Buy Star Trek movie online, buy Star Trek 2009 online, buy Star Trek movie download, Star Trek movie buy online, where can i buy the movie Star Trek, where can i buy Star Trek movie, where can you buy Star Trek the movie, where to buy Star Trek movie?
Buy Star Trek 2009 Online (mkv, avi, flv, mp4) DVDRip
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
Gene Roddenberry is cringing somewhere
This movie takes a venerable series with well developed characters and ideals and completely destroys them. This is the first Star Trek that I can remember that had juvenile and gratuitous sex scenes, sleazy attitudes,and the innumerable perils of Pauline type nonsense. I am not a Trekkiebut do appreciate the genius of Roddenberry. This movie had none of it. I was cringing when they had Crew members making out while about to beam to a dangerous mission. Did an 8th grader write this? In an endless and shameless attempt to put in familiar bits for nostalgia appeal, even ear bugs made a reappearance. This is not a spoiler as it had nothing to do with anything, just like the 66 corvette, and showing graphic details of a childbirth. If I want to see that I'll go to a maternity ward or to Youtube. This flick is not worth watching even if it is playing inside your eyelids. Not even worth downloading from Pirates Bay. I doubt that the writer or producer has any familiarity with the series to do what was done here. They could have watched a few episodes prior to penning this pathetic prequel. OK, I will say something positive. The Special effects are excellent, but sorry, that alone just doesn't cut it anymore. Star Trek reduced to Hollywood formula poop.
2009-05-17
Star Trek RIP
So Captain Kirk is now basically nothing more than a juvenile delinquent who got lucky? So Spock and Uhura are getting it on all over the Enterprise, even though she was apparently a student of his at the academy? Is Checkov now nothing but a clown? Has the Star Trek universe become nothing more than an endless feedback loop of journeys from future to past? Where were all of Starfleet's humanistic ideals--The ones that have inspired fans for generations? I got to the end of this movie and I didn't really care to see more adventures with these people. They looked like a bunch of LA mall rats running around unsupervised on Daddy's starship.

I did think it was cool that they got Mike Tyson to play the Romulan commander. Who knew he could act?
2009-06-01
Boldly Goes Where Everyone's Been Before.
I love Star Trek. And I hated this remake.

I fault the script by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci. These guys do TV. They do action, not character development. Not original ideas.

It's certainly not the cast's fault. Casting was superb. It's the only reason I can find as to why this film is rated 95% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. Not only was Zachary Quinto's Spock a standout, but every time Karl Urban did Bones, I was engaged at warp speed.

Though Chris Pine's Kirk was disappointing. Why make him speak like a big city bad-boy? He's supposedly a farm kid longing for a dad. And where were the Shatnerisms? I only caught one moment where Pine was allowed to unleash his brilliant reinvention of original Kirk, and it left me swooning — just as Kirk is bloody well supposed to.

But I don't blame Pine, I blame the lousy dialogue. And worse, the fact Kirk's character undergoes no transformation. He never faces any consequences for his behavior, other than a few punches. This gets dull fast, and by the time he's being promoted to highest command of the ship (thanks to his one good idea amidst all the mistakes), this lack of evolution has become tedious.

Spock's journey is slightly more interesting, as he turns moody and unprincipled. Though I don't believe this overblown everybody's-gotta-die version of their history laid the foundation for the adult he would later become.

What if this tragedy had actually caused him to make a choice? To veer towards human, and to use his extensive knowledge (wonderfully set up by the learning pods on Vulcan) to become a great Captain? Now that would have shaken things up. Kirk could have become his First Officer, and the writers of all the sequels could have leveraged that role reversal to no end, truly bringing us something new.

But, back to what existed in this (alternate) reality.

Though not very well executed, the idea of starting Kirk and Spock as enemies was brilliant. But how disappointing that the story doesn't make them work for their friendship. Instead, we have a Spock of Christmas Future who can just mind-meld Kirk into brotherly love.

And what if Kirk had chosen not to follow his potential future? What if he refused to take on that inevitable destiny? That would have brought such tension to the rest of the film, because our desire to have him become Captain, and to have them become beloved companions again, would be in real jeopardy.

