Star Trek (4k Ultra HD + Blu-Ray + Digital HD)

Every time I watch this movie I am reminded how much I enjoy it. Let me say from the start that I grew up on the original series (TOS), and I am a die-hard "Star Trek" fan. However, since TOS is truly unique and unrepeatable, I don't judge the movie by those standards, as I think to do so is a losing proposition. Why not let this movie stand or fall on its own merits? Why not appreciate it for what it is rather than what some people imagine it should have been? For people familiar with TOS, there are definitely moments that are genuinely Star Trek, such as the interactions between Kirk/Spock and Kirk/McCoy. It was funny, for instance, to hear what they suggested as the origins of McCoy's nickname, Bones. McCoy also has some classic moments when, like his TOS counterpart, his emotions get the better of him. And then there is the scene where Chekov attempts to speak his password to the computer, only to be initially rejected because of his thick Russian accent ("Wictor, Wictor" instead of "Victor, Victor"). These are the kinds of moments that made TOS truly memorable, and it was wonderful to see them in the movie. I think Zachary Quinto does exceedingly well as the young Spock. I found young Kirk's character to be a little more reckless than I think is necessary, but Chris Pine did a fine job portraying him. We learned the first names of several major characters. There is plenty of action, excellent special effects, and a good story line. And, just like TOS, there are some very funny one-liners. I actually would give the movie four and a half stars if I could. Despite the high entertainment value of this movie, there were a few things that proved to be just plain silliness for me. Overall they did not ruin the movie, but they were certainly momentary distractions and warranted a minor deduction in my rating: 1. The whole Spock/Uhura romance is utterly foreign to TOS, so I don't know why it was introduced in this movie. It just seemed pointless to me. 2. The idea of the "red matter" was also problematic. TOS was consistent in making the science of its day very believable. Even though the show was science fiction, many of the concepts contained therein were based on real science. How is it, then, that while one drop of the red matter can create a small black hole, it can be touched with a syringe and stored in a container? 3. Arguably the most absurd aspect of the technology in the movie was the decision to use a brewery for the engineering shots. My goodness, it's the 23rd century. Take a look at the Enterprise's bridge. It's brimming with ultra hi-tech equipment, yet the engineering section of the ship consists of lots of pipes, valves, barrels, and very 20th-century looking panels and boxes. Bad, bad choice. Despite these minor distractions, I would definitely recommend this movie. It is highly entertaining, fast-paced, action-filled, and engaging.

The minor disappointments I had with some little items are buried by the amount of great things that is the Star Trek Blu. The packaging is the single hinged chassis with cardboard slip cover, but the info sheet (typical rear cover art) is a hot-glued paper that cannot fit anywhere once it comes off. The resulting Blu art front is a head shot of Pine and the back is Quinto. The picture is as good as would be expected, with plenty of great space effects, the heavy lens glare that Abrams likes does not bleed too bad but ILM does not disappoint. They went with TrueHD which gives an adequate immersion, some of the best tests were with Spocks ship and that unique sound (but 7.1 DTS would have been nice). Plenty of reference points throughout, but even with that clarity I still couldn't get a read on some of the little things (tried freezing the fence signs in the Corvette scene, freezing some of the panel displays to read what the actors were looking at, etc.). But what takes the time and is worth every moment for the supplement geeks like me is the entire disc 2. Disc 1: Menus are unfortunately only minimal still animation (no live action or HD pics). Commentary by the makers. Disc 2: Blue screen animated left sided selections. Most items pop up with an "extended" option that has an icon appear when watching each documentary to facilitate viewing little snippets of additional material, or each one can be watched individually - no play all on anything with this disc. * 16:41 To Boldly Go. Several extensions including the Kirk dilemma (1:58), more Green Girl stuff (3:25). The main piece covers aspects of creation, whys and what fors. All of these supplements are HD interviews of the filmmakers spliced with low def footage (past and present Treks). * 28:53 Casting. Once again all HD present footage mixed with grainy low def shots of behind the scenes - gives some good material on why we saw who we did. * 24:33 Starships. Concepts, art design and some of my favorite stuff on the making of regarding construction. Seven extensions are selectable here including Warp Drive and Paint stuff. * 16:30 Aliens. Shows the meetings and thought process behind some of the critters and humanoids. Five extensions here. * 16:10 Planets. Some nice history for Trek regarding the Vasquez Rocks, which showed an obvious deleted sequence - made me look forward to those even more. * 9:22 Props and Costumes. One extension here about Klingons - which led to another whole deleted sequence I was now REALLY wanting to watch them. * 9:45 Sounds. I enjoyed this one the most as the sounds intrigued me when I first saw this in theaters. Nice homage/respect paid to the old series connections. * 8:47 Gene Roddenberry vision. A nice history with at least half of it being Nimoy narrating/being interviewed (there was a blatant absence of someone here but you will notice that through this entire set). * 13:30 Deleted Scenes - FINALLY. Play all option with commentary on/off of Abrams, Kurtzman. - Spock's birth. Throughout all of these you notice Winona's entire screen time was removed. Nice little plug on how he gets his name. - Klingon battle with the Narada, effects unfinished - which leads into an entire storyline removal - did not agree with the reasons for the removal but oh well. - Dysfunctional home life of the early Kirk sequence. Explains who that kid was on the road and who the voice was on the car phone. - Spock's parents arguing about which side Spock should embrace. - Klingon Prison Planet sequence - wow. I want this in the director's cut. Would have explained a great deal of how Nero and the Narada disappeared. - Vulcan sequence prior to destruction (Vasquez Rocks). - Kirk and Green Girl - can never have too much of that. Once you see this you can find out what Uhura and Kirk were really talking about in the theatrical cut (Klingon Prison - not battle). - Scene involving more Green Girl and Kirk defeating the Maru test - good scene. - Kirk apologizing to Green Girl - had to go once the others were cut. * Simulator: Mix of animated and slight HD footage of interactive material on the Enterprise and the Narada. The vast majority of material centers on the Narada (weapons, propulsion etc.). * 6:22 Gag Reel. A brief retro title sequence followed by a hilarious slew of swearing by even the best (priceless watching Nimoy cuss his lines). Fast paced and fun. * 3 trailers. Everything subtitled in French, Spanish, & Port. Disc 3. Digital copy and game demo. Did not use either. Overall, I had a great time going through all of this and I honestly think even the discerning Trekkie will be happy with this product. Yes, I feel the deleted scenes should have been left in as they explained some obvious gaps in the film, but at least we got to see them. The HD screenings have been very popular and I don't tire of watching this through and through. Enjoy.

