Where are all the lens flares? :(

"...Rocks, they are scratching windows" lmao.

HOW CAN SPOCK CALL SOMEONE A DICKHEAD??!!?1 THATS CLEARLY AN EMOTIONAL BIAS. SNL RUINED STAR TREK. GET IT RIGHT SNL WRITERS!!!!

Spock didn't call anyone a dickhead. Leonard Nimoy did. They are not the same person. Get a life.

Whoa. The dude was just kidding. Get a sense of humor, man.

I think that whooshing sound was a joke going over YOUR head.

PLEASE TELL ME HOW TO UNDERSTAND JOKES!!!!!
I DONT KNOW!! AHHH. YOU ARE SO GOOD AT CATCHING IRONY, TELL ME HOW YOU DO IT!!!

teeheehee

I don't know which was funnier, you're original post or the caustic response from the FlyingPig...gotta love those trekkies.

I don't know which was funnier, your original post or the caustic response from the FlyingPig...gotta love those trekkies.

William Shatner is rolling over in his grave.

As he should be. He's also screaming "GET ME OUT OF HERE!!!" He's not dead.

To the two people above, THAT'S THE JOKE

Only if he was dead.

Because thats not Spock, thats Leonard Nimoy...he isnt pretending to be Spock so he can call them dickheads as much as he likes.

can i pretend to be spock and call peole dickheads? pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese

I was waiting for Shatner to come out and tell those people to get a life

the white vulcan ears are friggin hilllaaaaarious

the onion had a decent rip also
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_ba...

Hilarious! Props to Pine, Quinto, and Nimoy.

Leonard Nimoy's the best.

It's interesting that Ebert wasn't that thrilled with the movie. "The Gene Roddenberry years, when stories might play with questions of science, ideals or philosophy, have been replaced by stories reduced to loud and colorful action. Like so many franchises, it’s more concerned with repeating a successful formula than going boldly where no Star Trek has gone before." You don't have to be a hardcore Trekkie to notice that this movie just wasn't very good.

I completey agree. And it's sad that all the criticism of this movie has been reduced to "hey, people who didn't like it must have been obsessing over minor details; they're such losers".

This one did lack the philosophical side of the series that was present in the first motion picture and one of the more interesting aspects of Star Trek to me. I actually liked the V-GER dillema in that movie, although it played out dreadfully slow.

haha... ya they really blew the major themes presented in that movie... Numb asses, bad plotting, laborious dialogue, bad costume design... I REALLY wish they'd stuck to the foundations built by the features.

and if Ebert doesn't like it... well then clearly, that's proof positive that it's bad.

haha... the dickheads thing was classic.

Ebert doesn't like a lot of movies, considering the mood he's in the day he watches and reviews movies. He says so himself, and he's an educated person, but one person's opinion doesn't mean the whole thing is bad.

Well, with respect to Mr. Ebert, not every movie can be as intellectually and spiritually nourishing as Knowing.

*stifles a laugh*

You do have to be a hardcore loser, though, considering the film's all around positive reviews and buzz outside of, well, hardcore losers.

Ebert is so overrated, read his critic again, he didn;t even saw the movie or he forgot to take the pill before going into the theater, he said why didn't they beam to the drill plataform when they said at least 2 time that the plataform was blocking their systems, and then he says why didn't scotty do it when he was introduce in the movie 30 minutes later.

Retire him already.

I agree with Ebert, which is rare. This is more like a Pixar movie formula where they aim at 5-yr-olds but hope the parents bringing them enjoy it too. It's dopey where Trek wasn't dopey before. Nothing cooler about it than before.

He only destroyd spoks planet in revenge to him "destroying" his, Thats the only planet he takes out, He was going to kill young spoc so that the events to kill his planet were never set for young spocks future, even though, as they explain it was an alternate universe cuz he changed things, you really think that kirk believed he could take on 4 or 5 people without getting beat up, and do you really think that he diddnt expect an emotional or physical reaction from young spock when he provokes his emotions? i think your confusing his confidence of being beaten up with a arrogant prick who thinks that he wont. Nero was bloan to bits by enterprise just to refresh your memory.

Didn't Nero try to destroy earth too? Seemed like he was on a rampage. And the whole "making Spock watch" the planet blow up just felt like a contrived mechanism to branch into an alternate time-line.

Kirk drives a car over a cliff, challanges a group in a bar, cheats on his test all with a smirk on his face. Didn't find him likeable till the end, but maybe that was the point.

For everyone that says why didn't Nero just go back forward in time to prevent the destruction of Romulus, I have to wonder were they watching the movie? Nothing I recall seeing gave me the impression that Nero and Spock traveling back in time was anything but an accident of the initial singularity, hence the separation by 25 years of when Nero and Spock showed up at the same place, and hence the decision by Old Spock to decide to start a new Vulcan colony at the end. Spock realized he could not go back to his time line because he had no control over it.

But Nero was already back in time by accident so why not take advantage of it to prevent the destruction of Romulus from happening instead of blowing up more planets? Is he nuts? I guess so.

I think his plan was to blow up every single planet EXCEPT Romulus... and having the red matter would just stop the supernova itself.

My favorite part of this video is the part at the beginning where it says it's no longer available due to copyright violation. Hilarious!

My favorite as well sir.

I think that whooshing sound was a joke going over your head.

sinestro and hal jordan imo.

I agree, however, it was because TOS and Star Trek 2009 were in different generations. There was a lot TOS could commentate on in the 60s and 70s, but in 2009, when we have an African-American president, watching the old episodes lose their meaning.

Then again, this is more of a Batman Begins and Casino Royale film. I can't take all previous works of the franchise and squeeze it into 2 hours.

Fail, he's not dead.

Video is no longer available for copyright reasons.

http://videos.zach-quinto.com/play.php?vid=178

here for now.

Here's a new link: [youtube a1msywNj9JM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1msywNj9JM youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1msywNj9JM

Probably the greatest SNL moment in years. It took me by total surprise last night while watching -- pure gold.

Here's a link to the NBC website.
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clip...
I also suggest taking a look at the new digital short: Motherlover!

You can get the clip on Hulu now: http://www.hulu.com/watch/72444/saturday-night-li...

Wow, NBC really came down on Youtube fast. I caught this live last night and thought it was one of the better parts of a pretty solid SNL. It must be hard to step into the shoes of iconic roles and I think these guys are handling remarkably well. Sense of humor is key.

while i agree to the 'fuck you' to those who are spoiling it, it would probably be wise that if you havent yet seen the film that you stay away from any blog posts about it. People are bound to be talking about it in its entirety.

They removed from youtube but added it to HULU. link below
http://www.hulu.com/watch/72444/saturday-night-li...