Interview – Orci Talks Casting, Characters, Canon…and Kirks |
jump to navigation

Interview – Orci Talks Casting, Characters, Canon…and Kirks October 8, 2007

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Interview,Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

In the first part of the exclusive interview with Star Trek co-writer and executive producer Roberto Orci we learned the scribe is a true Trek fan right down to his USS Enterprise phone and phaser collection. In the second part presented below Orci talks in more detail about the 2008 feature film including a status report on casting, more detail on their approach to canon, discussing what characters we may see in this film (and the next), how the film will appeal Trekkies and non Trekkies….oh and a little bit on that Shatner guy too. So I understand you recently completed the second big draft of the script. How different is this one from the original?

Roberto Orci: It is better. It is tighter. The villain is much better; in a first draft you tend to focus on your heroes. And I got to say that a lot of the things we read on contributed to the second rewrite. Really? There are thousands of comments…so which geniuses are the ones that made the difference in the script?

Roberto Orci: It is a collective thing, we take it all in. It is no joke that I  read every post and so does [co-writer] Alex [Kurtzman]. Will the possible Writers Guild strike effect the script?

Roberto Orci: Well it won’t effect anything because the strike would start when we are shooting so we will have the script finished by then. Any changes between now and then will be based on casting. Once we have the actors we will want to tailor it to their voices. There have been lots of casting rumors flying but so far there have only been 2 actors confirmed since Comic-Con: Zoë Saldana as Uhura and Anton Yelchin as Chekov. So are there other people you guys have signed up that we just haven’t heard of yet?

Roberto Orci: Nope that’s it. We have ideas and some of those rumored out there we are considering. We are not hiding anything as some people on your site are speculating. It is not uncommon and we are trying to come up with the best cast as possible and as long as we get them by shooting that is all we care about. So far you guys have only officially confirmed Kirk, Spock and now Uhura and Chekov. So can you confirm that McCoy is in as well as Scotty and Sulu?

Roberto Orci: I don’t know how you can have Uhura without Bones. So yes it is the original crew. J.J. [Abrams] has said the film is Spock-centric, but does the young Kirk have as big a role as Quinto’s Spock?

Roberto Orci: Totally! It is Lennon and McCartney. However Spock’s role is key in that we also have Nimoy. Having said that Kirk is Star Trek and he is as essential. What about Bones? The Kirk/Spock/McCoy ‘troika’ is also quintessential Trek, with McCoy being the counterpoint to Spock and Kirk in the middle.

Roberto Orci: That is a big part of what we are doing. You are correct that their interaction and how they face the impossible is what Trek is about and that is no different in our movie.

Trek’s classic troika part of new film Beyond the regulars – might we see other familiar faces, such as Kyle, Rand, Chapel, etc.?

Roberto Orci: Yes. I can’t say which. We are aware of all of them, but we are mindful that you can’t just try and stuff everything into a first movie just to stuff it in. Our hope is that this is ‘movie one’ of several and so anyone who gets omitted is immediately on the list for movie two. It is a factor of what can one movie tolerate and how well can a character be serviced and if they can’t be serviced correctly we would rather do it well later than do it poorly now. One of the reported characters is a ‘Federation Captain’ was that Pike or just another captain?

Roberto Orci: It was not necessarily Pike. One of the things we are trying to do in this movie is introduce a general audience to Starfleet. Captain Kirk was not the only captain in Starfleet. That brings up a bit of a pet peeve of mine with previous Trek films. So often other captains were set up as patsies – like Harriman in  Generations or Styles from Search for Spock. Perhaps it was a way to make Kirk look good, but it made it look like he was almost a fluke and the rest were losers.

Roberto Orci: Ya I totally agree with you and we don’t have that. Being a captain in Starfleet should be a special position and we don’t feel that another captain has to be diminished in order to elevate Captain Kirk. If you are a captain in Starfleet you are a cool mother f—er.

Surely Starfleet can do better than this Speaking of captains I have one more casting question which is burning in the minds of many Trekkies…what about Shatner?

Roberto Orci: What J.J. said at Comic-Con [story] is still true. We are actively perusing looking for a way to make a part that is worthy of him and that is not pandering to either his role in Star Trek or to the fans. You guys have resisting labels for this film such as remake, reboot, etc….even prequel. Prequel has a pretty basic definition so what is wrong with calling it that?

Roberto Orci: But yet it is not entirely accurate. In some senses it is a prequel, but the word I would use, which is how Damon [Lindelof] describes it, is a re-invigoration or re-vitalization. So your point is since Nimoy’s Spock would at least start well after the TOS period, then it isn’t exactly a prequel.

Roberto Orci: Exactly, Nimoy’s Spock is very much in line with canon.

Last Spock sighting – TNG’s "Unification" You guys have said this will respect canon and ‘fill a gap’ but you are also trying to make a new movie for a new audience. Why aren’t you doing what they did with Batman Begins and just start over and avoid opening yourself up to the critiques on breaking with canon?

Roberto Orci: The reason we aren’t starting over is because the people involved, both fans and behind the scenes, have worked so hard to specify what is canon –  then to simply ignore it would be unnecessary. There is so much about The Original Series that is worth continuing. It is not like Batman where you can ignore everything. That being said there are some things that have never been specified fully in canon that we take liberties with. I imagine that it is all a matter of degrees. Some fans are pretty flexible and others can be ‘strict constructionists’…just like different constitutional viewpoints.

Roberto Orci: It is funny you should say it that way. We very much treat these decisions like the Supreme Court and previous Supreme Court decisions are not turned over lightly. If they are overturned it is with the spirit of Star Trek as the guiding principle. Part of the reason we are purposely not saying if it is a reboot or not is that the solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherently part of what the story is and something we are reluctant to give away. Does this respect for canon cover both the script and the approach to the designs, such as the Enterprise.