It also would play truer to Kirk's character at that age. He's the rebel who does the opposite of what he's told. He'd never follow a prescribed future.

That's where the alternate reality plot line could have done more than save the day, as it did here, but make this film shine.

This script is a sorry mash up of other people's good ideas. Right down to Khan II: the wrath of Nero (a waste of Eric Bana's talents), and the red matter/molecular death star, and the mind control slug/bug, now available in easy-to-insert esophagus size.

Well, at least the overacting third crew member sent with Kirk and Sulu to deactivate the interstellar drill… (drill? for Christ's sake boys, don't space cruisers have powerful lasers for that sort of thing?) …is wearing a red space suit.

And what about all those silly slapstick moments busting up the dramatic tension? Like Scotty getting beamed into the water system? The annoyingly Ewok-like lizard creature in the ice planet's space lab? Spock's homicidal shipwrecking of Kirk, instead of putting him in the brig? And in what universe does Starfleet allow bridge crew a little pre-mission make out time out on the transporter pad? I don't even want to talk about the Spock-Uhura affair.

Though in my alternate reality, where Spock chooses his human side, I'd buy it. But it would have to be far more elegant than this.

What we have here nonsense like that deus ex machina moment where Spock Sr. happens to be on the ice planet (Hoth?) at the exact time and place to rescue Kirk Jr. from certain demise by snow-gecko.

And a sequence that beams Kirk and Scotty onto a warp-speed Enterprise. (Isn't science fiction supposed to include science-based innovations, instead of plot-driven drivel?) How about the climax of Kirk insulting Spock's beloved — and recently killed — mother to win command? It's ripped straight from an old episode, but in a way that makes Kirk a repulsive person.

Whatever happened to making characters work to get what they want? To watching them struggle and grow by finding innovative solutions to problems? To using action sequences to discover their humanity and nobility? Oh wait, for a second I think I slipped into a parallel universe where J. Michael Straczynski or Neil Gaiman had written this.

Now that's a Trekiverse I want to go to.
2009-05-21
An Insult to Our Intelligence
Just as the 3 "Star Wars" prequels ruined the Star Wars franchise (though I never liked it to begin with), this new "Star Trek" prequel is a damaging blow to the Star Trek movie franchise, and this prequel crap needs to stop now. The pathetic writers of this new Hollywood generation can't come up with any new, creative ideas, so they just keep going back in time (as they did with "Batman Begins") with established franchises, as if we need to see over and over again how the characters we love so much got their start. And the BIG problem with this new "Star Trek" movie is that they TOTALLY foul up the history of these characters and then insult our intelligence by having Spock (Prime - the older Spock) say that his actions altered the course of history (which, we learn, is why Kirk's father dies on the day of his birth this time around). What a lame, poor excuse for why the history of Mr. Spock, Captain Pike, Captain Kirk, Dr. McCoy and even Chekov is so radically different from what it is in the Original Series and its Original movies. What is different? For one, in TOS, Kirk first served under Captain Robert April on a different starship, and had years of experience as a first officer before becoming captain. In this movie, Kirk's serves with Captain Pike of the Enterprise first, right alongside Spock, and on his FIRST day of service he becomes first officer and then on the very same day is suddenly promoted to Captain! Quite a leap up the ladder! In TOS, Spock is supposed to have served under Captain Pike 13 years before he and Kirk meet. Also, Dr. McCoy suddenly becomes Chief Medical Officer on the very same day that Kirk suddenly becomes Captain. Wow, what a coincidence! This movie so ridiculously rushes the whole thing, but it's OK because Spock altered everything, right? In this movie, Chekov is on the bridge as navigator even BEFORE Kirk ever steps foot on the Enterprise. That means he has MORE experience than Kirk! So in TOS how did Kirk become Captain while Chekov was a lowly ensign? Oh yeah, Spock altered history. And Chekov is said to be 17 in this movie. When did he start at Starfleet Academy--when he was 13?! Finally, this movie has no intelligent (or even intelligible) story. It has a ludicrous story of the Romulans (who look like a biker gang in this movie) creating Black Holes out of planets. And this movie is all action and loudness with dizzying camera shaking, which totally goes against TOS's cleverness of playing on ideas rather than action. Abrams has no business in the "Star Trek" franchise, and I hope he never makes another "Star Trek" movie. But I guess as long as they make plenty of $$$$, it doesn't matter. That's more important than being faithful to the characters and history of the show, right?
2009-05-17
What a waste of time !!!!
This movie is just a joke,if you like Star Trek ,don't go to the movies to watch this comedy.