How do you revive a classic Sci Fi TV series with a devoted, loyal cult following that will crush you if you screw it up? Clearly you hire JJ Abrams to produce and direct. I consider myself somewhat of a Trekie. I've seen every episode of the original TV series...at least 3 times. I've seen each of the major motion pictures...at least twice. I've seen all of the spin off TV series and their respective motion picture spinoffs at minimum once. So, yeah, I'd say I'm a fan. And there are fans that DO NOT want their stuff messed with no matter what. After seeing Abrams' Star Trek, I can't believe that any loyal fan...even the preservationists...could be unhappy. But there are those that will just be impossible to please, evidenced by the fair amount of strong criticism in the review section of this page alone. I, on the other hand, am firmly in the camp of this-was-a-great-movie! Abrams and his cast pay homage to everything that made the original TV series a classic. The movie takes you back through time to some short segments about Kirk's and Spock's childhood, then quickly moves to and progresses from when the two board the Enterprise for their first times. And they are of course joined by the other primary characters from the original TV series. All of the characters attempt to channel a bit of the persona and dispositions of the original actors, and they do a terrific job combining the natures of the original characters with some modern day personality polish. Abrams version of Star Trek might rewrite some of what was solidly in place with years of Star Trek history, and that might indeed be what has a Tribble in the bonnet of some of the preservationists. But Abrams' version has mostly succeeded in revitalizing a series that was inevitable to be remade by someone. So to the preservationists I say, be very very happy that you got such a great movie that is such a tribute to Gene Roddenberry's vision. Star Trek 2009 has a lot action, a great cast, a fine story...I was thoroughly entertained from start to finish. My only problem with this movie is that it was too short. That's right...I said too SHORT. I'm usually complaining about how unnecessarily long Hollywood makes its movies these days. But if you watch the deleted scenes that are included on Disk 2 of the Blu Ray package, you actually learn stuff that would have enhanced the theatrical version of the movie had it not been cut out. One thing that won't be short is the life of the new franchise that Abrams has created. These are the MAIDEN voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Where no man has gone before. Jump on board this initial voyage of what I'm guessing will be many before Abrams is done.

