xp lain the difference with the Klingons and that was tough enough, yet it boggles my mind that after having created such a discrepancy in the first place that bothered fans for years, that they would so thoughtlessly create a new one like this.

I agree that if the present timeline Romulans, of which Nero may or may not be a part of, are not shown with the bumps, it will cause a problem as you say, but it remains to be seen if this will be an issue or not before getting too worked up about it.

As for the baldness, I don't see this as being a concern at all. First of all, it could be that Nero's group, for whatever reason, has opted for a unique or non-conformist look. Let's admit it: that bowl-cut for Romulans and Vulcans is getting pretty old. Don't these races have any sense of style after all these centuries? Secondly, we have seen bald Vulcans before, so why not Romulans? There's no reason they can't shave their heads.

I seem to recall reading that Nero would not appear on-screen all that often, so I'm guessing he does not travel back into the past. It's somewhat analogous to Khan. When they did TWOK, they were worried that Ricardo Montalban wouldn't want to reprise his role because of lack of screen time. However, Montalban wisely noted that even when he wasn't on-screen, everyone was talking about him, and therefore he accepted the part on that basis.

I also never cared for the TNG-era Romulan foreheads. I think they did it just because they had the budget to do it. Someone once asked Majel Barrett why it was done, and she said it was to better differentiate the alien races from each other. I don't know how close to the decision making process she was, so I don't know if that's really accurate, but it was a bad decision in any case. If Romulans are essentially supposed to be cranky Vulcans, they should look just like Vulcans. For Romulans to have gone from a smooth-headed look in TOS-movie era to big-foreheadedness in the TNG era, some sort of event such as the Klingon augment virus would have had to have happened. Evolution does not remake a whole race in less than a hundred years. So some 'splainin' was definitely in order. Unfortunately, we never got any.

For that matter, it has never been established canonically (in an episode or movie) just exactly how Romulans and Vulcans are related. In the TOS ep "Balance of Terror," Spock referred to a theory, which he believed, that Romulans were "an offshoot of [his] own Vulcan blood." That's pretty vague when you get right down to it. One of the TOS novels, probably "The Romulan Way," a great read, posited that the Romulans were Vulcans that left Vulcan after the civil war/reformation. They were the ones who refused to embrace Surak's philosophy of non-violence and non-emotion. But as we know, the novels are not canon. TNG's "Unification" and Enterprise's fourth season Vulcan/Romulan plotline lends credence to the novel's theory, but stop short of really e xp licitly revealing the origin of the Romulans.

Supposedly the movie-and-later Klingon look (bumpy foreheads) was how they actually wanted them to look in TOS, but they never had the budget for it. Once they had the first movie's budget, they made the change—and we had a continuity issue to live with for over 20 years.

I'm also bothered by the "revenge" hint. Haven't we seen enough revenge? TWOK was enough, but they couldn't leave well enough alone and gave Nemesis a sort of revenge plot. I really hope the new movie isn't some sort of re-do on Nemesis. If Abrams is half as savvy as everyone thinks he is, hopefully he didn't approach the movie as a "let's do Nemesis right this time" opportunity.

I also agree with Valkrist that it's time the Vulcans and Romulans got a new hairdresser. That bowl cut looked pretty silly even in TOS, and for everyone to still be wearing it in TNG era was dumb. For that matter, how realistic was it for an entire race to have the same haircut? Do we humans all have the same hair style?

While we're on hair, how about the Star Fleet sideburns? They were invented in TOS as a way to imply that hair styles would be different in the future, yet not require e xp ensive wigs or inflict something so weird on the actors that they'd be uncomfortable off-set in public. But once again, they still had pointy sideburns a hundred years later. In my life, we went from long sideburns in the 70s to no sideburns in the 80s back to sideburns in the 90s. So, do the producers of Star Trek think the audience is so stupid they won't understand who these people are if they don't always have the same hair styles, or is it just that they think people are e xp ecting a certain look so they give it to them?