What a total waste of time,seriously it was boring as hell.Iam curious how some guys rated this movie high.They must be out of their fu*&ing minds.

This movie is crap.Get out with your girlfriend,go for a drink at your favourite place. Watch videos at youtube, buy a Korean Thriller ,do anything else but don't waste your time and money to go and watch this Parody.

Peace.
2009-05-08
Doubly bad
Firstly: Not only is the writing vapid, you have no empathy towards the two dimensional characters and so the entire movie is missing pathos. The plot is itself thin, it seems that a few explosions and special effects are the limits of depth to this director. I wasted 80 bucks buying tickets to this piffle. And the lapses in logic, (one of many examples: why would any military grant a cadet Captaincy of the Federations most valuable warship?)

Secondly: For those of us with a memory, this movie is an insult. Repudiate years of my interest in a series solely because you have lazy writers is a huge insult to those of us who have wasted four decades watching Star Trek just to have every television program and movie repudiated to give these idiots "creative space"? Only the truly talentless could be so arrogant.

Goodbye Star Trek.
2009-05-15
Bad movie yes. But not because of what everyone else say.
Maybe I'm wrong. I just type what I think. Here it is:

One conversation between Picard and data or Kirk and Spock is more insightful and thought provoking than all American movies produced for the last eight years. Since 9/11 directors are not allowed to make smart movies any more. Actually they only make propaganda films like in world war 2. But the problem is that those films are smart and thought provoking and inspire people even today.

Some powerful people are making the job of their enemies for them. Making the American people dumper. How can anyone believe that Kirk's actions would earn him something other than a kick out of the academy in any reality that such a benevolent institution exist? How can someone abandon a crew mate on a frozen monster infested planet. How can someone linger next to a black hole and fire all weapons on a dying ship endangering his own ship? Because it looks cool? It that what they want to teach? If American boys go to war with mentality like that will they accomplice anything? They'll just going to get killed. Actually all the characters are petty and cruel and act stupidly. Even the last security guard. Is J.J. Abrams that dump? No. he is told to make it that way.

You think that J.J. does not know that the Romulans can warn their people in the past or does not know all the other unbelievable plot holes? He made the movie. And to be fair all of Star Trek had huge plot holes most of all TOS. The plot was always the means to make a philosophical or technological point. Witch here is obviously non existent.

Just like The Vulcan councilman insults his best student (Spock) in front of everybody with no reason and loses him that is how they insult the audience with no reason and loose them.

The point is propaganda films don't need to be stupid and sure as heck don't need to be stupid when they are based on Star Trek. How can you help people protect them selves from terrorist or any treats? By making them dumper and scared or smart and informed?

This is not Star Trek don't compare it with Star Trek. Its nothing. Only Gene Roddenberry can make star trek and he is dead. what he made he made and that is Star Trek.

But there is a good think to come out of it. Peoples attention will be drawn to the Real Star Trek and maybe they'll learn something.

And if you materialize in a sealed tube filed with water you will die. It is worse than materializing in a wall.
2009-05-16
An abomination and offense to all things Trek. It sucked!
Not only did JJ Abrams not know the first thing about Star Trek, what he did go and learn he decided to intentionally destroy. I could spend WEEKS listing all the idiotic things in this movie... First of all, before ANYTHING else, no matter WHAT you think, there was no reason to completely destroy the Star Trek universe by blowing up Vulcan. It was Abrams taking a dump on the ENTIRE history of Trek. As a story point is was stupid, too. And WAY too easy. This fact alone ensures that I will never watch another Abrams product - no matter what it is (let alone his next Trek movie).

