Does Star Trek's Enterprise Crew Measure Up?

We compare the original Star Trek cast to their rebooted successors.

Next week, director-producer extraordinaire J. J. Abrams (LOST, Cloverfield) re-starts one of the most beloved franchises in Hollywood history: Star Trek. What's more, the eleventh feature film in the Star Trek universe is a reboot, not a sequel, which dares to revisit the youthful Starfleet Academy days of James Tiberius Kirk (Chris Pine) and his future Enterprise crew. While we won't reveal plot spoilers here (suffice to say this Trek places our familiar officers in an alternate reality timeline), we thought we'd take a close look at the cast of Abrams' Star Trek to see how closely they resemble their classic counterparts. See how the Enterprise crew measures up inside!



James T. Kirk



Played by: William Shatner / Chris Pine

Strengths: Twenty-eight-year-old Chris Pine has a William Shatner-esque, boyish quality to him (see: Princess Diaries 2) but there's also edginess beneath that handsome mug (see: Smokin' Aces). We think Pine has got what it takes to give Kirk a faithful facelift.

Weaknesses: Can...anyone...resist...impersonating... the Shat? Pine will have to walk a delicate line between playing the character and playing the man who made Captain Kirk iconic to begin with.



Spock




Played by: Leonard Nimoy / Zachary Quinto

Strengths: We know Zachary Quinto can do cold and calculating, thanks to his work as Sylar on Heroes. And maybe it's the pointy ears and the bowl cut, but we think he looks the part of a young Nimoy, too.

Weaknesses: Where Nimoy was a master of the intelligent-yet-impassive face, Quinto's Spock seems to struggle more to contain his emotions. Plus, can Quinto sing like Nimoy?



Uhura



Played by: Nichelle Nichols / Zoë Saldaņa

Strengths: Actress Zoë Saldaņa has the charisma to keep pace with the flashiest co-stars -- she starred in Crossroads opposite Britney Spears, after all -- and has the wit to fill Nichelle Nichols' shoes (and Federation-issued minidress) as the xenolinguistics expert.

Weaknesses: Starred in Crossroads opposite Britney Spears.



Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy



Played by: DeForest Kelley / Karl Urban

Strengths: New Zealand actor Urban seems to "get" what Bones is all about -- complaining, practicing medicine, and cultivating his bromance with Jim Kirk.

Weaknesses: Urban has built a career around playing muscular warrior types (The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Doom, Pathfinder), so he was a surprising choice to play the sardonic (and combat-averse) doctor.



Hikaru Sulu



Played by: George Takei / John Cho

Strengths: Let's be frank; there aren't many Asian American actors in Hollywood who are household names, let alone ones who are great dramatic and comic actors, so we're especially glad that Abrams picked John Cho to fill the pilot's chair. Plus, Cho appears to have some mean fencing skills.

Weaknesses: Despite quibbles over casting Korean-American Cho as the Japanese-American Sulu, in the globalized -- nay, galacticized -- future, Sulu represents all Asians. Or something.



Pavel Chekov



Played by: Walter Koenig / Anton Yelchin

Strengths: Russian-born Anton Yelchin has mastered the art of the Chekov "w" -- nuclear wessels, anyone? -- and plays the character as a believable sort of naive boy genius.

Weaknesses: WTF, Abrams? Chekov didn't have curly hair!!!



Montgomery "Scotty" Scott



Played by: James Doohan / Simon Pegg

Strengths: The Enterprise's basement-dwelling engineer has always been the life of the Trek party, so who better to spice up Kirk's authority-challenging tiffs and Spock's half-human, half-Vulcan existential crises?

Weaknesses: Pegg looks nothing like the Scotty we know from the original Star Trek, and he's likely to give us more of the usual Pegg humor. Aw, who are we kidding? We love him! Bring on the hyper-Brit antics!



The USS Enterprise (NCC-1701)



Strengths: It's not really a matter of "casting," but Abrams and Co. did give the beloved USS Enterprise a bit of a facelift. We'll leave you Trekkies to make out the differences (hint: check out the bridge and the engineering sections to start).


Star Trek opens nationwide Friday, May 8.
 

See more from Star Trek on RT


Explore the Star Trek gallery


Seek out new clips and trailers


Read Trekking with Tim

Comments

chille

doctor awesome

Sure Cho's great but he can never match the amazing voice of Takei

Apr 29 - 05:29 PM

inactive user

Jared King

Takei is THE VOICE!