If you think about it, Star Trek almost undermines its whole entire philosophy. Star Trek was developed with the underlying themes of acceptance and individuality and non-stereotypical ideas. But when you think about it, thats exactly the opposite that is shown, with regards to other non-human races. Think about it, 99.9% of all on screen characters fit into stereotypical behavior for that said race... all klingons are savage, war-like, foul (I always pictured the Klingons to be using some foul language and would be the dirty joke tellers if Star Trek was rated R) uncivilized beasts... all Vulcans are purely logical with the personality of a brick wall... Romulans are conniving, opportunistic backstabbers that, like the Klingons, hunger for domination (and have had the same exact haircut for all eternity (men and women alike). And each race had the exact same haircut, same goes for Ferengi, Cardassians. The only race that was given some sort of individuality were the Bajorans. I am assuming, these non-human races were written like this to show the effects stereotypical thinking, but in actuality, they did on the show, the exact same thing we do in real life. And anyone that goes against the "norm" in Star Trek is struken down, just like in the real world.

It would be nice to get a definitive answer on the Romulan/Vulcan split. In order to develop that distinctive of a physical difference would take thousands of years, and would have to serve some sort of purpose... why would they have developed this ridges, is the sun on their planet harsher than on Vulcan, and the ridges over the eyes are like some sort of visor??? (yea, not likely, more or less trying to be serious/sarcastic at the same time). One interesting question, if the Romulans are direct descendants from Vulcans (i.e. the Surak story, that some left Vulcan in protest), how many left Vulcan for Romulus, a small party of people.... half the Vulcan population? Enough to sustain a, for lack of a better term, breeding population? If you dont have enough people, then after a few generations, some people's children will start marrying their own cousins, and after a while, you may get some ridge-headed imbred offspring. I know humanoids are vastly more complicated than other animals, but they do that on purpose to get a "desirable" trait in animals.

If the Vulcans and Romulans just share a millenia old common ancester, lets say Vulculans, then there may have been time to get a trait like the ridge-heads... but it would have to have served some bioligical function or would have to have been environmental, but it dang sure wouldnt have happened between TOS and TNG.. unless the Romulans got ahold of the Augment gene as well (stupid, yet convenient plothole fix)

OOOORRRR, someone in the makeup department goofed up and saw the makeup list for a Romulan on TNG and didnt know what the heck it was and put some ridges on an actor and the poo hit the fan, haha.

Or it could have been simply budgetary reasons, like the Klingons were... BUT you cant go and re-rewrite the Romulan ridge head canon for the sake of this movie, just to match the TOS Romulan.

10 months to go, and then we'll know!

You're definitely right in that alien races in Star Trek tend to be stereotypes. I think it's intentional in that the show uses the alien race as a mirror to show us the worst things about ourselves. The best/worst example of this is the Ferengi. Capitalists run amok! All's fair in the name of profit! Definitely descriptive of the corporate sector in America.

I'm very much married to the theory that Olorin outlined, that the Romulans split from the Vulcans after refusing to accept Surak's teachings and the major cultural and philosophical shift occurring on Vulcan at the time. On the question of population, I see it as likely being up to maybe a third of Vulcan, or perhaps just a quarter. When you consider Earth at it's present time for a model, we could stand an exodus of 1-2 billion people and it would not affect our ability to go on, nor would the departing people be doomed to not being able to start a civilization with those kinds of numbers. That is of course assuming that Surak's teachings were that widely unpopular. It could also be that there were already many pre-Surak Vulcans out in space or on other worlds that, not being close to what was going on back home, also refused the change and were absorbed by the emerging Romulan faction, thus bolstering their numbers. Anyhow, just theories, but fascinating ones, as Spock would say. Whatever the case, the emergence of the bumpy forehead makes no internally consistent sense, and I don't see why a species' cranium would develop that. Perhaps it is the reverse and Romulans are the original look, and Vulcans are what came after? Like Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon?

Lastly, if the change was made for increased budget reasons, like the Klingons in TMP, why then did we have TOS normal-looking Romulans in Final Frontier and Undiscovered Country?!? Surely they had money in those movies, no? This is made even more baffling by the fact that when ST VI came out and we saw a TOS Romulan in it, TNG was already on the air with those bumpy foreheaded travesties. It really shows that somewhere at Paramount, communication broke down big time.