Roberto Orci: So many of the design decisions are so faithful to what it was, much more faithful that you might imagine. We are trying to be so true to The Original Series in both look and the characterizations. And the Enterprise design is awesome. Trek fandom is not monolithic. Not every Trek fan likes The Original Series and some fans are feeling a little left out. So my question is – is this movie still for them?

Roberto Orci: Obviously my answer is yes. If you are a true Trek fan there is a common thread through each series when it is really working that is that about meeting the impossible and overcoming your differences to face it. You do not need to be an Original Series fan or even a sci-fi fan to enjoy this movie. It is not about selling an audience on sci-fi. It is like with Mission Impossible III. It is about getting them engaged in amazing characters that you love and being with them when they face the impossible – be it sci-fi or be it an ‘impossible mission’ or be it the shock of meeting sentient alien robots as in Transformers. You once told me that you will be putting in ‘continuity nuggets’ as little Easter eggs for the fans. Will some of those be related to the other series like TNG?

Roberto Orci: We got some TNG stuff in there for sure. I made sure of that. And there should be a little something from everything, but for me personally it is all about Next Generation and The Original Series because those are the shows that really set down the rules for Trek that the other shows picked up on. We are also trying to do a lot of what Enterprise was doing in terms of a prequel and some of the corners of Star Trek which were mainly defined by Deep Space Nine are covered to a certain degree. So are we talking about little references like the name of a ship, like the USS Archer in Star Trek Nemesis?

Roberto Orci: Our references are bigger than that and more pivotal to the story. But I love that little stuff too and we are doing that as well.

An ‘Enterprise Easter Egg’ in Star Trek Nemesis You have talked about making Star Trek relevant again, how are you going to do that?

Roberto Orci: I think when a lot of people think of Star Trek they think of it as some other kind of fantasy world. What we want people to see is that the future that Gene Roddenberry created, of Star Trek and Starfleet and Starfleet Academy and the Federation, are extension of what might happen…maybe tomorrow. One of the things we are trying to do with this movie is connect it back to today. How we got from here to how we got to Captain Kirk on the Enterprise. I imagine part of the plan to appeal to a general audience must factor in appealing beyond the usual male sci-fi demographic. Looking at your and Alex and J.J.’s work one can see that you guys like to have strong female characters. So can we expect women that do more than just answer the space phone?

Roberto Orci: [Laughs] Ya totally. In my totally unscientific observations Star Trek seems to attract more women than other sci-fi properties,  nonetheless there is clearly room for growth. That is one of the main ingredients we are looking at is to connect every gender to Star Trek; particularly since Trek is so much about equality and women’s rights. It is one of those things have to be re-emphasize. All of our wives – mine, Alex’s, J.J.’s and Damon’s – were very helpful in making sure this script was accessible for women.

Kick ass women of Xena, Alias, M:I:III & Transformers There has really been a lot of secrecy related to this project. So my question is…why? And is there a plan to roll things out over the next year?

Roberto Orci: We do have a plan to reveal things in a timely manner that is not just waiting until the very end. But to get to why all the secrecy I always use the example of Terminator 2. I, and everyone really, went into that knowing that Schwarzenegger was a good terminator. So in that scene in the hallway where poor little John Connor is surrounded by terminators – imagine that scene if you didn’t know that Arnold was good – you would have thought that kid was dead meat and the reveal that Schwarzenegger was good would have been mind blowing. So one of the reasons for the secrecy is that we are into wanting the audience to feel the full impact of the story twists. This is something we have dealt with before, like on Transformers, the fans want to know when their surprise party is. The secrecy is not about us being coy or embarrassed but for us wanting to maximize those moments of surprise for the audience. We think it is not withholding from the fans but trying to give them that surprise party. Are you guys thinking about sequels yet.

Roberto Orci: Our objective is to make a good movie…period. Our only goal and mandate is to make a good Star Trek movie, but counting on the fact that if it is good then sequels will take care of themselves. We are not going to save anything for later. Our hope that this earns us the stewardship of future movies but we are not arrogant enough to count on that. All that being said, if it was my choice, I would do Star Trek for the rest of my life.



Read Part 1 of the interview with Roberto Orci 


On behalf of the community I want to thank Bob for all his fan outreach. I really think all the post Comic-Con communications have made a difference. – Anthony Pascale


1. Drew - October 8, 2007


Thank you!!!

2. Sean - October 8, 2007

I still don’t see how the original cast can be replaced and still have the same chemistry. I’m hoping for the best, but I’m expecting the worst.

3. Marc - October 8, 2007

First :-) It is just a few minutes past noon in germany…

To Roberto: I have trust in you….make a good movie!

4. jon1701 - October 8, 2007

A great interview, really good.

I like the idea of picking up ideas from Trekmovie and the other trek sites. You know, the internet is one of the largest brainstorming sessions ever created. Its good that they can cherry pick the good stuff.

I like the way the info is trickling out. My main problem is that I WANT TO KNOW, but I DONT at the same time. As time wears on i’m going to be reading these threads through my fingers.

Which may make it very difficult to type…

5. Bono Luthor - October 8, 2007

Please have Shatner as Kirk in there. I am so excited about what I have heard about this movie so far, but if we all miss the chance to she Shatner and Nimoy as Kirk and Spock again it will break my heart and some time down the line we will all regret it deeply…

6. jon1701 - October 8, 2007

5# Only if the story demands it.

Dont just shoehorn him in for the sake of it.

7. Anthony Pascale - October 8, 2007

i am only going to say this once. I do not want this to turn into another pointless shatner in the movie debate.

8. STFAN - October 8, 2007

Wow, you guys really need to get moving on the casting issue…. The shooting is still scheduled to November 5th, right?

Anyway, Thanks for the interview.

P.S. any chance that we will see some of the designs anytime soon?

9. Bono Luthor - October 8, 2007

It’s Original Star Trek. How can the story not demand it?

I think, if need be, a break with continuity that fans would forgive would be ignoring the whole nexus/death of Kirk thing.