You know, I don't even want to waste any more time listing the other many idiotic elements of this un-inspired lame movie (the enemy was flat, the story had been done over and over, etc.). Uhura and Spock!?! Right, another stupid move. They go on and on. I will say that I liked the shuttlecraft (except the stupid idea of beaming across light years from one).

If you hate Star Trek, go see this movie. It's juvenile and standard Abrams, so you may like it. If you have any respect for Star Trek then this is a slap in the face to you.
2009-09-05
And when I say "alternate" future I mean "unintelligent and pointless"
This is a really disappointing movie. This reboot of the Star Trek universe is way off the mark. The original series certainly shows its 1960's roots, but the characters, and almost all of the stories, were intelligently written and imaginatively and consistently developed.

The relationship between Kirk and Spock was built around each providing a counterpoint for the other's strengths, with Spock, of course, balancing Kirk's passion with a healthy dose of reason. Between them, they formed a symbiotic medium, reflecting the human condition that leadership and advancement comes from a balance of both reason and passion.

The original Kirk was passionate and decisive, but was not reckless. Nor was he consumed by his own crude, punk emotions. He was a leader who understood that his responsibilities extended to his ship, his crew, Star Fleet, and the rules and aims of the larger society. He let this guide his decisions. Even by himself, there was responsibility, rationality and reason within him. Spock represented, and added to, the pure rational component of any argument. Put together, the two characters showed us that goals and problems are best addressed by moving the human condition towards a stronger sense of responsibility, rationality and reason. It was a vision for the future.

Against that, in this new movie, both characters have moved decidedly away from the rational and towards the emotional. Kirk is now just some one-dimensional, self-obsessed, reckless angry rebel who treats every situation as an opportunity to start a bar fight (literally and/or figuratively). One expects future dialog to be along the lines of "Spock, did you see the way that ambassador glanced at me during negotiations? He needs a lesson in respect. Fire all photon torpedoes!!" Who in their right mind would want such a character as a starship captain?

And the new Spock has had the strengths of his rational side completely neutered. This new movie makes it obvious that his rational Vulcan side is ineffective, unimportant and weak, and that the emotional human side is where all the important cool parts are. The arc of the story in this movie seems to be constantly telling him: "Dude...stop thinking so much! What you need is to do is get yourself a girlfriend, get laid, have a few shots of Jack Daniels, and go punch a few people."

Similar dumbing-down occurs with the destruction of Vulcan. Six billion lives lost from a culture that was as advanced, peaceful and intelligent as the Vulcans (remember...it was the Vulcan's who first reached out to humanity to make First Contact) is an tragic, important event. The original series would have made THAT the point of the event, as it should be. But in this movie, the only really important thing was that Spock's mother was killed. Well! Now it's personal I guess! No wonder he's mad! Why is it that movies such as this can't talk in the important abstract? Why is there always the need to introduce the personal vendetta? Why can we not have an important cause that is worth struggling for in its own right?

In the aggregate, whereas the point of the original relationship between Spock and Kirk was that the addition of stronger reasoning adds to our human capacity, the point of this movie seems to be the opposite: that what humans need to do is reason less, think less, make everything personal, give authority and responsibility the finger, break as many rules as possible, and get into as many bar fights as we possibly can. I was hoping that we'd left that attitude behind us with the passing of the Bush years...but I guess not.

As a side rant on that...the American psyche is frustrating in its contradictions. We live in gated communities to keep us away from exactly the bar-fighting trash represented by Kirk in this movie. We want harsh, lock-em-away laws if such characters challenge our peace of mind. But in the movies, we celebrate those same characters fighting authority, breaking all the rules, thumbing their noses at exactly us and those we appoint, punching anyone who asks them to be reasonable, killing anyone who tries to stop them, and winning only by fighting, not by thinking or working together. The same effect shows up in shows like Prison Break. How does a society both impose capital punishment AND cheer for the (supposedly) wrongly convicted to fight against the police that are trying to enforce the very laws that us as a society put in place? If we recognize that people are sometimes wrongly convicted...why are we killing them?