[quote=""Valkrist""]Lastly, if the change was made for increased budget reasons, like the Klingons in TMP, why then did we have TOS normal-looking Romulans in Final Frontier and Undiscovered Country?!? Surely they had money in those movies, no? This is made even more baffling by the fact that when ST VI came out and we saw a TOS Romulan in it, TNG was already on the air with those bumpy foreheaded travesties. It really shows that somewhere at Paramount, communication broke down big time. [/quote]

Well, that's precisely it. One group of people—Berman et al—were in charge of making the TNG TV show, and another group was in charge of the movies. They each did their own thing regarding the Romulans. Ironically, the movie people had paid some attention to TNG: they included Khitomer and Worf's ancestor, of course. However, they overlooked—accidentally or intentionally—the Romulan forehead.

This image is stuck in my mind for some reason, but I don't have the time to check it now, but maybe later: in Generations, when the TNG crew beams aboard the Armagosa station, does that closeup of one of the Romulan bodies they find NOT have the bumpy forehead?

No, he definitely HAS the bumpy forehead.

[quote=""Olorin""]Well, that's precisely it. One group of people—Berman et al—were in charge of making the TNG TV show, and another group was in charge of the movies. They each did their own thing regarding the Romulans. Ironically, the movie people had paid some attention to TNG: they included Khitomer and Worf's ancestor, of course. However, they overlooked—accidentally or intentionally—the Romulan forehead.[/quote]


I think Olorin hit the nail on the head with this one... BERMAN was in charge on TNG at the time, with all due respect to Roddenberry... he sure did pick a goofball to run his baby.

[quote=""BladeCollector""]I think Olorin hit the nail on the head with this one... BERMAN was in charge on TNG at the time, with all due respect to Roddenberry... he sure did pick a goofball to run his baby.[/quote]

Now, I think you're being a bit too hard on Berman. He was Roddenberry's handpicked successor, and he did try to run ST the way Roddenberry wanted it in his latter days. It's easy to rank on Berman for running out of creative juice and giving us stale rehash after stale rehash, but we need to remember how good TNG and DS9 were in their primes.

True, but I've always considered the best of TNG and DS9 to have come from Ronald Moore, Ira Behr, Michael Pillar, Peter Fields, etc... Berman did have good episodes and Brannon Braga even had some great episodes, and as for Enteprise, Manny Coto write some good stuff for the last season.

But Berman, unfortunately, has become the fall guy for everything wrong in star trek.... thats what happens when your at the top.

[quote=""BladeCollector""]But Berman, unfortunately, has become the fall guy for everything wrong in star trek.[/quote]

Precisely.

Here are some more cast publicity stills, courtesy of trekmovie.com. If that's really Pegg as Scotty (I'm not familiar enough with Pegg to recognize him in an odd shot like that), couldn't they have given him a bit of a hairpiece? Scotty did not have a receding hairline.

Anyone else think Yelchin as Chekov looks like Dr. Bashir in this picture?

Here it is:

As was done when the first set of character posters were released at Comic-Con (see story here), the official site for 2009’s Star Trek has been updated with images from the Vegas convention posters available as wallpapers and IM icons. Besides giving us more options for Trekking out our computers, the updates also give us our first high-res looks at the movie’s Sulu, Scotty, Chekov, and McCoy.

And here they are:

OK, here's the last one:

It just occurred to me, and a quick check of IMDB confirmed, that apparently we have no Nurse Chapel in this movie.

Yeah, I've seen that poster and unlike the first one, I'm far from happy with it. I 'get' that these are not meant to be look-alikes to the original cast, though certain similarities were certainly cultivated when choosing the new people. However, when looking at these posters, the images should, in theory (at least for me,) invoke the memory and mental image that we have of the old TOS cast. With the first poster, I thought Spock looked great, Kirk pretty good, and Uhura was passable. I'm not trying to see Nimoy, Shatner, and Nichols specifically in those faces, but merely for a way to tell at a glance, that these are the characters that we know.

With this new poster, I definitely don't see a Chekov or a Scotty. In Chekov's case, perhaps the fact that his hair can't be seen in the photo is making a difference, but it just doesn't work for me. As for Scotty, just like Chekov, if not for the fact that they are labelled as who they are, and that I know which actors are playing which parts, I just don't see the character. And yes, the hairstyle on Simon Pegg left me scratching my head too. Sulu would be ok if not for the fact that see Harry Kim from Voyager every time I look at that photo. McCoy I'm still a little undecided on. It's tough to judge by the profile, but I think Urban was a good pick for the role so I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt for now.

