Here’s the HD sizes for download:
http://downloads.paramount.com/mp/startrek/sb2009/ST_TVSpot_Dare30_480p.mov
http://downloads.paramount.com/mp/startrek/sb2009/ST_TVSpot_Dare30_720p.mov
http://downloads.paramount.com/mp/startrek/sb2009/ST_TVSpot_Dare30_1080p.mov

The point is that YouTube isn’t paying for it. Stupid, yes, but many people would say the studios are as well.

Taking an advertisement down due to copyrights? Isn’t the purpose of an advertisement to be played lots of times? It is supposed to generate interest in the product?

I think I read about that in a marketing book.

Now you know why Avatar and Foundation fans have trouble sleeping at night. . . .

“Get a Life.”

William Shatner

At my age, I doubt it is “fanboyism” whateverinthehell that means. It is more like grumpy old curmudgeon bitchin’ bout the no-brained idiots who have to rehash the old stuff and manages to make a right dog’s dinner of it. BTW, I like the complement “boy” at my age.
I wouldn’t mind a back story movie, but they might consider some connection to the source material beyond the characters’ names.

In the original series, McCoy was older than most of the crew. Scotty probably came with the ship. Kirk and Spock were about the same age (career wise if not chronologically) Sulu and Chekov were punk kids almost fresh out of the academy. These individual back stories guided much of the interplay between the characters throughout the series.

So now they are all classmates? Make them all ensigns and put them under the command of someone else. The problem with reimagining or rebooting is that most of the powers that be lack any imagination.

Suppose I will see it whan it comes out. I’m not so old I won’t accept change. I should just be glad it wasn’t directed by Roland Emmerich, James Cameron or M. Knight Shamalamadingdong.

I try to take a laid-back attitude about canon and such — after all, they’re just stories people have made up, and some of the ones with official numbers attached to them have been, ahem, really bad. (I’m in the camp which denies that Star Trek V ever really happened, for example.)

If I knew who to talk to, I’ve always wanted to pitch a Trek anthology series. Different stories in different parts of the Trek universe each week. If one set of characters resonated particularly well with the fans, they could come back in subsequent episodes, but it would generally be something different every week. There’s lots of books that could be adapted. It’s a rich enough fictional universe for such a thing.

Would it have killed them to be a little more creative?

Maybe the movie will explain the older Kirk’s stilted delivery. Perhaps a head injury or mini-stroke was responsible.

The bots… They ARE nicely done, but when they fight it looks like metal vomit. I can’t figure out what is going on. There’s a reason why they had less details in the original cartoons you know, so you won’t wonder “hey, who’s exhaust pipe is THAT?”

PS: My first rock concert was The Darkness. I’m still trying to wash my eyes from the pain.

*has, once again, missed the point entirely ^_^*

Fekkin’ brilliant!

Does every post with a link in it have to go into moderation purgatory? This is the ONLY site I know of that does that.

If people were required to register/log-in before posting a comment, like on RichardDawkins.net, then there would be no need for “moderation” — regular commenters’ are given a free pass for links, provided they don’t abuse their privilege. It would save you the trouble, Phil, of having to moderate every single comment with a link(s).

It’s fanboyism. You might as well command the tide to not come in.

Well, it’s nice to know the boneheads at Paramount still don’t understand viral marketing. Sigh.

It’s the lawyers. To them, “viral marketing” is a new way to sell vaccines.

You like the original series and hope to protect it? Keep it sacred? And summarily dismiss any exploration of the backstory as “Star Trek Babies?” Really?

Nothing interesting could have happened before the timepoint of the original series pilot? Really?

You can’t tell a story without the specific actors who inhabited the characters? Really?

And you’re so sure of your position that you can pass judgment on a film (directed by JJ Abrams and based on Star Trek) not yet released? Really?

Wow.

Finally got around to seeing the first one. Meh… The bots were nicely done, but I couldn’t care a gnat’s poot for any of the human characters. Sadly, it will now forever be the first Blu-Ray I ever watched.

Seeing them building the Enterprise on the ground pretty much ruined any ability I had to suspend disbelief.

*shrug* Anti-grav is pretty canon on the ST-verse. Given that, you can build ships anywhere. Maybe it’s cheaper to build it on the ground. For example, you don’t have to equip/train thousands of employees for hard vacuum/microgravity work. Or you could take a cue from MST3K and just relax. Allow for artistic license if you must.

I don’t understand why they want to take a movie that everyone likes, and then change everything about it. Why not just make a different movie. start a new franchise.

Because not everyone really likes it anymore. IMHO, ST got old and tired at the end of DS9′s run. Voyager and Enterprise, and films made during their runs, didn’t help. A reboot turned BSG from a farce into a near classic SF series.

I’m going to be a total contrarian radical here, and not judge the movie until I’ve seen it. Can you imagine? I guess my falling out with the original inoculates me against the WFS (Whining Fanboy Syndrome).