The 4% who hate this, are emotionally compromised by their own idiocracy. While this is by no means the best thing in the world, with no flaws and perfect everything, it is still a good movie. Opinions aside, the facts remain, this is an okay movie, meant to stimulate the mind, and evoke the emotions. The actors they chose to reprise the roles in this alternate timeline, were no less than almost perfect choices. The more perfect choices were Scotty, Spock, and probably Uhura. The less perfect choices were the rest of the main crew, but still well picked. They fit well enough with the original roles, to make it funny, but stood enough apart to make one realize that this was an entirely different era. As they said in the movie, it's an alternate reality. Whatever might have happened, has now not, because of the events surrounding Nero (or Oren, with a little ^ above the e, in Romulan). So although they share characteristics with their predecessors, events have helped shape them into their own individuals. As Pike pointed out in the beginning, he believed Kirk acted out because he grew up without a father. His stepfather was apparently mean to him and his brother George (there's more details in the book and extended lore than the movie can show in this limited time), so he felt this need to "rebel", and it would account for this Kirk to be a little more brash and "boyish" than the original series Kirk. Which, of course, we see as much older, in the role of Shatner, versus the younger Pine. Spock, who did not lose Vulcan in the original series, and Bones who did not meet with Kirk aboard the shuttle to Starfleet Academy, are, of course, both different as well. The directing was less than perfect. It's only when you're in the pitch dark on a tiny screen with maximum brightness, that you notice the terrible use of lens flaring. Or if you pa attention to those sorts of things, and let it distract you from the storyline. I usually ignore that part. Abrams, while not a bad director, did make a few bad calls, in the over use of basically everything. Less is more. Aside from the light show, the scenery is actually quite pretty. Not exactly what space would probably really look like, but there are also a lot of places that kind of do look like they're from a science fiction movie. Lots of pretty nebulas. As far as storyline goes, while they did force a lot of things, and skipped over others, it's not bad. It's not quite the same "secret but not secret" storyline that the Trek shows did (like referencing ecology, eugenics, feminism, nazis, racism, gays, and all in space!), but it did help to establish a sort of "backstory" for this brand new alternate timeline, and pave the way for future movies. It gave you something that you could reference later on, in order to understand how this timeline works. While not the best in the world, compared to a lot of other trek stories, this isn't one of the worse ones. Definitely one of the better ones, in fact. Compared to, at least, some of the really terrible ones. And I mean terrible. If it was a bad idea, probably written by Roddenberry. The best scripts were usually Fontana's. So, with that all said and done, and in conclusion, if you don't mind science fiction, you've never really gotten into Star Trek, or you're just bored and have nothing else to watch, give this a try. Why you wouldn't have seen it yet, at this point in time (seriously it's been almost 10 years), I don't know, but watch it. You won't regret it. Unless you're one of those 4% who are idiots who either try to hard, expect way too much, are idiotic, or just don't like science fiction in general and really shouldn't be watching this and reviewing it, then. Enjoy. And live long and prosper.

I agree this "Star Trek" is very entertaining eye candy that relies to much on CGI effects. However, it was fun and entertaining. I agree with Matthew T. Weflen "Matthew Weflen" (Chicago, IL) and all his technology praise. (I'm a Trekkie and not a Teckkie and could never have done the great job he did describing its great technological advances.) They are right on. I agree with L P "lilip" (Los Angeles)'s " . . . Star Trek: The Original Series, The Next Generation, Deep Space 9, and Voyager are all rendered invalid, because a couple of writers . . ." This movie has no relation with the Star Trek universe at all but to rip off the name for ticket and DVD sells. But I do have and easy fix for future sequels to this movie to bring it in line. First, J.J. Abrams' needs to sit down and watch all 600+ episodes of the 4 series and all the previous movies to wake-up to the critical importance of Vulcan and that you can't wipe it out of existence and still have a Star Trek storyline. Second, fire his two writers and never use them again. How do you undo the damage Mr. Abrams has done? Easy, Hollywood's done it before! Do a "DALLAS". In the opening scene of the next movie have Kirk come to on the floor of the bar and say, "WOW, what I dream I just had." And try again. This movie is like two earlier ones Hollywood put out I can mention as examples: James Cameron's "Titanic" and Michael Bay's "Pearl Harbor". These two movies had nothing to do with either the Titanic or Pearl Harbor. They were just backdrops to love stories. As, I have told other's, "You want to see a great movie about the Titanic, watch "A Night to Remember", want to see a great movie about Pearl Harbor, watch "Tora, Tora, Tora"." But those two by Cameron and Bay are just great love story movies with famous backdrops, and with little accuracy to those backdrops. The same holds true with this movie. If you're a "Trekkie" like me, enjoy the film for the eye candy it is. Just remember, it is just a good bang-bang shoot'em up using the Star Trek universe as a backdrop. Watch the earlier Star Trek movies and series for true Star Trek. Want Hollywood to correct itself. Boycott any future ones by Abrams. Hitting Hollywood in the pocketbook ALWAYS gets their attention! So, enjoy the movie, it has great special effects, great new actors, and great picture quality. But Star Trek, it isn't.

