📽️ Star Trek purchase, purchase Star Trek movie online , purchase Star Trek download , buy Star Trek movie, purchase Star Trek online, purchase Star Trek, Star Trek purchase movie 2009, where can i purchase Star Trek DVD 📀, Star Trek money can buy, Star Trek movie 2009 purchase 🎬.
Purchase Star Trek (2009) Movie Online and Download - J.J. Abrams 🎥
Year:
2009
Country:
USA, Germany
Genre:
Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
IMDB rating:
8.0
Director:
J.J. Abrams
Chris Pine as Captain James T. Kirk, retired
Zachary Quinto as Captain Spock
Leonard Nimoy as Captain Spock
Eric Bana as Nero
Bruce Greenwood as Capt. Christopher Pike
Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy
Zoe Saldana as Captain Nyota Uhura
Simon Pegg as Capt. Montgomery "Scotty" Scott
John Cho as Captain Hikaru Sulu
Anton Yelchin as Commander Pavel Chekov
Ben Cross as Ambassador Sarek
Winona Ryder as Amanda
Chris Hemsworth as George Kirk
Jennifer Morrison as Winona Kirk
Storyline: On the day of James Kirk's birth, his father dies on his ship in a last stand against a mysterious alien time-traveling vessel looking for Ambassador Spock, who, in this time, is also a child on Vulcan disdained by his neighbors for his half-human heritage. Twenty-five years later, Kirk has grown into a young troublemaker. Challenged by Captain Christopher Pike to realize his potential in Starfleet, he comes to annoy instructors like young Commander Spock. Suddenly, there is an emergency at Vulcan and the newly commissioned USS Enterprise is crewed with promising cadets like Nyota Uhura, Hikaru Sulu, Pavel Chekov and even Kirk himself, thanks to Leonard McCoy's medical trickery. Together, this crew will have an adventure in the final frontier where the old legend is altered forever as a new version of it begins.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 1534 Mb h264 1690 Kbps mp4 Purchase
HQ DVD-rip 720x480 px 2384 Mb mpeg4 2627 Kbps mp4 Purchase
DVD-rip 640x480 px 627 Mb mpeg4 690 Kbps mp4 Purchase
iPhone 480x200 px 665 Mb mpeg4 732 Kbps mp4 Purchase
Reviews
Trek fans avoid at all costs!
First of all let me start out by saying I am a Trek fan. I love the original series. Not the kind of fan that knows everything that happened to everybody in every episode on every stardate type of fan, but a fan nonetheless. The last few movies were dull and I never even bothered to watch The Enterprise TV series. When I heard a new movie was in the works I was very happy. Once I heard JJ Abrams was directing my heart sank (still can't forgive him for what he turned Lost into).

First of all the plot is so full of holes the whole starfleet could fly through. Why is it that a cadet crew (some not even cadets yet) are the only ones who can save a planet or two? The movie relies too much on visual effects and too little on plot. The effects got boring after awhile. The time travel thing has been done and done so many times it's obvious the writers can't come up with new ideas. Even if we are to accept this is some alternate universe/timeline, it still doesn't explain how Chekhov aged so closely to Kirk. In the original series he was only 22 and Kirk in his 30's. In the original series no one knew what Romulans looked like or that they were similar to Vulcans, yet it's common knowledge in the film. None of the movie makes sense. You have to have a lack of imagination to truly enjoy this film. Leonard Nimoy doesn't even seem like his old character.

I saw this with both trek and non trek fans and everyone agreed it dragged on too long, was boring & they couldn't wait for it to be over. Star Trek needs to take another long rest and any future movies must not involve JJ Abrams. This is not Star Trek reimagined, it is Star Trek rewritten.
2009-05-17
To boldly go , and destroy a 40 year franchise
On Friday May 22 2009 I went to the Detroit Science Center and saw the traveling Star Trek exhibit. I was never a fan as a kid but recently I have started watching Star Trek in chronological order according to the canon/time line of the franchise beginning with Enterprise. I have really enjoyed it. The exhibit at the Science Center was terrific, complete with mock ups of the bridge, actual costumes and props from each show, the works.

A few days later I went and saw the new Star Trek. I liked it to a point, and then Spock's mother dies when Vulcan is destroyed, the use of an alternate time line came into play and everything Gene Roddenberry, Shatner, Nimoy and the generations that came after them put on screen, was made null and void.