Two thumbs up on the first poster, two thumbs down on this one.

[quote=""Valkrist""]In Chekov's case, perhaps the fact that his hair can't be seen in the photo is making a difference[/quote]

Yes, where's that Beatles moptop look, ha ha?

[quote=""Valkrist""] Sulu would be ok if not for the fact that see Harry Kim from Voyager every time I look at that photo.[/quote]

I thought that too.

Spoiler (highlight to read)

Clifton Collins Jr, who plays Nero's right hand man, confirmed that they ARE Romulans, and also described them as "space pirtes." This sounds to me like someone operating outside the Romulan government.

I hope somehow their performances capture the characters.. there is no resemblence whatsoever for me... i wouldnt know who they were if i didnt know already... i guess they cant all be as perfect as Spock.

[quote=""BladeCollector""]I hope somehow their performances capture the characters.. there is no resemblence whatsoever for me... i wouldnt know who they were if i didnt know already... i guess they cant all be as perfect as Spock.[/quote]

You're right...most of them don't look particularly like their predecessors, other than Quinto. But I think the performances will make it work.

Re: the spoiler.

I find that encouraging. It helps to e xp lain the look, calm my 'Nemesis' fears somewhat, and gives me hope that one major TOS continuity point from Balance of Terror will be preserved... perhaps.

[quote=""Valkrist""]....gives me hope that one major TOS continuity point from Balance of Terror will be preserved... perhaps. [/quote]

Oh Lord, I forgot all about that Balance of Terror thing! Well, I suppose it was in the back of my mind somewhere, as I was concerned about it vis a vis the Romulans in Enterprise, but I thought they handled it well there.

OK, get ready to drool: first real images from the movie! Beware spoilers, so scroll down! Also, some of these will click thru to higher rez versions.










































The crew (minus Spock):


Spock and Kirk having a little disagreement:

Nero:
[font=&quot]
[/font]

And one more:





























USS Kelvin under attack:

And another!

I have to say, that bridge set looks drastically different from the TOS bridge and much more like the movie/latterday TV series bridges. But check out that chair near Sulu's hand. It look's like a dining chair from the 1950s!

those are some nice pics. makes me want to see this movie even more and wishing it was still coming out in december.

I like the bridge actually, it has a new feel to it.. but I kinda get a retro TOS feel looking at it, but updated.

Wow! Where did you score those?

Some comments:

Crew looks great despite some initial misgivings on my part. I especially like McCoy's pose on the bridge pic - so like Kelley!

Nero definitely looks Romulan now, and no stupid brow ridges that I can see. Yay!

Why is Kirk wearing a black uniform in every shot? Is that even a uniform? It has no insignia on it. Something wrong with command gold or even the unique green one that the original Kirk wore?

The uniforms look great, though I see the shades are indeed darker than the originals, as I had read in an article.

A bit too much emotion on Spock's face in that shot, but I guess he got caught smiling in 'The Cage' so that makes it ok.

Small glimpse of the Kelvin's saucer section looks good, raising my hopes for the big E.

While I did not e xp ect the bridge to look like the TOS one, I must say I find this one too radically different for my taste. I can understand moderninzing the instruments, but perhaps a slightly similar colour scheme to the original bridge might have helped to make things a tad more familiar. What's with that odd looking standup console behind and to the right of Kirk? Seems very out of place to me. Looks like they are reverse engineering the TNG and Voyager bridges to this version of the Enterprise in order to include that no-seat console that Worf/Tuvok always manned. Stupid and jarring, if you ask me.

I just commented on Spocks face to a friend of mine right before I came back to the forums... I said he looks too angry to be someone with no emotions
There does seem to be an insignia on Kirks top... you can barely see an outline, i think, as its the same color as the shirt. I like to darker, more bold colors... TOS looked like faded wool.