I bought quite a few of this product from this seller and have not been disappointed at all. Everything stated on the features were true and I am so happy I found this seller. TY

While strict believers in Star Trek canon may have some trouble with the idea of an alternate-storyline Trekiverse adventure, this movie has likely saved the franchise from exiting stage left at the last Starfleet outpost. My father and I are old-time Star Trek fans and we were there on opening-night when this movie came out. At the time we had trouble with certain things. Not the growing romance between Spock and Uhura so much- that was a nice touch actually. What bothered us more than anything was the destruction of Vulcan and the alternate- read bogus- series of events that took place after. Some things are just best left alone we thought. Fast forward to now. I had put off buying this movie for a long time, opting to pout about the changes that I did not exactly like. Finally, at the insistence of my wife I went ahead and bought it on sale here at Amazon for $9.99. It was cheap so why not? So we put it in and watched. I had an epiphany to say the least. I love the classics and some of the Star Trek episodes and movies of the past are just that to me- classics. So I was surprised when re-watching Star Trek 2009 that the changes no longer bothered me. In fact, the gusto which the new cast brought to their roles and the energy that seemed to spring from the new interpretation was very moving. I couldn't take my eyes off it this time around. It is a good movie let me tell you. I do not know what gave way. Maybe it was the changes that have occurred in my life since 2009 that changed my tune. I did get married and move out of state for the first time ever. Or maybe it was the effects of the economic downfall. Whatever it was, I realized that Star Trek in its old incarnation had reached the end of the line and run out of gas. The reboot gave it what it needed to survive- a new purpose and actors who are fresh on the scene to whom the Trekiverse is exciting rather than just a day on the job. As Zen Buddhist philosophy dictates- without change we die. Maybe this was for the best. I will not give away more plot details for those who have not watched the movie already but I will heartily recommend it. It is fun for anyone who likes action-adventures and space westerns for sure. It is even fun for an old Trekkie like me because while different, it feels fresh. Changes are not too radical a departure from the nuts and bolts of old Star Trek lore so sitting down and picking it up is easy. For being available at such a low price in HD, my recommendation is if you have been putting off watching this movie, boldly go where you have not gone before and click ADD TO CART. You will not regret it.

9/8/66. It's a badge that Original Trekkers wear proudly -- the date that the very first Star Trek episode ("The Man Eater") appeared on television. I bear it, and Star Trek hooked me that very Thursday evening, and for the next three years, I sat through all 69 episodes, both the best ("Oh Boy! The Trouble with Tribbles") and the worse ("Oh, no! Not that one!"). When they began to appear in syndication, I watched them over and over until I could repeat the lines with the characters. And, no, I'm not going to tell you who my favorite character was. It's been 43 years since that first episode. I'm still hooked. A lot of my compatriots have said that J.J. Adams' "reboot" of the Star Trek franchise went too far -- they weren't ready for some of the things that happened (and, for the sake of those readers who have not seen the movie, I'm not going to reveal what those things are). They didn't like the changes in the mythos that occurred. OK, fine. Different strokes ... I, however, love this film, and would have gone to see it over and over again if it hadn't been that my darling didn't really want to (and our budget didn't allow it). So what if things changed? It's an alternate universe -- and any Trekker worth her salt will recognize those occur -- Remember "Mirror, Mirror?" A planet blows up, and I admit, given the planet, I'm pretty sad (no, it's not Earth). I'm also sad that Scottie used Admiral Archer's favorite beagle for an experiment, and it hasn't been seen since (Okay, so one slipped out). However, the most powerful ideas and characters remain true to their alternate others: Kirk is strong, handsome, creative in a crisis (and may be a womanizer, although he doesn't get the woman he wants here), even if he's not William Shatner. Spock struggles to keep his emotions in check and his logic foremost (tremendously well-played by Zachary Quinto). "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban, unexpectedly unlike many of his fantasy and SF rolls)is humane, funny, and passionate -- and a lot better looking than the well-beloved, late DeForest Kelley. Bruce Greenwood ("The Core"), Simon Pegg, Ben Cross (superb as Sarak) and Winona Ryder (Amanda! And I am getting to be too old) are all wonderful, and add strength, passion and substance to both their characters and the film. It was, however, sad to see Leonard Nimoy, as "our" Mr./Abassador Spock, late in his life, and know we probably never see him in another Star Trek film. So. Buy it? Damn straight. Get it for your children and yourselves. Star Trek would have never died for me, anyway, because I've dreamed of walking on another planet ever since I saw that first episode. But now, Star Trek will come alive for a fourth generation to learn those same dreams.