When people say "You gotta have THE VOICE!" They're talking about him.

Apr 29 - 09:38 PM

Jaco

Nick R

Takei really didn't develop that voice until after the original series.

May 2 - 03:24 PM

reavus4983

Mike Saxton

Two years ago I was pissed as hell about remaking Star Trek. But now I'm not complaining about any of the casting, especially not Kirk, Spock, and Bones. Couldn't be happier or more relieved, in fact. All I can say now is thank god Abrams didn't pick Mike Vogel to be Kirk. Pine might be a pretty boy, but Vogel looks like he's ripped right off an Abercrombie poster. I like the new ship too. Faithful but new.

Apr 29 - 05:41 PM

johnnyhandsome2008

Johnny C

Who is Mike Vogel ....?

May 2 - 02:28 PM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

hate the new ship, hate the fact that they're making a star trek film for people who don't like star trek, and i hate the fact that ANTON YELCHIN is going to be in this movie

maybe itll work as an action picture, but still what a shame that one of the best television sagas EVER is getting a reboot treatment when nothing was wrong in the first place, imo, and doing the reboot without the likes of ronald d. moore, brannon braga, or rick berman

Apr 29 - 06:41 PM

scifimark

scifi mark

ummm rick berman almost single handidly destroyed the star trek franchise, im glad he is no where near this. Why do you care about yelchin so much. Out of all the characters he is the least important anyways. Chekov wasnt even in the first season of TOS. Also it seems you were going to hate this movie no matter how it is. Fairly ironic how rodenberry was all about tolerance and an optimistic future and some of the die hard trekkies are some of the most close minded people i ever talked to. Im making a distinction between star trek fans and trekkies.

One reviewer said it was for people who hate star trek and you take that as gospel? I think its for both people who like star trek and bringing something new for people who never could get into it. This movie would not succeed if they targeted trek fans exclusively there just arent enough of them to make it the success they want.

Apr 29 - 07:30 PM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

please please PLEASE tell me how rick berman almost destroyed star trek..i cannot wait to hear this

and have you EVER SEEN ANTON YELCHIN IN A MOVIE?

hes the most annoying little squirm i think ive ever seen in the movies in the last decade..watch charlie bartlett and you will totally agree with me that this annoying little smug a.s.s. does not belong anywhere near a franchise as legendary as star trek..

Apr 29 - 08:07 PM

Dianne L.

Dianne Lee

I don't mind the movie appealing to others besides Star Trek fans. If you're a SciFi fan you'll be attracted to it...but to assume there aren't enough of us to support the movie is ludicrous. We hail from almost every profession in existance, every age range, nearly every country in the world...don't count us out...we're not down yet. And remember, Star Trek has been accumulating fans for over 40 years.

May 7 - 11:08 AM

Dianne L.

Dianne Lee

I am a Trekkie and have appreciated all the Star Trek series. I love everything Star Trek. While I insist everything new to Star Trek remain loyal to the original Star Trek concept, I am not opposed to things new. I've met people from numerous professions, those of numerous persuasions, and among those have met people both brilliant, generous and understanding as well as greedy, stupid, and close minded. Trekkies to me are those who love Star Trek, appreciate all it's different characters, lifetimes, stories...and above all it's original concept. So stop with the bloody labels..unles you'd like one.

May 7 - 11:15 AM

geluf

Brandon Tanner

"but still what a shame that one of the best television sagas EVER is getting a reboot treatment when nothing was wrong in the first place, imo, and doing the reboot without the likes of ronald d. moore, brannon braga, or rick berman"

..are you serious?

Rick Berman ran Trek into the ground, and Nemesis was the nail in the coffin. Wake up: Trek was absolutely dead before Abrams got a hold of it. I love Trek. Always have, always will. But times change and Trek has to keep up if it is to remain culturally relevant.

Apr 29 - 11:47 PM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

k once again i will say, HOW DID RICK BERMAN NEARLY KILL STAR TREK?

tell me HOW and you wont be able to because the truth is, star trek enterprise was great, so was voyager, and everybody always pisses over nemesis and blames it on berman..WHY give me solid reasons please

and to fury uk, DS9 wasnt dark it was campy as HELL and the new enterprise isnt the same, it just looks like a design which was conceived because they wanted to get rid of all things 'trek' about the movie because this movie is for people who dont like star trek, so they decemated a great design for no reason..