Kirk is a young rebel rouser from Iowa who in a matter of moments it seems is recruited into Star Fleet and through a 'just happened to be there at the right time' scenario, is put in charge of the Enterprise. Gone is a story about how a young officer worked his way up the ranks at Star Fleet to achieve his later success. Instead we see a bar room brawler who takes command of NCC - 1701 by means of a hurried and contrived plot.

JJ Abrams made no attempt to make the Enterprise look anything like it did in 1967, he has publicly stated he has never sen Star Trek and that is fairly obvious from this over done film. JJ Abrams gave us 'Lost' and with all of the shaky camera work in this film I expected Ben Linus and the smoke monster to appear at any time.

I know the film was made for the short attention spans of today's audiences but some respect for Star Trek fans would have helped. One reviewer stated that the bridge of the Enterprise looked like a perfume counter at the mall, I couldn't agree more. The characters gratuitously speak their famous catch phrases to remind us that we're still watching a Star Trek film. We see Uhura and Spock have romantic scenes together and we see Kirk hiding under a bed in Uhura's room at Starfleet and both are in their underwear. Was this really necessary? The special effects were good yet typically overdone as always in today's movies. The characters were too amped up and the story never took time for the quieter moments that made the original Star Trek great. All of the people involved in the original Star Trek, who have since passed on, are probably rolling in their graves.

The original Star Trek was only on the air for three years but has since become a legend. Sure it was campy and you saw the fake rocks and the zippers in the aliens costumes, but it deserves more respect than the treatment given by JJ Abrams.

At the Detroit Science Center they had a, wall length, display of the entire franchise in chronological order from Enterprise to the current fiasco. Much was on display of characters and plot points. At the very end of the display was this new movie. All it had written by it was 'The adventure continues.' After seeing this new film, I certainly hope not.
2009-05-29
Pubescent Trek
I've seen all the Star Trek movies, all episodes of the original series, and all episodes of The Next Generation. When I first heard about the premise for the new film, I had mixed feelings. On the one hand I thought it would be interesting to see how the original gang came together and some background of the original characters. But on the other hand I wondered why they were reverting to the past instead of moving forward with the saga.

The opening scene was visually stunning. And, visually, the film was a treat, comprising a heck of a lot of detail. But when the pubescent characters were gradually introduced running around recklessly with their teenage hormones, I began rolling my eyes. If the casting director had chosen good actors, things would have been much different. Simply put: the actor who played the young James Kirk can't act. Many of the actors were television stars. And bringing second-rate TV actors onto the big screen is never wise.

The other thing that I resented was the young Spock character. The actor did a fairly good job, but what was so admirable about the original Spock and arguably the draw of the original series was his lack of emotion. And using this against Kirk and especially Bones' emotional reactions was appealing. Any show works best when the characters are diverse rather than redundant. When you employ cultural imperialism by making Spock give in to the inferred superiority of Earth or human culture, you not only make things less interesting but give people a bad taste in their mouths. The film seemed to be saying, "Let's test Spock's logic by destroying inferior planet Vulcan and his mom and have him finally give into our superior human ways by showing lots of emotion." What adolescent stupidity! Finally, time travel has been done too much in Star Trek films. The story could have been just as good if the Enterprise had encountered a formidable ship from an alien race of the present. They did it obviously just so that they could have the older Spock in the movie. I thought it would have been better had they just opened with the old Spock as a narrator, reminiscing about old times and then saying, "I bet you are wondering how it all came together and how the original crew came together on our first mission." And then the movie goes into the story.

To sum it up, visually the movie was fun at times. But with annoying teenage recklessness, bad acting, Spock's outbursts, cultural imperialism, and tired time travel, this was a bad Star Trek movie.
2009-05-21
Star Trek? More like more contemporary Hollywood drivel eagerly lapped up by lowest common denominator
There are lots of points to make regarding this film. 1) The casting was superb, only Uhura's character was pretty shallow and was never really explored. 2) I'm a professional video editor and I've seen many great movies and I can honestly say that this movie has one of the most number of cuts in it I have ever seen. Consequently the directing never shines. The average duration of one shot must be like 3 seconds? If someone is sad enough to count the cuts then it could be worked out ;-)

The effect of this is audience separation, lack of engagement with the plot or characters, the 'masses' may have been impressed by flashing images but anyone with a bit of intelligence will have felt something lacking. I personally felt sick after seeing the film, it has accelerated modern pace to now 'epileptic' proportions. I guess its a reflection of society, because people can't sit still or focus for 3 seconds without realising how boring and insignificant their own lives really are. Take my advice, chill out a bit more.