The other sad direction in this movie was the removal of Vulcans and Romulans as alternate societies. Again, we seem to be taking the attitude that only "us" humans matter. The "others" are uninteresting, unimportant, and potentially get in the way. Whereas the original series celebrated the idea of different societies, and recognized that any society (even all of humanity itself) will benefit by coming together into a larger common society with others of sympathetic goals, this movie promotes the idea that we would be better off if everyone was more like us, or better yet, if everyone else BUT us would disappear. In this movie the "us" is humanity compared to the "them" of other planets. In our world, the "us" is our culture or country compared to the "them" of other cultures or countries. Again...I was hoping that such a provincial attitude would pass with the Bush years...but again sadly, I must be mistaken.

The original series was a vision for the future...a larger, more interesting future. The new movie is a vision for the past...a provincial, isolationist, fearful past. In the end, the world, and the galaxy, are both poorer places because of this movie when compared to the vision and intellect of the original series.
2009-06-15
Miserable horror stupidity
Not content to rest on his laurels in boring the world into a black hole with LOST, or writing some of the worst ever episodes of Felicity, J.J. Abrams set busily to his task of eviscerating Star Trek in a derivative, boring, 2 hours and 6 minutes of sadistic torture. With new credits ripped straight from Third Rock From The Sun and Simon Pegg sequences that seem to be taken from Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and Romulans who appear to have been extras from The Matrix. Do the makers of this film trust any of their OWN ideas!? Do they have any!? And the staple hopeful tone Star Trek is gone. Replaced by a war slash comedy tone that I would expect only to find in Red Dwarf or Starship Troopers. There are just enough seconds of great action in this film to fit into a great trailer. Yes that's right. That stuff you saw in the trailer? That's it, that's all of it, no more than that. There are just enough seconds truly funny comedy to fit into a comedy trailer. Surprise surprise! For the rest of it, we get people sitting around talking about nothing. Except they are in space... which is, you know, actually nothing. Unlike the New York of Seinfeld, which is, y'know, something. Oh, and did I mention that every character in TNG, DS9 and Voyager and Enterprise is dead? Oh, not dead. NEVER BORN! That's right, Picard and Data, will never exist. Never born. Because the timeline has been re-arranged. Re-arranged by who you ask? A small mining ship. A small mining ship with no time-sheilding has evaded the time-shielded time-police and killed Kirk's dad and destroyed the whole planet of Vulcan. Ri-ight. WTF? W T F!? How did they do away with the time police? Aren't a lot of the time-shielded time police FROM the planet Vulcan, that has just been destroyed by illegal unscheduled time travel of a tiny mining ship? If some kind of deity like Q has disabled the whole of the time police, why is it for such a small reason as destroying one tiny planet. Couldn't the deity destroy the planet with a flick of his finger? Oh wait, it's, you guessed it, Stargate! And why don't we see these juicy Q-type-bady-talks-to-bad-guys sequences?? Who knows.

Star Trek is supposed to be hopeful and inspire individuals to do good in the world. This is a war movie to inspire people to pick up a gun and do who knows what.

Star Trek Zero (official working title) gets a big ZERO from me. Awful, abysmal. One star because they don't allow lower.
2009-05-09
Georgina Fisher (Houston) Maybe you are looking J.J. Abrams for where can i buy the movie Star Trek? Here you can download it legally. Anne Tran (Indianapolis) It is very likely that you want to find a website Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi where can i buy Star Trek movie 2009? You are moving in the right direction and are in the right place! Donald Conrad (Brooklyn) Favorite actors: 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 in search of an answer to the question where can you buy Star Trek the movie USA, Germany? You have found this Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi genre on this page. Darren Conley (Dallas) Among the huge collection of films in 2009 in the formats mkv, mp4, avi, mov, and flv it was difficult to find where to buy Star Trek movie? But my favorite film director J.J. Abrams shot this film in the USA, Germany in 2009.
×