Apr 30 - 10:12 AM

Sputnik99

sputnik 99

This is how Berman ruined Star Trek, niall 1:

It needs a reboot.

Apr 30 - 11:18 AM

Cloudman06

Sam Mendez

Go cry about it trekkie. The Trek franchise was dying for a reason, and a good one at that: Star Trek has SUCKED since First Contact and mid-TNG, and Moore, Braga, and and Berman take a fair share of the blame.

Two words: NEW DIRECTION! I'm excited.

I would have been just as happy if they just let Star Trek die out and move on, make new good science fiction, but this works too. Gonna be good!

Apr 30 - 01:28 PM

timberwolf4545

tom julian

I have to agree with the others. As Berman and Braga dragged the series on, it just lost its spark. it was just the same boring tired stuff all over again. Voyager and Enterprise were simply awful and if you want to complain about star trek - go there. They went 100% against the feel of the original. What was once daring, bold and imaginiative became tired, predictable and dull. Think about that for a second - people flying around in space having adventures was made dull by Brannon and Braga. And the actors looked tired and the scripts seemed like there were prorduced by manatees. anyway, i think your point of view is dumb.

May 1 - 06:07 AM

Charles M.

Charles Martel

I have to agree with the others. As Berman and Braga dragged the series on, it just lost its spark. it was just the same boring tired stuff all over again.
--Nope. Completely wrong.

Voyager and Enterprise were simply awful and if you want to complain about star trek - go there.
--Appears you are incorrect once again. Getting to be a habit with you.

They went 100% against the feel of the original.
--Wrong again. I believe you are true glutton for punishment. Not a good habit.

What was once daring, bold and imaginiative became tired, predictable and dull. Think about that for a second -
--It did not take a second to read your most misinformed commentary.Why would I again think about it for more than a couple of micro seconds?

people flying around in space having adventures was made dull by Brannon and Braga.
--Not dull, but you are really on a roll here. Quite repetitive in the equation as well.

And the actors looked tired and the scripts seemed like there were prorduced by manatees.
--Prorduced you say, nice addition to the English language. A veritable Shakespeare in the making, a Marlowe at least. Why pick on manatees,anyway. Lovely animals.

anyway, i think your point of view is dumb.
The point is that I don`t think you think much. I think therefore I am does not to seem to apply in your case. Rather, I think I think therefore I may be, would suit you better.

My sincere apologies for this damaging comment on yourself written by myself but orchestrated nevertheless by yourself.

Oh, yeah, I have refuted your. . . ahem . . . argument with one that resorts in no place to the use of inane speech.

I am happy to leave that task to you and you fulfilled your task quite well with the last word in your comment.

Anyway, I have the power of speech so how can I be described as dumb?

There are worse words you could have used and I am so sorry your creativity did not quite surpass that of Beavis and Butthead.

You play with fire and you get burned, pretty badly it would seem. You need to find some perspective otaku-san, for this is just a comment about movies, not a judgement on one`s character. But you managed to judge yourself quite harshly.

The less is the pity.

And you need that (pity).

Having reviewed my comment, I feel quite good about myself. Unlike some others I have just . . .uh . . . met on a certain blog. Rotten Tomatoes doesn`t mean comments have to be rotten, too.

I could go on and on.

But I feel you have suffered enough for now.

Respond at your own risk. But you had better raise your bar a several notches.

Bring some beef next time and make a real game of it!

Tata!

May 1 - 06:30 AM

And The Answer Is 42

VJ Perry

but all of your responses are opinion anyway. but you must be joking if you dont think that enterprise was just a re-tread.

May 1 - 09:35 PM

Steven L.

Steven Luce

Wow, dude. That was quite possibly the least convincing rebuttal I've heard. Maybe you should've just pantsed the guy. It would have been more effective. Anyhow, the question of whether or not the franchise needed to be "rebooted" and whether or not the creators had lost their touch, is not answered by whether or not you enjoyed the show.

The fact is, fewer and fewer people tuned in to each new series or purchased ticket for each new movie. And, each new series and film took a massive rating and revenue nose-dive after the premiere.

"Nemesis" cost more than $60 million to make, and grossed just over over $67 million worldwide. That's hardly a success in Hollywood. Even "Insurrection" barely cracked $70 million domestic gross, and "First Contact" failed to break the century mark. To put that in perspective, "Quantum of Solace" was raked over the coals by Hollywood brass for grossing a mere $575 million worldwide. The Star Trek films just aren't in the same ball park.

