🎦 Star Trek full movie english download, Star Trek full movie download mp4 in english, Star Trek full movie free download in english. 🎬
Star Trek
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 Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x480 px 2384 Mb mpeg4 2627 Kbps mp4 Download
DVD-rip 640x480 px 627 Mb mpeg4 690 Kbps mp4 Download
iPhone 480x200 px 665 Mb mpeg4 732 Kbps mp4 Download
Reviews
The Lucas Syndrome invades Star Trek
Star Trek is not about the past but rather about the future. This new movie is not the Star Trek that we know and have loved for more than 40 years, is in fact a poor excuse to gain market and to reboot (erase) the series completely. The end result: what will happen with all the Star Trek after TOS? Is already known that this movie connects the Star Trek Countdown comics in order to create an alternative reality since Nero and Spock travel through time but not to our Star Trek time-line, but another alternative reality (SPOILER). Nero's effect on that time-line by killing Kirk's father does affect the alternative reality in this new Star Trek. In addition Spock's interference changes completely the time-line for this parallel (in such way) universe. So, what we are seeing is not our Star Trek but rather a new version of it. Not the best solution since there was a lot of great ideas after Nemesis. This is by far the Lucas Syndrome, "if you are out of ideas, then create a prequel."

(SPOILER) Romulus, Remus and a large part of the Romulan Empire get destroyed in the very late 24th century (see Star Trek Online and Star Trek Countdown) and the result is Nero and Spock arriving at this universe. The time-line here is completely different from our Star Trek, so what we know is no longer canon, since this is like a goodbye to our beloved Star Trek. In its place, what we get? Huge explosions, short skirts, sex, and a movie lacking of morality. Star Trek is not about that, is about a message, is about going forward and explore strange new worlds.

I'm afraid that this movie will eventually erase what we know about Star Trek and the effort of all the productions, writers, casts and all the people related to previous Trek series. I hope fans will realize that shiny explosions and short skirts is not everything... BRING OUR STAR TREK BACK!!! BRING TNG, DS9 and VOY BACK!!!

"Resistance is Futile."
2009-05-03
Unoriginal and broke canon BADLY
I gave this movie a 5/10 because if you go into this movie having never been exposed to Star Trek before it is a fairly entertaining action flick. For the Trekkie, however, it was absolutely horrible. I suppose that I might fit in with the "hardcore trekkie" crowd who is very hard to please, but I've never been to a convention, I didn't care much for TOS or Enterprise. I can't quote every single episode. I was a pretty big fan of TNG and DS9 and I've seen all of the movies. Anyway ... the movie involves time travel. I figured by now anyone to ever touch Star Trek would have it figured out that time travel is the Trekkie's nemesis. If your plot requires time travel, the movie (or TV episode) will suck. That's pretty much a rule just like the even/odd movie rule (while Nemesis broke that rule, this movie puts it back on track). Eric Bana plays the villain, Nero, who was superfluous and totally unoriginal. He's a Romulan (btw - for no reason what-so-ever they decided to change the appearance of Romulans. They're now bald and have paint on their faces) that survived the destruction of Romulus when their star went nova, killing his wife along with most Rolumans. Spock was supposed to save the planet but failed. Nero blames Spock and decides to take vengeance by traveling back in time to destroy Vulcan and earth. The plot reminded me of the two-part Voyager episode "Year of Hell" starring Kurtwood Smith. I'm pretty sure that episode involved time travel, and the basic premise (wife gets killed, guy goes bad and starts destroying planets) is almost exactly the same! So the plot is lame and ripped off from other cheesy Star Trek plots from past episodes. But there's other extremely lame elements as well: o Spotty has a cheesy, annoying and unnecessary side-kick that reminds me of Jar Jar Binks (though he doesn't speak as much so it's not quite as bad). o Spock and Uhura have a love affair. o At the end of the movie they leave the "star trek universe" in such a manner that destroys all future Star Trek events. Basically TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise ... never happen. I suppose this might not matter if you accept the time travel premise and "alternate time-lines" etc. but that's basically an excuse to ignore canon and do whatever the hell you want. In other words if you go down that path you're deciding from the beginning that you're going to write a bad script. o There's a freakin' sword fighting scene!!!! Why don't they just pull out a phaser and shoot the bad guy!?!? o As someone else said, Kirk was unlikeable as a character. He was made out to be completely infallible and didn't care about anything. He was that "sexy rebel without a cause, that finds his cause" Hollywood clich
2009-05-10
Completely not Star Trek
The effects were excellent, but I'm not sure why they chose to call it "Star Trek" if they were intent on changing so much of what made Star Trek "Star Trek".