Or, if the rumours about Spock going back in time to save the Trek timeline but it getting slightly changed in the process are true, have Spock save the Federation etc, but let one of the side effects/changes be that in the new timelines present, which Spock presumably returns to at the end of the film, Kirk is alive, so Spock gets to see his old friend again.

It could be made to work. Actually, I quite like that idea. Well I would wouldn’t I?

Sorry about typing and spelling. Busy Monday morning going at the same time!

10. Frank - October 8, 2007

Nice interview. Seems to me that the movie is in great hands. Couldn’t ask for more.

11. TrekSucksHard - October 8, 2007

“Kirk is Star Trek”

Now that is a quote I have been waiting to hear! Say what you want about the other captains like that baldheaded Picard or the wimpy Archer but Kirk would wipe their butts in a second- he’s smart, tough and intelligent (he’s a true leader who uses his crew to the best of their abilities- with Spock’s cold, hard logic and Bones’ humanism they are an unbeatable combination) and is the complete symbol of what Trek is about!

Do this right, Mr. Orci- I have faith in you.

12. Iowagirl - October 8, 2007

– What J.J. said at Comic-Con [story] is still true. We are actively perusing looking for a way to make a part that is worthy of him and that is not pandering to either his role in Star Trek or to the fans. –

Mr. Orci, it’s up to you, you can make it happen – take this unique chance!

Thank you for a very interesting interview – there’s still hope…

13. Mauro - October 8, 2007


I was a boy in the 60`s, and I follow Star Trek since then, I loved your way of think about the script.

In my opinion, more than Spock or Kirk, the reason behind the sucess was Gene Rodenberry and his filosofy, his way of thinking what should be the future.

Tank you very mutch.

You can count with our support.

Mauro, São Paulo – Brasil

14. Arcadian - October 8, 2007

Great interview! I’ve been coming to the site regularly for some time now but this is my first post. So that you know where I’m coming from in Trekkie terms – I love the Original Series but also appreciate and enjoy the newer series. I’ve got to say, I’m really up for this movie and I like everything that’s being said by Orci and Co. I have absolutely no problem with other actors assuming the roles, but I really do want to see Nimoy and the Shat up there together one last time – even if it’s only for a moment! Please guys, while you’re at it, undo Generations and give us back a future with James T alive and well!

PS. You might be interested to know how big an international fanbase this site/movie has – I’m in Cyprus. Where’s everyone else from?

15. Snake - October 8, 2007

that was an great interview…..i cant believe some comments regarding the story have been taken on board in the rewrite.

16. Arcadian - October 8, 2007

Sorry Anthony – you posted your “pointless shatner in the movie debate” comment while I was still typing my post. I hope you’ll let me have that one – I won’t pursue it, honest!
Great site, by the way!

17. Mac - October 8, 2007

Fantastic Interview. But Orci & Co, if you read this: make Paul McGillin Scotty! There is no other, who has deserved that role.

18. Bono Luthor - October 8, 2007

UK and this was my first time posting today aswell. Getting very positive vibes about this film and of course I will see it if Shat is in or not, but if he’s not then it’ll be like missing a chance to see Lennon and Macca together again.

IMAGINE the goodwill from geeks and fanboys/girls they will get towards this project if they could get him in there and make it work.

This film and Indy next year. Paramount will own me!

19. Snake - October 8, 2007

sounds like it’ll be a ‘re-quel’

20. Matt - October 8, 2007

That Orci fella clearly knows what he’s doing. Good to feel like the franchise in the hands of big game hitters.

21. Anthony Pascale - October 8, 2007

arcadian…welcome from delurking…always nice to see first time posters

let me clarify. I dont mind people expressing their views. it is those who post with ‘an agenda’ (eg post over and over and over about their one campaign)….also those who go after other posters for not agreeing with their agenda…hence ‘debate’

btw….i want shat in it too, but the story is king and it must work for the story. And no one here can say that they know it works with the story…except of course Bob, Alex, JJ, and Damon

22. TJ - October 8, 2007

A great 2nd part to an awesome interview. THANK YOU Anthony & Mr Orci for taking the time, I especially like this quote:

“..a re-invigoration or re-vitalization.”

I think thats perfect and EXACTLY what Trek needs, a recharging of the batteries! Put some cool (Trek cool? Oh Yeah baby!), kick-ass juice back into the franchise whilst still staying true to the core of all that Trek was/is. Picking the original series characters is just perfect for that, they were an iconic part of the 20th Century….make them an iconic part of the 21st Century!!

Besides who hasn’t heard of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty??? Beam me up Scotty! Classic! Speaking of Scotty, lets hope fans opinions count because Paul McGillion would be PERFECT casting for the role!!! ***assuming human pretzel*** Do you look at how fans reaction to rumours of casting for who you pick?

Regardless of who is/isn’t in this movie, another BIG Thank You to Mr Orci, your comments, insights and true love for all things ‘Trek’ has got this fan’s vote of confidence!!!

Damn its gonna be a long 14 months waiting to see this movie!

23. Arcadian - October 8, 2007

Anthony, I understand you 100% and totally agree. The story is what comes first. Again, thanks for the site, and for building such an exceptional relationship with the team behind the scenes. It’s great to feel that what’s said here actually has an effect on what will appear on the screen.

24. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 8, 2007

Anthony, I can understand that you don’t want this to become another thread about fans yelling for Shatner to be in the movie. But as Roberto Orci is stopping by here, posting comments, it seems to be the only way to be heard, to get feedback about it and to know that someone in charge, someone who can change things is around here.
I won’t say put Shatner into the movie again, as I have said it many times. last time here as #132
with a proposal as to how to include Shatner into the movie ;)
Sorry, couldn’t resist ;)

But I would like to discuss the enemy a bit more. I think it would be great to have a human as the enemy. If it is an alien (maybe a Romulan) I think the threat would drift away into a more fantastical one. A human enemy would be more fearsome as imho the threat would be more real (even in a sci-fi-movie)…
It is like in the Alien-movies. There have been those cruel aliens but the most fearsome enemy has been the traitor which was human. Ripley said something like that in Aliens: “I don’t know which race is more evil, but I doubt that this one will kill for money.”
And the “best” enemy in a Star Trek movie has been Khan, who was a human…

25. Bono Luthor - October 8, 2007

Hi again. Just wanted to say I completely respect other peoples views that are not the same as mine and I honestly don’t have an agenda.