Aside from you, and the other folks at the Star Trek conventions, no one was watching. Now, does this mean the series was creatively bankrupt? Absolutely not. But it does mean that Star Trek was no longer able to bring in the big audiences. In marketing, we would say the brand was no longer attractive. When that happens, you are left with only two real options: dissolve the brand, or overhaul the old one.

Which brings us to the present. J.J. Abrams and company have done one hell of a job overhauling the Star Trek brand. People are actually talking about Star Trek again. You have every right to maintain that the franchise was doing fine didn't need an overhaul, but most of viewing public disagreed with you. Like it or not, Star Trek was a dying brand. Remember, everyone screamed bloody murder when the new "Battlestar Galactica" revealed that Starbuck and Boomer were now girls, and that the cylons were in fact our progeny. Look how that turned out.

May 2 - 07:43 PM

Steven L.

Steven Luce

I apologize for the occasional dropped word in my previous post. My delete key is sometimes a little overzealous.

May 2 - 07:45 PM

Magallanes

First Last

Yes, commercially talking, Star Trek didn't so well for movies, but it is part because Star Trek showed a series of poor movies, with the exception of 1 or 2, the rest is boring, pointless and weirds (a Data laughing all the movie is not funny).

But Star Trek are not movies but a tv serie:
Star Trek
Star Trek New Generation
Star Trek Deep Space 9
Star Trek Voyager
Star Trek Enterprise.

5 tv series.

So, to do a star trek movie is optional, may be star trek must stick doing tv series.

May 3 - 06:26 AM

Steven L.

Steven Luce

Magallanes, if you re-read my post, you'll notice I refer to the entire franchise, not just the films. The TV series also saw a steady decline in rating after TNG went off the air, and bottomed out with Enterprise. No offense, but until J.J. Abrams came along, Star Trek was no longer a viable brand. And I'm a fan.

May 3 - 07:24 PM

Magallanes

First Last

Yes, commercially talking, Star Trek didn't so well for movies, but it is part because Star Trek showed a series of poor movies, with the exception of 1 or 2, the rest is boring, pointless and weirds (a Data laughing all the movie is not funny).

But Star Trek are not movies but a tv serie:
Star Trek
Star Trek New Generation
Star Trek Deep Space 9
Star Trek Voyager
Star Trek Enterprise.

5 tv series.

So, to do a star trek movie is optional, may be star trek must stick doing tv series.

May 3 - 06:41 AM

TombstoneLawDog

Daniel Klein

Charles M wrote:
>I have to agree with the others. As Berman and Braga dragged the series on, >it just lost its spark. it was just the same boring tired stuff all over >again.
--Nope. Completely wrong.

>Voyager and Enterprise were simply awful and if you want to complain about >star trek - go there.
--Appears you are incorrect once again. Getting to be a habit with you.

>They went 100% against the feel of the original.
--Wrong again. I believe you are true glutton for punishment. Not a good habit.

Does this--the simple act of vehemently disagreeing-- really count as 'rebuttal' where you're from? I'm honestly mystified that you can feel a sense of superiority merely by saying 'no' to someone and claiming that you have *vanquished* them.

Steven L: Good response, dude. You basically said what I wanted to say, but I was too fascinated by this guy's post to completely leave it alone.

May 4 - 10:41 AM

Alan S.

Alan Stewart

Yes. It is terrible they want to appeal to a wide audience so they can actually make money with this movie.

If it is a well written, well told story with great performances that should not offend any Trek nerds and it will appeal to a new class of fan who was not attracted to the hammy over-the-top acting and crapppy sets in the original series.

I will enjoy both.

Alan S.

May 1 - 02:49 PM

johnnyhandsome2008

Johnny C

Who is Mike Vogel ....?

May 2 - 02:30 PM

SuperScuba

Steve Whaley

You do realize you are listing some of the people who drove trek into the ground don't you? Granted, they did their share to keep the franchise going, but ultimately their ideas grew stale. Star Trek needs things to be mixed up a bit. I think J.J. and company are doing the best they can to make sure longtime fans appreciate this film. Don't you want to see Nimoy back in action? There has to be something you'd like to see this film for.

May 4 - 12:52 AM

nick m.

nick mortensen

shut up. just shut up

May 4 - 01:24 AM

Scorehound

Michael Leonard

It was either reboot the franchise for a younger audience or let it die and disappear... which would you choose?