3) I liked the colourfulness of the battle scenes and the angles used, definitely gave it new life there, but it didn't really manage to disguise the level of CG. The Star Trek movies 1-8 used models as the basis for effects, although this film did better than other contemporaries its still noticeable. I'd prefer a juicy fly-by of a cg enhanced model to a cartoon any day. You can't beat the destruction of the Enterprise in ST3 or the flyby of the spanking new Enterprise E in first contact. Mouthwatering and powerful, instead of thin and annoying.

4) I felt this 'Star Trek' film downgraded the content so that there was nothing profound or intelligent to take home with you, no message. A fundamental error of any film, and certainly of a Star Trek film or episode as this was the basis for all of the good ones. And yes I do think Nemesis and Insurrection were lacking in this too, however they did at least attempt to pay homage to intelligence. This film is more concerned with appealing to all the family like a George Lucas movie, than actually providing anything memorable.

5) The film features time-travel as the convenient plot device which I dislike, its just lazy. The older Trek did use time travel but in a minority, where as the later trend of star trek (a very bad one) in voyager and enterprise was non-stop time travel.

6) The film sets up a new premise for a new series for new fans, and I'm all for this. I want new people to like it. I just won't be a part of it, I'll keep watching the old stuff (there's plenty of it!). However I actually believe that this film is too shallow to have any enduring or lasting appeal, and the masses will not follow it with any loyalty at all.

7)Some child-like elements (little kid drives car fast without parents permission), Disney elements (kirk turns into a cg monster human WTF??) and product placement (Nokia) confirmed how moral-less and banal this film was.

8)The bad guy was mean, Eric Bana is cool, but he didn't have enough screen time to be truly believed.

9)I didn't feel anything for any of the characters, except Leonard Nimoy and thats just cos he was in the movie. I felt for him I really did.

10) There were too many distractions to what could have been a good solid movie.

11) It was good for kids, I think it would inspire my nephews.

12) Regarding the director, I personally think Lost is a big waste of yours and my time, engineered to hook you without ever telling you anything worth knowing. Much like this film. If we spent our time creatively, something might actually be achieved (the spirit of Star Trek).

Conclusion: It was a money-spinner that raped the Star Trek name for a bit of cash, in good old Hollywood style. it might leave a few new fans in its wake, but an even worse sequel is sure to nip that in the bud. The fact that the rating is so high for this movie is due to something I like to call 'The Retard Factor' (should be an episode?). The only way forward for people who actually like Star Trek (and not star wars) is for they themselves to make a film.
2009-06-05
Star Trek made into Star Dreck
I was a fairly dedicated fan of the 60's TV show (but not really the new series or the previous theatrical movies). However I was pretty disappointed in the envisioning of the new generation's star trek directed by JJ Abrams. The whole movie seems to be no better than a SCI-FI channel movie with bigger special effects.

There are too many plot holes to go into. The movie barely held together, nothing really worked well story-wise. The guy who played the young Spock was okay, but that was really the only noteworthy performance in the whole damn thing. Everybody else sucks. There were a couple of slightly decent action scenes, but the fight at the end was surprisingly lame and badly done. It was shockingly bad.

There's a cameo by Leonard Nimoy, but absent is the original TV series star, amazing William Shatner. He's nowhere to be found here, to his credit.
2009-06-06
Star Trek: Rebooted!
Last night I was lucky enough to be one of the few to attend the world premiere of J.J. Abram's "Star Trek" at the Sydney Opera House. This red carpet event was every bit as surreal and magical as the film itself.

The film in many ways matched the venue – unreal. You have doubtless heard or seen other reviews (as I have) and they probably say the same thing: this is (in every sense of the phrase) a second take on the Star Trek universe, from the beginning.

From the opening sequence, JJ Abrams asserts his authority in a plot twist which will shake the very fabric of the Star Trek universe. In a sudden (plot) twist, the very nature of the film becomes clear: this is a new Star Trek.