No more thought-provoking issues, no more "exploration" and much more "fighting".

I don't know why they cast Winona Ryder as Spock's mother. She looks like her character Abigail Williams from "The Crucible", what with her cloak and bad age-makeup. Apparently Abigail fled Salem and ended up on Vulcan...

The plot is doesn't make sense and relies too much on coincidences. Supernovas threatening galaxies, black holes that act as worm holes, it doesn't make scientific sense at all. And what's with Uhura making out with Spock, not once but twice, second time in full view of other crew members! The scene where Captain Kirk feels the need to blast Nero even though a black hole's engulfing his ship was so not like Star Trek's values. What happened to humanistic values? Nero was going to die, his ship had a black hole in it, they should have just let the black hole deal with him. I really didn't understand the business of offering help to an enemy near death, then when the enemy rejects it, fires at said defenseless enemy.

All in all, great effects, but the core of Star Trek is gone.
2009-05-12
It sucks
OK, so I have Nichelle Nichols' autograph, and a photo of me with James Doohan. I guess I was a Trekkie in my younger days -- but only for the original series, and I guess the films with the original crew, not the spin-offs. All the more reason I really wanted to like this film.

I don't even know where to begin. This film is a mess. It doesn't work for me as a popcorn movie, let alone as Star Trek. The plot is ridiculous and full of holes. (Black holes, get it?) Trekkies have always been able to forgive ridiculous plots (e.g. Star Trek movies three through six), as long as it meant we'd get to see Kirk and crew back in action. This so-called reboot is barely recognizable.

Rather than doing a sustained impression of William Shatner's Kirk, Chris Pine appears to have opted instead for a sustained impression of Christian Slater. Never mind how Pine plays Kirk, the character hardly resembles the original anyway. Instead of James T. Kirk, the master tactician who lived and breathed Starfleet, but wasn't afraid to buck the system, we get James T. Kirk, the reckless a-hole who has issues with authority.

Then there is Spock. Instead of cool, logical, level-headed but still part human Spock, we get vindictive, whiny Spock -- who is having a hot affair with Lt. Uhura, who herself appears to be a descendant of Beyonce.

All of the remaining characters -- including the villain -- are written and played fairly one-dimensionally. The only characters that seem to come close to the originals are Scotty -- who is in the film all too briefly -- and Chekhov.

Yeah, I know, this is now "alternate universe" Star Trek, because Nero and "Spock Prime" went back in time and changed the past, present and future. That shouldn't mean everything has to suck.

Woe to Leonard Nimoy, for not being able to resist a little more Spock money. The producers obviously lured him into this film to give it some Trek credibility (Trekibility), but it doesn't help. Shatner should be glad he wasn't asked.

Well, I know I am going against the grain here. This film has done huge box office, so JJ Abrams and crew will make more of them. Let me save you the trouble of waiting, or traveling to the future to see them: They will also suck.
2009-05-14
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 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
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
Cheesy buzzword sci-fi
The fun ride of visual effects in this movie is offset by the terribad plot devices used throughout. You would think they had an eight year old as their scientific adviser on the script. From a 'supernova that threatens to destroy the galaxy' to a little drop of 'red matter' that's a- OK sitting in a jar on a table but somehow able to create a singularity, it's full of terribad buzzword science worse than anything scene in STNNG.

The acting and direction was more along the lines of a slapstick comedy at times, than what you expect in a sci-fi movie. From kirk's hands swelling up, to the silly willy wonka like chase of scotty through the water pipes, comedy in places it didn't beling. A stark contrast to the first Star Trek movie.
2009-05-13
JJ Abrams' Space Wars
Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek is a tale of diplomacy and peace littered with ethical and moral dilemmas developed to make you think, to wonder about what future humanity is moving towards.