I for one am hyped to the ceiling with excitement for this movie. It looks phenomenal.

May 6 - 05:23 AM

Crispy1

Chris B.

I starting to think it might be good!

Apr 29 - 06:43 PM

Chris B.

Chris Bellew

omgawd! this movie looks awesome.

Apr 29 - 06:45 PM

Chris B.

Chris Bellew

omgawd! this movie looks awesome. i'm going to see this shiznit.

Apr 29 - 06:49 PM

willpower

will molinar

KKAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry, had to be done. Shatner's face is right there for Christ's sake.

Apr 29 - 07:15 PM

scifimark

scifi mark

ummm rick berman almost single handidly destroyed the star trek franchise, im glad he is no where near this. Why do you care about yelchin so much. Out of all the characters he is the least important anyways. Chekov wasnt even in the first season of TOS. Also it seems you were going to hate this movie no matter how it is. Fairly ironic how rodenberry was all about tolerance and an optimistic future and some of the die hard trekkies are some of the most close minded people i ever talked to. Im making a distinction between star trek fans and trekkies.

One reviewer said it was for people who hate star trek and you take that as gospel? I think its for both people who like star trek and bringing something new for people who never could get into it. This movie would not succeed if they targeted trek fans exclusively there just arent enough of them to make it the success they want.

Apr 29 - 07:30 PM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

please please PLEASE tell me how rick berman almost destroyed star trek..i cannot wait to hear this

and have you EVER SEEN ANTON YELCHIN IN A MOVIE?

hes the most annoying little squirm i think ive ever seen in the movies in the last decade..watch charlie bartlett and you will totally agree with me that this annoying little smug a.s.s. does not belong anywhere near a franchise as legendary as star trek..

Apr 29 - 08:07 PM

Dianne L.

Dianne Lee

I don't mind the movie appealing to others besides Star Trek fans. If you're a SciFi fan you'll be attracted to it...but to assume there aren't enough of us to support the movie is ludicrous. We hail from almost every profession in existance, every age range, nearly every country in the world...don't count us out...we're not down yet. And remember, Star Trek has been accumulating fans for over 40 years.

May 7 - 11:08 AM

Dianne L.

Dianne Lee

I am a Trekkie and have appreciated all the Star Trek series. I love everything Star Trek. While I insist everything new to Star Trek remain loyal to the original Star Trek concept, I am not opposed to things new. I've met people from numerous professions, those of numerous persuasions, and among those have met people both brilliant, generous and understanding as well as greedy, stupid, and close minded. Trekkies to me are those who love Star Trek, appreciate all it's different characters, lifetimes, stories...and above all it's original concept. So stop with the bloody labels..unles you'd like one.

May 7 - 11:15 AM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

please please PLEASE tell me how rick berman almost destroyed star trek..i cannot wait to hear this

and have you EVER SEEN ANTON YELCHIN IN A MOVIE?

hes the most annoying little squirm i think ive ever seen in the movies in the last decade..watch charlie bartlett and you will totally agree with me that this annoying little smug a.s.s. does not belong anywhere near a franchise as legendary as star trek..

Apr 29 - 08:07 PM

Looselycult

Dean Peteet

"and doing the reboot without the likes of ronald d. moore, brannon braga, or rick berman"

Nothing against Ron Moore but the best thing he did was get out from underneath Next Gen and all those other crappy Star Trek spin-off shows and do real scifi with BSG.

Apr 29 - 08:13 PM

Jen Yamato

Jen Yamato

Anyone else singing "Bilbo...Bilbo Baggins" in their heads right now?

Apr 29 - 08:28 PM

inactive user

Jared King

How about Shatner's take on "Rocket Man"?

Apr 29 - 09:34 PM

lnxjenn

Jennifer Dozar

I had Bilbo Baggins in my head for like a week after reading this article! haha :) So, you're not alone Jen Yamato! hehe

I loved the film! I thought it was exciting and fun. I Love star trek in general, especially orginal and next. I hope they do another one WITH KLINGONS this time!

May 11 - 02:45 PM

thunderstruck560

Adam Waddell

One of my favorite aspects of the original star trek was the storytelling aspect. To the casual observer, it looks like the same thing happens in every episode, but the exact opposite is true. They actually found a way of telling deep and compelling storylines every episode that usually had some moral or humanity message in them. There were the occasional screwball episodes (trouble with tribbles comes to mind off the top of my head) but there are also episodes like the cage which puts Commander Pike in a position to realize if humanity is contempt to stay in an ideal environment or if freedom and knowledge is really that important. I think the movie will be very shallow when it comes to storyline, and i'm sure it will have Michael Bay action sequences, but there is a small glimmer of hope inside of me that the storyline will be somewhat intelligent.