However, the opening sequence delivers more than just this "statement" - it also gives us a taste of what is to come: action, drama, solid performances and an outstanding introduction to a new era.

Little by little we are introduced to the main characters, starting with Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Uhura as we briefly navigate their early lives including events at Starfleet Academy before hitting a plot crescendo which brings all the cast together – and to the starship Enterprise, NCC 1701!

This is a movie strong on character development, and each of the actors deliver brilliant performances – nothing less would be appropriate given the shoes each has to fill.

The movie moves along at an agreeable pace, never slow enough to be tedious, nor too frenetic so as to be judged another "run 'n' gun" style sci-fi action flick.

This is a movie with cutting edge special effects, but they serve more to frame the storyline and characters rather than to be the show entirely.

Star Trek has always been tied to models and great visuals, so this is something which we've come to expect from this groundbreaking franchise.

Since I do not intend to introduce spoilers in this review, I can only really say that the crew of the USS Enterprise is brought full circle to face the film's dark enemy, a Romulan by the name of Nero who is portrayed by Australia's own Eric Bana (who is not given nearly enough screen time in my humble opinion).

By now you've probably heard that the movie also features Leonard Nimoy – reprising his role as Mr (please, not Doctor) Spock. This is indeed true, however you may be surprised to learn that this is no token cameo role.

Leonard Nimoy's Spock plays a pivotal role in the film, and in a way bridges the franchise from the original series to the new film version. He also has delivery of my most favorite line in the film..

Each actor holds their own with the roles we know so well. It would be unfair to single out any specific actor.. but I have to say that Simon Pegg and Zachary Quinto are simply outstanding amongst a group of very talented actors in a movie which is (perhaps a little surprisingly) carried by strong character development.

In summary, this film is likely to appeal to a wide audience including die hard Trekkies and those new to the Star Trek universe. This is a must see film, even if you can't tell the difference between a Tribble and a Tholian!
2009-04-08
Read Me Trekkies
I have never been so disappointed by a movie than i was by this bubble gum attempt at a prequel. I could have made a better movie on my camera phone. Whoever picked JJ Abrams to direct should be shot. In some interviews, he admits that he's not a star trek fan. Boy, oh boy, does it show. He's 'lost' when it comes to directing; he didn't get any good performances from his actors; It looks like all shots were done on the first take; he rushed through production; and a lot of short sequences in the movie went nowhere and should have been cut. I'm sure he was the one who brought the idiots Kurtzman and Orci to write this poor excuse of a star trek film. Their plot line had so many holes, it was like swiss cheese. I mean they took a massive icon that is star trek and were given the task of making a prequel, and this is the best they could come up with???

Young Kirk drives a corvette off a cliff?? Uhura kiss Spock?? Scotty stuck in a water pipe?? What the heck is 'red matter'?? Launch Kirk off the Enterprise in a pod?? Kirk loses every fight?? Scotty has a sidekick?? etc.etc.etc.

I am a Trekkie,(but not one of those weirdos) and hopefully I can speak for some of us out there who found this movie to have no 'soul'. You could have made a movie that was true to all the elements of the original and still do a 'reboot'. Have you guys seen "Batman Begins" 2005? That is how its done you jerks. This was just a cookie cutter sci-fi cgi movie with the title and character names from the original. I feel like you took everything in me that is Star Trek and spit on it.

I want my ten dollars back.
2009-05-09
Is this a Joke??
A true disappointment

I had large reservations about this movie that only became larger as the previews gave more details. I am in no way a Trekkie and I have found my share of flaws in the Star Trek movies and TV shows, but even I couldn't stand the errors in this movie.

To me it was like a cross between Galaxy Quest and Starship Troopers.

And what star was going supernova and endangering the whole galaxy? It would have to have been enormous millions of times larger than any star we can see to directly threaten any worlds outside its own system let alone the whole galaxy. You don't need a degree in stellar physics to know that. We have seen the effects of several stars that have gone supernova in our galaxy and in nearby galaxies and none have been anywhere near that big.

None of the actors had the character they were playing right and Chris Pine seemed to think the role of Kirk was nothing but a joke, Kirk was cavalier but just plain stupid was not part of the character, he wouldn't get a job as dish washer let alone ship's captain. Scotty was nothing like in the TV shows or movies; He had little or no technical abilities and was just the joke of the scenes he was in.