This was not Star Trek and it infuriates me that they would try to pass it off as such.

Why couldn't they simply make up new names for the characters or at least give the film a subtitle instead of allowing JJ Abrams to prove his arrogance and ignorance to the real themes behind the Star Trek name? Unnecessary is the most accurate word to describe this film, with its paper thin plot and cardboard cut-out characters. But I realize that is what makes a summer blockbuster these days: big explosions, juvenile humor, and the standard "bad guy must die" scenario.

Young Kirk listening to the Beastie Boys and talking on his Nokia phone??? Give me a break, give me The Undiscovered Country any day. At least that film had a message beyond trying to sell me merchandise.

And why did Sulu have a katana if he was an expert in fencing??? Wouldn't it make more sense for him to use a rapier since a katana would be useless with a fencing background? I heard George Takei - in the original series - refused to use a katana because he thought it was too racist and that was why they made Sulu a fencing expert in the first place.

Though I think the most annoying thing about the film - for me - was the cinematography. Even if I ignored how little this movie cared about the substance of the original series or any subsequent Star Trek series, it was still a terrible film. Constant close-ups and a shaky camera anytime the screen isn't completely CG does not substitute for cinematography, it's just lazy film making.

I don't understand why this film needed to be made. JJ Abrams is not a director, he is my childhood's rapist.

Oh and watch for Abrams' Cloverfield monster to make a nice appearance on the ice planet Hoth, I guess that's one creature I can check off my "Where are they now?" list.
2009-05-15
How did the writing for this get to the screen?
To start with, I should say that I am not a "Trekkie" - I am aware of the characters broadly and have even watched some episodes and previous movies, but am not an aficionado nor a big fan. I had seen the shorts for this movie and following a young Kirk looked excellent and it appeared to be a rollicking action film.

So, to start with the good:

* Casting was superb, as was the acting. I felt the actors embodied the feeling of the series and carried out their part in the script flawlessly. * Action scenes were well choreographed and were enjoyable. * Production quality, as you would expect, was high - the movie certainly looked very slick, and I particularly like the start with Iowan farm showing massive star-scrapers in the background. * First scenes were good, with Kirk entering the academy.

The bad:

* Suspension of disbelief is severely taxed - I can take "red matter" and other plot elements at face value, but had a real problem taking a lot of other things as such. * We are dealing with an alternate history, but the idea that 25 years of altered history has lead all of the main characters in Star Trek to exactly the same points beggars belief! * There are 430 crew on board the ship, however recent military graduates end up running the entire ship? There is one old guy in the crew and the rest all come from military college - and they didn't even graduate? * Crew was assigned to a new space ship with no time or effort being put towards shaking down the ship nor the crew? * The command bridge of the vessel seems to be a social lounge, where anyone - including civilians can saunter onto * A mining vehicle - even one from 129 years into the future - has sufficient technology that it can destroy an entire fleet of warships - even whilst tethered to a planet and unable to move * The protagonist (Nero) was barely even a one dimensional character - he was simply angry * A mining ship has a huge internal volume for some reason that is fully pressurised and heated * A spaceship that becomes a singularity suddenly has enough mass to drag in the Enterprise (this one is a physics geek quibble admittedly...)

The ugly:

* The writing was just lazy - kirk is ejected out onto an ice planet by Spock - and this is supposed to be in some way logical? ARRGGGHHH!!! * My guess is the writers were hamstrung - they were given a brief where they had to tailor the story in a two hour time-frame so that we could have the old crew in charge of the starship Enterprise to facilitate the corporate requirements of big business movie making - hence the reason why so many of the plot elements make no sense.

At the end of this movie, I was looking forward to the end - just to make it stop! I found it quite frustrating dealing with plot holes you could drive a Mac truck through!

No doubt, now that they have the crew together, the next story they will release can be more self consistent.

Perhaps you just need to be a Trekkie to enjoy this one?
2009-05-12
📹 Star Trek full movie english download, Star Trek full movie with english subtitles free download, Star Trek full movie download with english subtitles. 📀
×