[quote=""BladeCollector""]I like the bridge actually, it has a new feel to it.. but I kinda get a retro TOS feel looking at it, but updated.[/quote]

[quote=""Valkrist""]While I did not e xp ect the bridge to look like the TOS one, I must say I find this one too radically different for my taste. I can understand moderninzing the instruments, but perhaps a slightly similar colour scheme to the original bridge might have helped to make things a tad more familiar. What's with that odd looking standup console behind and to the right of Kirk? Seems very out of place to me. Looks like they are reverse engineering the TNG and Voyager bridges to this version of the Enterprise in order to include that no-seat console that Worf/Tuvok always manned. Stupid and jarring, if you ask me.[/quote]

I guess the funky console that Uhura is standing it serves the same purpose story-wise that Worf's/Tuvok's station did: the actor gets to face the camera instead of having their back to it 90% of the time. I bet there's no reason other than that.

I think the bridge does look much more like a work-back from VOY than a reimagining of what the TOS bridge should look like. However, I also think it has a sort of retro look that is suggestive of TOS. So I agree with both of you. One other comment I'll put forward—I think it's too brightly lit. I'm sure all of this will grow on us as we see more of it and get used to it. I know it's a tough challenge to try to make it look faithful to TOS while making it look more advanced than 2008 technology, since the TOS technology for the most part looks primitive compared to the real world of the early 21st century.

[quote=""Valkrist""]Wow! Where did you score those?[/quote]

From trekmovie.com, which compiled them from the individual sources Paramount released them to. No outlet got more than one picture.

[quote=""Valkrist""]

Crew looks great despite some initial misgivings on my part. I especially like McCoy's pose on the bridge pic - so like Kelley!

Nero definitely looks Romulan now, and no stupid brow ridges that I can see. Yay! [/quote]

Yeah, ditto on those. Except I'm not to thrilled with Checkov's squirrelly Simply Red curly hairstyle. At least they dyed Simon Pegg's hair dark for Scotty, though, even if they didn't give him some patching to cover his receding hairline.

[quote=""Valkrist""] A bit too much emotion on Spock's face in that shot, but I guess he got caught smiling in 'The Cage' so that makes it ok.
[/quote]

[quote=""BladeCollector""]I just commented on Spocks face to a friend of mine right before I came back to the forums... I said he looks too angry to be someone with no emotions.[/quote]

He does look rather angry, but he was totally emotional in "The Cage." As we know, at that time in the production of Star Trek, it had not yet been decided that Vulcans would be emotionless. When they did the second pilot, Roddenberry decided to transfer the emotionless characteristic from "Number One," who was being dropped, to Spock. In terms of internal story reason, Quinto has commented that Spock is still struggling with his emotions at this point in time.

[quote=""BladeCollector""]There does seem to be an insignia on Kirks top... you can barely see an outline, i think, as its the same color as the shirt. I like to darker, more bold colors... TOS looked like faded wool.[/quote]

[quote=""Valkrist""]Why is Kirk wearing a black uniform in every shot? Is that even a uniform? It has no insignia on it. Something wrong with command gold or even the unique green one that the original Kirk wore?[/quote]

At first I thought it was just the black undershirt that is part of the uniforms (though I would hope its role would be something more dignified than an undershirt—it hardly seems fitting for an at least quasi-military organization like Star Fleet to go around with the undershirts showing). Then BC pointed out you can see the emblem on it. I guess this shirt is something akin to Picard's stunning "smoking jacket" that he wore in Season 5 of TNG—a special alternative uniform that only captains get to have. But why they introduced this instead of just sticking with what we know, I don't know.

Also, where is this in the TOS timeline? In "Where No Man Has Gone Before," all the uniforms were gold with a turtleneck. In these shots, however, the uniforms are essentially the same as standard Seasons 1–3 TOS uniforms.

Oh, here's a comment from Damon Lindelof, one of the producers, on Kirk's black shirt, from MTV:

When asked why Kirk was wearing black instead of the standard yellow captain’s shirt, Lindelof said that the black uniform was, in fact, a captain’s uniform — and the color was “significant” to the story surrounding this scene.

Yep, I agree the bridge does invoke a retro look. I was just hoping it would do so while channeling more of the original bridge in feel, and it does not do so for me. I also agree it is too brightly lit. Even the NX-01 bridge wasn't so glaring. Reminds me of sickbay on the refit 1701. Also, are you sure that's Uhura standing at the console? For that prominent a spot, it should be her, but the skin tone and what I can see of the face does not look like Zoe Saldana.