The only character I think they had right was Dr. Leonard 'Bones' McCoy; Karl Urban had it perfect right down to the insults and paranoia.

This was more like a Star Trek parody than anything else. Did Abrams ever watch any of the Star Trek shows or movies, I haven't been this disappointed by a Star Trek movie since Star Trek the Motion Picture.
2009-05-09
There she BLOWSSSsssss
Not that anybody will read this..

I haven't been to a theater since the last "Ring" movie. That said the house was about 20% full. Some twit sitting behind me was cracking wise and chewing popcorn. I got up and moved away. Yea.. then he shuts TFU.

I'm not a rabid Trek fan. But I do admit that I know more than most people do about the ST franchise. One of my "Online" friends actually designed one of the ST Ships. So far he is not a big fan.

There is a huge publicity machine behind this film. Lots of "Gold Pressed" is riding on the success of this film. That is why EVERYBODY LOVES IT! ..sigh.. The only comfort I can take is this wasn't a Voyager movie.

Right off the bat the makers of THIS Star Trek have no chops. What exactly has JJ Abrams done? Gene Roddenberry went to war. He was an airline pilot and survived a crash. He had the sack to hold it together until rescue. Gene was also a police officer.

JJ Abrams only claim to fame is a friendship with Tom Cruise. Please.

The heart and soul of ST is gone. The "System" has co-opted OUR future. That includes our hopes and dreams.

They did that by wiping out the future. Now free from common sense and a wink and a nod to the makers.. are free to shape and form as they please.

Remember YOU are the product.

GENE (the other one)
2009-05-21
Wobbly camera strikes again
After the recently terrible James Bond film, and the equally terrible ending to the Bourne trilogy, it appears that the "wobbly camera" disease has spread to another franchise with similar results. There appears to be a direct correlation between the rate of camera wobble and the "pace" of the action scene being shot. We all know that this camera wobble is artificial and often done during editing and special effect overlay, but the outcome is the same and it is unwatchable. It appears to me to be a "technique" used today in many films to prevent the audience clearly seeing the shot, the special effects and the action occurring. Possibly because the audience would see mismatches between the special effects, the action being overlaid and the poor quality stunt work. I gave this film a rating of one out of ten principally because the wobbly camera technique is something we now see in many films, particularly films with large amounts of special effects and it is cheating the audience out of the opportunity to see if the shot actually flows and to observe how the special effects are melded to the shot and the action. Do we really want to come away from every film thinking we have been in a small boat in a rough swell? I certainly don't and I now add JJ Abrams to the list of Marc Forster who created the worst Bond film of all time with "jiggle camera" and Paul Greengrass who destroyed the Bourne Trilogy with "shaky camera". Hang your head in shame, this trio had the opportunity to make great films, each carrying their franchise forward and each in turn has been unable to achieve an outcome without the use of "shaky camera", which is an automatic turnoff for the audience.
2009-05-11
📹 Purchase Star Trek movie online, Star Trek HD 720p download, Star Trek the movie, Star Trek download, characters in Star Trek, Star Trek budget, Star Trek movie download, Star Trek Bluray purchase online, Star Trek HD full movie online, Star Trek HD online, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Ben Cross, Winona Ryder, Chris Hemsworth, Jennifer Morrison, Rachel Nichols Star Trek, Star Trek 1080p, Star Trek 720p, Star Trek direct link download, Star Trek purchase download, Star Trek full movie, Star Trek full movie download, Star Trek full movie free download, Star Trek purchase movie 2009, Star Trek full movie online, Star Trek 2009, Star Trek Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi online, Star Trek purchase DVD 📀, Star Trek USA, Germany, purchase Star Trek, Star Trek download 720p, Star Trek dual audio, Star Trek HD J.J. Abrams, Star Trek good movie to purchase, purchase movies and download, Star Trek movie 2009 purchase, Star Trek movie available for purchase, purchase Star Trek movie, Star Trek real life, Star Trek Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Ben Cross, Winona Ryder, Chris Hemsworth, Jennifer Morrison, Rachel Nichols 📼, Star Trek actors names, Star Trek HD digital copies of movie, Star Trek movies unlimited 🎞️.
×