As I said I will see this movie no matter who is in it, but as a regular reader of this site in recent months I was overwhelmed with excitment after reading the interview this morning and just wanted to add my opinion on the whole ‘Shat’ debate.

Obviously with filming starting next month we are in for a glut of news and I can’t wait.

This is a great site and I will keep coming back for more, because frankly, at the moment, certain other movie news sites seem to be lacking where this film is concerned.

I hope JJ and co give us a few more bits and bobs leading up to Christmas to keep us going!

26. Arcadian - October 8, 2007

Just had a worrying thought… what if this movie doesn’t even get a cinema release here in Cyprus?! Nemesis didn’t (although I guess a lot of people will reckon we dodged a bullet there!)
Oh well, I guess a holiday in UK might be called for around Christmas 08!
Why the hell not… to be honest, I’d jump on a plane if there was a chance of being an extra in this one – even if it meant I got a red shirt and a Wilhelm scream!

27. Paul Martin - October 8, 2007

You don’t want to be in the UK right no Arcadian, I’m freezing my backside off at me desk!!!

28. Paul Martin - October 8, 2007

Obviously I meant right now…. laptops fault.

29. daniel alvarez - October 8, 2007

I love Shatner, in his prime and at his best he was unbelievably powerful, attractive and necessary, He is not necessary in this film and I would NOT use him. That may seem harsh but i truly feel it’s the right decision. Let Nimoy have his day to give this new start the proper beginning. Don’t dirty the new river with “stuffing Shatner into the script”

Remember in first contact when James Cromwell said ” you guys are on some kind of Star Trek” It was ridiculous and stupid, a line shoved in for the fans. Don’t do shit like that in this film. Keep it real, real sci-fi is always better sci-fi. And no guys with rubber heads and a Jersey accent please, use subtitles for aliens.

LET SHATNER stay in bed on this one Orci, just make the best Star Trek based sci fi film you can possible make

30. Snake - October 8, 2007

regarding referencing the other shows – it sounds like there will definitely be TNG stuff but i wouldn’t hold my breath for any Enterprise, DS9 or Voyager….when he referes to Ent its just saying that they are doing the same as what they did – a prequel..and “some of the corners of Star Trek which were mainly defined by Deep Space Nine are covered to a certain degree.”

That’ll just be certain darker, conflicting elements that that series exemplified…

31. Snake - October 8, 2007

29 – Wha? i thought that First Contact ‘startrek’ line was great!

I do agree about rubber headed aliens though – i think all fans have had it up to here with the Michael Westmore alien of the week speaking in a perfect american accent

32. Andrew - October 8, 2007

Sounds like they’re going to do a great job.

I’m still concerned about continuity though – especially visual continuity.
I hope they don’t change the original Enterprise design too much – it’s a timeless classic !! I could live with a few “tweaks” though, perhaps more intricate detailing on the exterior hull etc.
As for the bridge design, I hope they are faithful to the original blueprints in that they have the same basic layout, but perhaps they could update the computer displays and have sophisticated graphics that put out meaningful information instead of just random blinking lights.

I guess they face the same challange that Berman & Co. faced when creating Enterprise in 2001 – it’s all about creating a good balance between the “retro” elements and the new elements.
You want it to look cool, you want a modern audience to believe that this could one day be a “real” spaceship but you also want to see that they are being faithful and respectful to the original.
It has to be close enough to the original designs so that it can “blend” with the original series and not look completely out of place, but also has to incorporate modern ideas / 21st century production values.

33. DJT - October 8, 2007

“It is no joke that I read every post and so does [co-writer] Alex [Kurtzman]”

Trekness confirmed. You have soul.

34. 1701 over Gotham City - October 8, 2007

Wow, nice to hear they read our posts… that being said…

I really really hope the back story of McCoy’s divorce is revealed. I love the idea that he was not another cookie-cutter academy graduate. And it really suits his personality that he wasn’t. Joining the fleet to escape the pain of the divorce just really adds great dimension to his humanity…
and McCoy is nothing if not the voice of humanity on Trek.

And yes, stick to the designs!! we love them!

35. JeFF - October 8, 2007

After reading these interviews, my sense of pride in Star Trek has returned…

…all the negativity and closed-mindedness of the crotchety neo-con-Trekkers be damned. These guys have a job to do, and quite frankly, it sounds like we could be a hell of a lot worse off, i.e. Stuart Baird. I’m sorry for those that expect the worst; I would have hoped that the core of Trek would have taught them otherwise.

Godspeed Orci.

36. Lope de Aguirre - October 8, 2007

Sounds nice.

I hope Orci means what he says!
I would love to see a Spock centered movie, he is in some ways the best character in whole Trek.

I would also love to see some secondary characters like Pike and I know that you can’t left out Kirk .
But the whole TOS-crew? I don’t know – I can only hope there won’t be all those characters as crew on the Enterprise and than on the other hand I don’t want to run accidental in some later cremate every 15 minutes.
I would included Spock, Kirk + McCoy from the main crew at most but we will see.

And If you guys at the helm of the movie manage to get nods to “Deep Space Nine” and “Enterprise” without it feels forced – yay!
I hope there are some darker (emotional and optical) scenes in it but overall I somehow expect it to be light.

I hope for some deep character conflicts between in within some crucial characters and please don’t make the badguy that a BADguy – no James Bond, Star Wars, Lord of the Rings kind of 2 dimensional baddy.

I’m also glad to here that there seems to be more than another ship story – make it epic with lots of planets, ships, stations and please introduce a decent creature (you klnow that big animals whichj aren’t humanoid like in Lord of the Rings, Star Wars and stuff) or two to the Trek movie franchise. Not that there were plenty or even enough in the shows anyway…

Back to the “glad not another ship story” thing: there seems to be a parallel or more likely alternate universe storyline which would be – grab your seat – NEW to the Trek movie franchise.
Can’t belive such things could happen in my lifetime…

OK good luck you guys and I’m for sure excited and can’t wait for the final movie!

37. StillKirok - October 8, 2007

So basically, we are no longer allowed to discuss the idea of Shatner in the movie. Hopefully the producers will not treat the silence as a sudden lack of interest but rather a censorship.

No problem.

As for the references to other Treks, please keep the references to Enterprise either to a minimum or nonexistent. There’s a reason that this was the least watched Trek show in history. For one, it didn’t fit with canon. It’s impossible to reconcile the events of that show with the other ones. The technology alone saw to that.

38. ZoomZoom - October 8, 2007

Good interview.
But as others have said- come on guys, get that cast sorted!

39. Driver - October 8, 2007

Really good interview guys, thanks.

40. TyrannicalFascist - October 8, 2007

Awesome interview!

And guys, if you do read these comments, it would be sooo awesome if you got a small cameo part for an older Scott Bakula or Jolene Blalock! It’d really honor all those who worked on Enterprise, plus treat all those people who wanted to “Save Enterprise”.

41. TJ - October 8, 2007

Remember, film is art therefore its subjective so they’re not going to please all! Everyone involved in this movie has a hell of a task, a 41 year old fandom to contend with (they’re not going to please everyone no matter what) and the need to balance that out and draw in a whole new generation of cinema goers. That being said, as much as I would love to see the folk I grew up watching involved, the story HAS to come first and formost! This film can not be exclusive to only Trek fans, it has to be accessible and enjoyable to the vast majority! It has to be SUCCESSFUL and I think we’re bloody lucky the folk involved actually have a respect for Trek and its fans…I’d take that as a positive and big blessing!

They seem to be trying to honour the spirit of all things ‘Trek’ so far, as much as any fan could ask for. Trek’s spirit was about being positive, embracing the future and change… we have to be realistic about the fact this isn’t going to be the Trek as was (unless someone invents a time machine) and I dont think I want it to be. It’s not a replacement, its a continuation!

And without sounding like a completely numpty cheeseball, let’s trying to practice a little of what we loved, preached!

P.s. #27 I’m freezing my bum off in a air-conned edit suite in the UK right now too. Obviously the kit is more important that my fingers and toes!

42. CanuckLou - October 8, 2007

Excellent interview! Thanks Anthony. I’m really jonesing to see some of the designs ie the Enterprise etc. Hopefully this is not of those ‘surprise’ items that has to be held back to the very end. I’m assuming that changes in the time line go back far enough, pre-Kirk ie probably with his dad, so that any technological differences between ST11 and canon will be attributed to that.

I like Orci’s take on things and if you are combing these threads for feedback I’ll repeat this again – No TrekBabble!

Also, the confirmation that Nimoy’s Spock picks up in ST11 with canon continuity in place is really gratifying to hear.

43. Scott Gammans - October 8, 2007 Does this respect for canon cover both the script and the approach to the designs, such as the Enterprise.

Roberto Orci: So many of the design decisions are so faithful to what it was, much more faithful that you might imagine…And the Enterprise design is awesome.

OK now… is Orci saying that the *original* design for the Enterprise is awesome (and he won’t be messin’ with it much), or the *new* design for the Enterprise is awesome? Personally I’m fine with tweaking the look as long as we still have something recognizable… I’m just dying of curiosity here to see what they’ve come up with.

44. Lope de Aguirre - October 8, 2007

@ #40

Old Archer in the TOS timeframe is hardly possible but I second the wish of old T’Pol appearing somewhere in that early TOS timeframe.

This would be a passing on the torch like McCoy in the TNG pilot, Picard in the DS9 pilot, Kirk in Generations, Quark in the VOY pilot and Cochrane in the ENT pilot.

45. Kirk's Girdle - October 8, 2007

Re: Roberto Orco

I’m right with you on the T2 reference. I’ve always watched that scene and said, “Man, if the previews hadn’t given it away…”

46. Scott Xavier - October 8, 2007


How do you stay true and replace the crew. Bring all of them together even though Chekov wasn’t an original. And then say its canon. Canon of another timeline? That seems gay. It could just be me and Im sorry for offending.

I guess when 6 million fans are involved I’d beat every inch of a dead horse, back up over it with a runabout, and beat it some more!

47. Sebi - October 8, 2007

#37 The whole “ENT wasn’t canon” is not true! They were very respectfull of canon, and when they “violated” it, they just streched it a little.
For a show, how is set before the original 60s series, they did a good job. Please give some respect to the creaters and cast of ENT. If that show came 10 years earlier, they would have made 7 seasons as well. Look how lame the first season of TNG was… With today’s audience (and studio heads), who can tell for sure which series is good and which not. They cancelled “Firefly” too, which was also a gread series. Noone knows why…

ENT is part of ST canon says Paramount. This is also my opinion. So if the writers of STXI decide to make a litte reference to ENT, so be it. Damn, why not put a Xindi on the Enterprise…. (I hear the complaints on that comment coming…)

48. Dennis Bailey - October 8, 2007

#37: “There’s a reason that this was the least watched Trek show in history.”

Yeah, the same reason that DS9 was less watched than TNG and “Voyager” was less watched than DS9.

Every series after TNG was less watched than the one before.

So, it’s not the reason you want to think.

Bring on the references to the other Trek shows, including “Enterprise.”

49. ZoomZoom - October 8, 2007

#47 you won’t hear many complains, but you will hear a lot of ‘whats a xindi?’
Anthony, Roberto must slip you a few tidbits, on the quiet? Go on, tell us a couple. Roberto will never find out- I won’t tell him! ;)

50. The Dark Knight - October 8, 2007

I’d like to know what the villain will be?!?!?!?!

51. The Dark Knight - October 8, 2007

Or who!!

52. GraniteTrek - October 8, 2007

I have to echo others that hope they don’t mess with the Enterprise design too much. The TOS design is iconic; the TMP update (IMHO) was stunning – how many Trek fans then and now don’t get a little misty eyed during TMP’s grand tour of the revitalized Enterprise, she was truly a beautiful swan-like ship. It’s my hope they don’t go new-BSG on it and put warts bumps and ridges all over it.

53. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 8, 2007

“Kirk is Star Trek”
-Roberto Orci

AAAAAAHHHHHH…… (emits orgasmic gasp not unlike Khan’s after Kirk cried out from Regula 1)

(p.s. Mr. Orci, you owe me ten cents for using my phrase. :))

54. Shinzon's Cousin - October 8, 2007

I am wondering if they will be wearing the uniforms from “The Cage” or “Where No Man has Gone Before” since this seems to be pre TOS. I have always been a fan of The Cage uniforms.

In terms of thinking of canon like the Constitution, I think that is a great approach. I doubt we will have anything on the level of how Zefram Cochrain was changed for FC in this movie. This group seems to have actual respect for Star Trek unlike the Berman/Braga regime.

BTW, thank you for not doing a “reboot.” I know that reboots and remakes are the fad of the day but Trek deserves better. Thank you for realizing that.

55. Snake - October 8, 2007


re T2

indeed – if u watch what the T-800 does before that scene its all pretty league with T1….One could quite easily have thought that arnie was the bad guy and the T1000 the Kyle Reese type (although if was pretty calm and cool in his scenes before hand)

If it had been kept under wraps people would have jumped outta their seats going ‘HOLY SHIT!! ‘

The studio or whoever did the marketing mustuve just thought well we’re spending $100 million on this pic we want people to KNOW Arnie isnt a bad guy trying to blow a 10 year old kid away and that Arnies the hero in this one….wonder how Cameron felt about all that? – after all it was filmed (upuntil that scene) whereby you would think the T800 was the villian again…

look at the trailer:

And its not as if there was any internet, AICN etc spilling the beans a year in advance…so it was much easier to keep under wraps then..

They should have just stuck with the teaser trailer and not released the one above..:

A similar thing happened to Star Trek III whereby the gave away the Enterprise blowing up in the trailer:
i believe Harve Bennet was mighty pissed they did that

20th century Fox didnt release an Empire Strikes Back trailer with Vader going “I AM YOUR FATHER” and Luke screaming ‘NOOOOO!’ right at the end did they…

56. pizza hotdog - October 8, 2007

I must say this has been a unique opportunity to have almost a direct pipeline to the writers of the new Star Trek movie. Great interview by the way! Taking Mr. Orci at his word, then he has read my several posts regarding story lines. Which in itself is amazing. 2nd draft done, and shooting starts next month. It can’t get any better than that.

444 dtST

57. Captain James B. Quirk Trek Modeler - October 8, 2007

I feel like Pontius Pilate… ” I find no fault in this man.”

Thank you Anthony and thank you Robert. I am sooooooo Looking forward to this movie!

“Kirk is Star Trek.” God I love that line!!!! I tried to tell those TNGers at TrekCore for years, that same thing.

There are so many good quotes in this interview. Thanks again, oh and for the Enterprise* appologists… Get over it, the show was crap, the acting was crap and the ship was a rip off. Man up and admit the truth!

58. Decker's Stubble - October 8, 2007

Great interview. I hope that in trying to be all things to all trekkies, they don’t get bogged down trying to make obscure references to all the in-jokes like some of the previous movies did.

I really agree about the other Starfleet captains. ST has a habit of making other captains in Starfleet look like boobs or lunatics. There are exceptions, of course, like Jellico in TNG, but usually any other captain that gets any serious camera time is made to look as if he’s incapable of commanding a seven-eleven, let alone one of the most powerful ships in the galaxy.

59. Greg2600 - October 8, 2007

Terrific work Anthony. I concur with your sentiments about Bob Orci. Wow, I can’t believe how chatty he has been about this movie. Many thanks to him. I was intrigued about what he said, although not much new. I think the big question on everybody’s minds will be how are they going to prequel TOS with the entire crew (and remain within canon)? Also glad to hear Shatner is still being considered.

60. homelite - October 8, 2007

It occurs to me that our friend Anthony is about to sign off over a year of his life just to keep this site from incinerating in it’s own hotness. The floodgates are-a-gonna-break soon, and the time and energy he spends on us is clearly heroic. I delurk momentarily to praise the man and his methods.

BTW, I’ve been tracking a certain blog (, and rumors aside, there appears to be NO way that dave shatner will be appearing in this film. He doesn’t even acknowledge it exists! So much for the debate.

61. jonboc - October 8, 2007

This fan is really starting to like this new team. Unlike the old Trek assembly factory, I’m sensing a heartfelt respect and appreciation for TOS here.

But more importantly, I’m sensing an understanding of what makes it tick. Things that were said, like :

” I don’t know how you can have Uhura without Bones”,

“So many of the design decisions are so faithful to what it was, much more faithful that you might imagine.”

“Having said that Kirk is Star Trek and he is as essential.”

“the fans want to know when their surprise party is.”

Wow. It’s like, for the first time, in a LONG LONG time…they get it. The people making Star Trek GET it! I couldn’t be happier in the direction this movie is headed.

I will say I have reservations about the “easter eggs”. I’ve never been a big fan of these “winks” to fandom, in comics, TV or movies, unless they really ARE hidden. When they are tossed out every other scene it gets corny. So in that respect, I hope these easter eggs are hidden well, and sparse. not scattered all over the lawn like the white house egg hunt.

And lastly, I do like surprises. I’ll never forget seing Checkov as fist officer on the reliant…seeing Kyle was a great kick and seeing how the whole crew came together and how the plot unfolded was great fun. I like surpises and by avoiding spoilerss that might surface, I hope to be pleasantly surprised on Xmas day, 2008.

62. hitch1969© - October 8, 2007

Dear The OrcSter™,

I love this interview. Thank you for taking the time to do it. Can’t wait to see the movie!!!

Totally Stoked,


63. Cervantes - October 8, 2007

Nice interview Anthony, with some good questions asked.

#43 Scott Gammans
I too, am waiting with baited breath to see how the ‘look’ of the various ‘TOS-era’ designs have been altered, not just the ‘Enterprise,… Since Roberto describes this Movie as a “re-invigoration or a re-vitalization”, that COULD mean a…*big gulp*… “re-imagining” of certain design elements, perhaps even a MAJOR re-imagining of LOTS of them, even though he states that they are being ‘true’ to the look of TOS…
And I am sure this next statement by him is a big indicator of this –
“Part of the reason we are purposely not saying if it is a reboot or not is that the solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherantly part of what the story is and something we are reluctant to give away.”
We’ll this paves the way for those ‘time-travel’ / ‘alternate-timeline’ rumours to be true, allowing for totally new designs throughout, while still saying it’s not contradicting ‘established canon’… That’s all well and good, and I have faith that the Movie will be good regardless, but my idea of ‘established TOS-era canon’ is not all about the minutia of various events and appearances of characters across the various Trek series and Movies, but rather what TOS-era series LOOKED like, and too much deviation and re-designing of too many elements will be a major disappointment to this original series fan. So I remain wary. I don’t want everything duplicated as was, but I’d like the overall look of the production to reflect the terrific elements of the classic series designs.

64. Dr. Image - October 8, 2007

Outstanding interview, Anthony!
Just the right questions. And it’s such an honor for our collective fan voice to actually be heard AND taken tnto account when crafting this film.

And to Roberto:
1) Pike-era uniforms, please.
And 2) An early Enteprise with spiked, red-domed nacelles, a tall bridge assembly, and a properly BIG deflector dish, etc.
If you are respecting canon, you can’t ignore certain VERY obvious things, as I’m sure you know.

65. IrishTrekkie - October 8, 2007

Roberto Orci Alex Kurtzman , you read all our comment you rule !
i really like that there talking about other movies
i do hope that if this works they will do more , plus its been far to long since
star trek movies where actually linked and a follow on from the movie that came before it
(like star 2 and 3). i also think its great that they will be showing more of starfleet
some of my favrite bits in the movies is when you see starfleet command, the
academy and so on , it really gives you a feel for how big the universe and organision is.
……..hmm when he said re-invigoration i worryed ,
i mean i just like let it be cannon, which he says in the next bit they wont ignore everything , and i for one
am cool with them taking liberties with it. And great strong female characters in star trek where
always great , but not enough of them in the movies

66. billy don't be a hiro - October 8, 2007

“Part of the reason we are purposely not saying if it is a reboot or not is that the solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherently part of what the story is and something we are reluctant to give away.”


67. Olympus1979 - October 8, 2007

Mr. Orci must know that he holds the power of canon in his pen. If he wants to “Bring Back Kirk”, he can do it with one line, and no need to even haveb Shatner in the film. Im sure Mr. Orci could figure out the proper place/line, but If Spock were to leave young Kirk a note, or say a word to him about his death at all, he would save Kirk from death in Generations. That simple.

We dont need an explanation. If you really want to bring back kirk, you can do it with your pen Mr. Orci, and it would probably take all of 10 seconds screen time. That would bring Kirk back without the need for Shatner.

68. Cervantes - October 8, 2007

#53 Shatner_Fan_2000

Forgot to add…don’t get too excited, as Roberto didn’t say William Shatner’s Kirk is Trek…although those of us fond of the original Star Trek know that he is…and I don’t see how ANY small slot for an ‘alive and well’ future, aged Kirk could in any way alienate any part of the audience for this Movie, if his inclusion was so-willed by all parties concerned… ;)

Time will tell…

69. Cygnus-X1 - October 8, 2007

“…but for me personally it is all about Next Generation and The Original Series…”


And, I very much appreciate the surprise-party aspect to the new film.

By all means, keep the story under wraps.

70. Nathan - October 8, 2007

Whoot! Whoot!

Star Trek is now officially back!

71. tadayou - October 8, 2007

I have to admit, the way Orci talked about the movie, he finally sold it to me.
If they are really doing this, being so respectful and thoughtful, then I think this is gonna be a film that at least most of us Trek fans can enjoy.

It’s gonna be a long time till Christmas 2008. But boy, it’s gonna be full of childish anticipation on my part.

Thanks for the great interview, Anthony (and Mr. Orci, of course).

72. subatoi - October 8, 2007

Great part II. Very interesting, makes you think, makes you wonder, reveales a little.

Thanks, Anthony, for your efforts, and thanks, Roberto, for “talking” to us.

73. DavidJ - October 8, 2007

Cool interview. I was kinda hoping to hear more about the TONE of the film though. Are they going for the gritty submarine feel of TWOK, or the more swashbuckling adventure feel of TSFS?

Personally I’m hoping for the latter. I’ve said it before, but I really think that (regardless of what you think about the stories) Nimoy’s movies really captured the heart and soul and MAGIC of Star Trek better than any of the others.

74. theinquisitor - October 8, 2007

I think it’s brilliant that Orci reads the comments and took them into consideration. It’s noticed a tendency in the movies of Star Trek to be more about the non-trekkies than the trekkies, or maybe that’s just my biased position as a trekkie. But the fact that Orci is looking to the Trekkies for guidance is really encouraging.

75. Reign1701A - October 8, 2007

“Kirk is Star Trek”. Here here and amen to that! The entire original bridge crew confirmed, a faithful Enterprise design, no Batman Begins style reboot, I’m more pumped than ever for this! Thanks you Anthony for asking awesome questions that reflect what’s on our minds and thank you Mr. Orci for taking the time w/us. The only part that makes me weary is that they’re taking input from us monkeys here on the site!

76. theinquisitor - October 8, 2007

It would be great to see every single frame of it for the first time in the cinema, but how can I resist the trailers when they come? I regretted ruining First Contact, I must not do it this time.