I remember an early article stating that yes, we will get to see Kirk wearing command gold, so I'm a little baffled at the prominence of the black shirt. Looking more closely, I do see the vague outline of the insignia, but I dislike the fact that he seems to be wearing a different colour just to be distinguished from everyone else. Are they worried we won't know who Kirk is among all the new faces? When I think of Kirk, I think of the gold uniform.

Lastly, it's been stated several times that the timeline of this movie jumps forwards and backwards all over the place, so I'm not too worried about not seeing the early versions of the uniforms. They may still make an appearance.

[quote=""Olorin""]Oh, here's a comment from Damon Lindelof, one of the producers, on Kirk's black shirt, from MTV:
When asked why Kirk was wearing black instead of the standard yellow captain’s shirt, Lindelof said that the black uniform was, in fact, a captain’s uniform — and the color was “significant” to the story surrounding this scene.[/quote]

Hmmm... I smell a rat. If that is indeed a captain's uniform, it is not from any incarnation of Starfleet that we've ever seen, but then again I guess this new team wants to leave their creative stamp on the franchise in some way. I find it peculiar that he refers to 'this scene' as a singular event and not plural. Which of the photos is he talking about, or are all of the photos that we have seen related and part of the same sequence of events?

Ok, replying to myself here. I found the Lindelof quote and the pic that it refers to is the bridge one with Kirk sitting in the chair. I could go with his comment on the black shirt being relevant to the particular scene, except that Kirk is wearing it in every other picture shown thus far, including the one down on the planet. Thus, unless all these pictures are part of the same sequence, Lindelof is just making excuses for a design change.

He also mentions two things that confirm for me that the woman in the background is not Uhura: first he mentions that the screens behind Kirk are just above the comm console (which is Uhura's traditional position,) and secondly, he refers to the woman in the picture as a red-shirted female crewwoman and not as Uhura, which would be odd an odd thing to do if it was indeed her.

I think one of the biggest problems with doing a really true TOS bridge set is a combination of 2 things.... 1. it would look rather cheesy, you dont want it to look too futuristic, because its taking place in the "past", but we have come a long way in the 40 some odd years since TOS came on... and 2. We now have some better technology in 2008 than was presented in TOS... look how odd a clunky the communicator from TOS looks compaired to a modern day cell-phone.

Here's another pic of the Kelvin. Don't think I like the design....

Looks a little too modern, as in TNG-movie era, but then again I guess that's in keeping with the updated look of everything else in this movie. I'm neutral on the design, but I can't quite figure out if that section above the saucer is a warp engine or an engineering hull. You can almost see something under the saucer, but it has an orange glow instead of a blue one. A deflector dish, or a warp helice?

Yeah, I wondered the same thing. I suppose one is one and the other is the other, ha ha.

You know, in accepted Star Trek canon, starships have always had paired warp nacelles, or at least, they always had more than one. However, in the old TOS-era ST Technical Manual, which had diagrams of lots of ships we never saw (ie, which were invented for the book), there was one ship that looked like the Enterprise but which had only a single nacelle. OK, I grabbed the book off the shelf. Both the "Saladin" class destroyers and the "Hermes" class scouts had a single nacelle. It connected to the saucer by the same type of pylon normally used to connect the secondary hull to the saucer—except there is no secondary hull in these designs. The design of Saladin and Hermes is identical; see it here: http://www.trekmania.net/art/SaladinClass1.jpg

Here's a spoiler about the background of the Kelvin, taken from trekmovie.com:

The Kelvin is a Federation starship from a generation before the Enterprise and smaller than the Enterprise. It is of a new ship class never seen before. The ship is commanded by Captain Robau (Faran Tahir) with George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth) as first officer.

Yeah, I had also read of the theory wherein in order to create a stable warp field, nacelles on a starship always have to come in pairs. I have seen many instances of Federation vessels with a single nacelle, or even three nacelles in some cases, but never onscreen or in established canon. A vessel can have four nacelles, like the Prometheus class, because it still follows the law of pairs.

BTW, your link won't work. A warning comes up saying that hotlinking to that page is illegal.

It works if you copy and paste it into the address bar.

I know its not canon, but they have a single-nacelled ship in the video game "Star Trek: Legacy"... a small, scout vessel.

A three nacelled ship was shown in the alternate future during "All Good Things"... it was an Enterprise-D refit commanded by Admiral Riker