Apr 29 - 08:32 PM

Adam R.

Adam Strange


Uhura without the fro??? WHY! Shes the Fro of Star trek!

and it's funny to see Chekov being played by a teenager,
he always was pocket sized.


I hope this movie is actually good.

Apr 29 - 09:03 PM

tfortier

Thierry Fortier

Wow, thanks for the hobbits song... that was pure gold!

Making the movie more like "real Star Trek"? what? put more cheese, cheap fx and weak storyboards?

The trailer 3 was fantastic. Cant wait to see that.

Apr 29 - 09:31 PM

inactive user

Jared King

How about Shatner's take on "Rocket Man"?

Apr 29 - 09:34 PM

inactive user

Jared King

Damn it Jim! I'm a doctor not a action hero!

Apr 29 - 09:36 PM

eliotno3 e.

eliotno3 eliotno3

Hahahahaha. Best post of the board, hands down...
Can't wait to hear what Bones says this movie! :p

May 1 - 08:32 AM

eliotno3 e.

eliotno3 eliotno3

Hahahahaha. Best post of the board, hands down...
Can't wait to hear what Bones says this movie! :p

May 1 - 09:45 AM

inactive user

Jared King

Takei is THE VOICE!

When people say "You gotta have THE VOICE!" They're talking about him.

Apr 29 - 09:38 PM

Trufire

Josh Hines

"Weaknesses: Starred in Crossroads opposite Britney Spears."

Indeed. LMFAO :-P It will be very interesting to watch. I don't expect them to but fully faithful to the original. That's why it is a reboot. Tweaks will be made and I will be OK with that. Why? Because we still have a lot of the original stuff to love and cherish. (KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!!!) I am going to go into the theatre to be entertained as i'm sure I will be. Then after that, I will critique the differences they made. I'll enjoy the film as it is rather than judge it by its predecessor. That would just be too much to live up too and no one can really do that. But kudos for trying though too. :)

May 7th 7pm show here I come! :-D

Apr 29 - 10:50 PM

geluf

Brandon Tanner

"but still what a shame that one of the best television sagas EVER is getting a reboot treatment when nothing was wrong in the first place, imo, and doing the reboot without the likes of ronald d. moore, brannon braga, or rick berman"

..are you serious?

Rick Berman ran Trek into the ground, and Nemesis was the nail in the coffin. Wake up: Trek was absolutely dead before Abrams got a hold of it. I love Trek. Always have, always will. But times change and Trek has to keep up if it is to remain culturally relevant.

Apr 29 - 11:47 PM

niall1

Niall Cavanagh

k once again i will say, HOW DID RICK BERMAN NEARLY KILL STAR TREK?

tell me HOW and you wont be able to because the truth is, star trek enterprise was great, so was voyager, and everybody always pisses over nemesis and blames it on berman..WHY give me solid reasons please

and to fury uk, DS9 wasnt dark it was campy as HELL and the new enterprise isnt the same, it just looks like a design which was conceived because they wanted to get rid of all things 'trek' about the movie because this movie is for people who dont like star trek, so they decemated a great design for no reason..

Apr 30 - 10:12 AM

Sputnik99

sputnik 99

This is how Berman ruined Star Trek, niall 1:

It needs a reboot.

Apr 30 - 11:18 AM

Enigma

Craig Mottram

Berman, Braga and Moore always went with a safe approach to Trek, and ultimately in the end ran out of ideas. I think the darker elements in DS9 and the story arks were great though.

The new ship looks good, and its still the Enterprise. Can't believe some people are nitpicking over that. Hopefully the new film will be a bit more edgy and less sentimental.

As for singling Anton Yelchin out... Dont watch the film niall 1, you seem to disapprove about everything. Anyone want his seat?

Apr 30 - 04:17 AM

What's Hot On RT

Critics Consensus
Critics Consensus

Transcendence is a Sci-Fi Snooze

Total Recall
Total Recall

Johnny Depp's Best Movies

24 Frames
24 Frames

Picture gallery of movie bears

Good Friday
Good Friday

50 movie posters gallery

Find us on:                 
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile