www.ditl.org

Blackstar the Chakat wrote:The scene of the E-nil on earth in the trailors may actually be real scenes. The director's reasoning is that if the E-nil is strong enough to travel at warp, it's strong enough to have been built on earth. There were also other reasons, having something to do with actual gravity being an advantage, since all the systems inside would operate at 1G anyway

I'll go with the usual MO for teasers until I see something different, like the actual trailer.

Edit: Remember that Abrams is well known for his "misdirection:.

Blackstar the Chakat wrote:The scene of the E-nil on earth in the trailors may actually be real scenes. The director's reasoning is that if the E-nil is strong enough to travel at warp, it's strong enough to have been built on earth. There were also other reasons, having something to do with actual gravity being an advantage, since all the systems inside would operate at 1G anyway

For some reason (no basis for it) I always assumed that ships modules were built on Earth, then brought up to orbit for the final assembely. That would explain one of the reasons why they built an enclosed space dock at least.

Building the full thing on Earth and then lifting it off to space is highly innefecient. It'd be far smarter to just build it in space from the start.

Well duh. But come on, were talking about the Federation here, why would it make sense?

Touché.

I just thought they wanted a cool looking trailer.

SO stick a whole lot of explosives in a big steel room and then make it explode
that would be a cool trailer
completely pointless but cool nonetheless

Where I do (as everyone and their mothers know) like lots of war, shooting, ships dying and massive armies clashing. I still liked the trailer. I think it sets a good meaning for the movie.

Yeah so did I
It was interesting
made you wonder a little on how they were going to structure the movie
I hope the movie meets expectations

Nickswitz wrote: I hope the movie meets expectations

I wish. The trouble is, no two people want the same movie. I even argue with myself over what I want the movie to be like. It's interesting to see what people get hung up on. For instance, I have some friends who really hated The Lord Of The Rings because they had always imagined elves to be tiny creatures. Lucky for me, I don't have a great imagination when it comes to books, so even though I'd read The Fellowship of the Ring, I didn't have any weighty preconceived notions about the movie. I just wish it was the same with Star Trek, but it seems to be the opposite.

In terms of emotional content, I want the movie to have a moment like this. (I mean the part where they show off the Enterprise, not the dialogue.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSvV2QTAcHY

Rochey wrote:Building the full thing on Earth and then lifting it off to space is highly innefecient. It'd be far smarter to just build it in space from the start.

In space, you'd have to use gravity generators anyway, and depending on the length of time of construction it might actually be more efficient in the long run. And it would probably be easier to work in a 1g enviroment as opposed to a weightless enviroment. You also won't need spacesuits and space-rated equipment to work on it.

I only really know what I don't want the movie to be - I don't want to see complete trampling of continuity or established characters, but I don't mind a little "re-envisioning," especially if it breathes a little life into the franchise.

I get the feeling that it will be more than a little re-envisioning. Hollywood likes to 'go big' with their ideas... So if the idea is to do a "re-imagining," it probably won't be limited to a few small differences.

I have no problem with that, as long as canon isn't displaced over silly technological minutiae, and as long as the characters at least demonstrate the seeds of the characters we know.