I can’t wait any more! Maybe a slingshot around the sun would get me there faster…

77. dalek - October 8, 2007 Speaking of captains I have one more casting question which is burning in the minds of many Trekkies…what about Shatner?

Roberto Orci: What J.J. said at Comic-Con [story] is still true. We are actively perusing looking for a way to make a part that is worthy of him and that is not pandering to either his role in Star Trek or to the fans.

Thanks for asking that and for still giving us hope Mr Orci. As long as there’s hope I’m optimistic you can come up with something worthy for us, yourself and Mr Shatner.

As for references to other Treks. Cool. As long as it doesn’t distract from the story, why not.

Re: sequels — if your version of the Star Trek universe veers off course due to an altered timeline I’d suggest a re-match with Khan. However couldnt think of a single actor in the universe who could be recast as Khan and be a tenth as good as Montalban. So maybe not.

78. Kev-1 - October 8, 2007

I’m glad they’re looking at comments but it’s their vision. I hope they go with what works for them. I’m interested to see if the Kirk character is actually Captain Kirk, not Lt. Kirk or something.

79. JL - October 8, 2007

Thanks for the well done interview, Anthony!

Reading these posts, I just thought of something.

Why is he using such a powerful reference when talking about movie “spoilers” – T2 and the “evil or good” Arnie thing? As in “it’s a hugely powerful moment in the film and it should not have been lessened by revealing it in a trailer.

To me, that is a tip-off……. I’ll say it right now: I am going to bet that WILLIAM SHATNER *WILL* be in this movie…….. they just don’t want to give it away, they want to BLOW OUR MINDS WHEN IT OPENS.

What do you guys think?

PS – oh, and the 70s song “Billy Don’t Be a Hero” and the music in the first level of Donkey Kong Junior are really similar.

80. JW - October 8, 2007

I am so thankful that we DS9ers are at least being considered. Orci is right, so much of what the Trek universe is (from simple facts and features to major structures and themes) was defined in DS9, and a lot of people forget that.

I understand the emphasis on TOS and TNG (it’s a TOS film, after all), but It’s nice to hear that they are not ignoring the contributions of the other series’.

81. Etha Williams - October 8, 2007

“Surely Starfleet can do better than this…”

That caption cracked me up. I remember when I first watched Generations, I was SHOCKED at the incompetence of Captain Harriman.

82. gord - October 8, 2007

Yeah, mad props that the production team actually cares about maintaining an original outlook while not deviating from what made Trek great in the first place. Berman/Braga took far too many liberties with the franchise and as much as I enjoyed Enterprise as a sci-fi show it sometimes almost seemed like it wasn’t worthy of the Trek name.

Couldn’t be more excited about this film, but no matter how much care is taken with canon and designs etc. if the plot stinks then the film will stink.

But I’m sure it won’t!

83. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 8, 2007

Great Interview!!! Everyone seems happy (except Dennis who is rarely happy -though you should be your work on Exeter has been brilliant- loosen up brotha!)

R.I.P. Mugatu – NEVER FORGET!!!!

84. Shaggy - October 8, 2007

Great interview – these interviews are helpful as I was pretty doubtful about this project when I first heard about it a while back. But as I hear more from those working on it, I become more excited for Dec. 2008 to get here.

I am glad that they aren’t willing to release too much about the movie (especially this early on) – I like to see the whole thing and be surprised there. For example I hate movie trailers that reveal way too much about the actual film or show all of the good parts of the movie in a 30-45 sec spot. I really hope they won’t do that with ST when the trailers start rolling out next year.

It will be interesting to see how they make it accessible to everyone through the characters. Personally there’s not a Trek series I don’t like although my brother is different – he likes everything but TOS. I know a lot of people that only liked TNG. It’s a big task these guys have on their shoulders, but it looks like it’s in the right hands. Knowing how much of an inspiration TNG will be (it’s the Trek series I grew up with) is comforting as I think that was a great example of how Trek could be jump started.

85. Dennis Bailey - October 8, 2007

I’m perfectly happy with the interview, thanks. Trekkies are a different matter, and often require a higher tolerance. :)

86. Mr. Atoz - October 8, 2007

Mr. Orci,

Will the set design and enterprise closely resemble TOS? or more of a look like we saw in Enterprise?
Does the Enterprise look like it did in TOS or possibly like it did in WNMHGB and the Cage?

I’m not to worried about your story, I thought MI3 was really good.


87. Dr. Image - October 8, 2007

Waitaminute… Orci has a PHASER COLLECTION??!!!
Well, he had better have a Richard Coyle, an HMS, maybe a Brad Nelson, a JLong kit, and at LEAST a Master Replicas or an AA if he is to be taken seriously… at all.
-A Trekkie

88. emthrax - October 8, 2007

I expect something like this:
The villain could be half vulcan and half romulan, to create somekind of contrast to Spock. If there are some scenes in the movie, showing the academy, maybe the villain could be introduced in these scenes. Maybe he wanted to become a starfleet officer, but he failed the Kobayashi Maru character-test, while Kirk succeeds by cheating. After that he could be disappointed and angry, becoming a member of the romulan fleet. Because of his origin he could play a role in the unification-movement on Romulus. When the Federation and Romulus want to sign a peace-agreement in the post-Nemesis-time, he (as an old man) trys to change history by traveling back in time to erase the Enterprise and all it’s adventures out of the timeline.

89. raulpetersen - October 8, 2007

mr orci & mr kurtzman,

two words tom hanks

he was going to do first contact he is a big fan hes always wanted to do it
so why not get him for the federation captain

just a thought, he is a very big name too!

90. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - October 8, 2007

No Tom Hanks, I’m all Tom Hanksed out!!!

Dennis I hear you, but if you think the jello heads are out in force now just wait another few months as more significant announcements and leaks are made. We may need to call in Sonny Chiba to bust some heads

91. Pragmaticus - October 8, 2007

Roberto –

Lt. Kevin Riley. I beg of you, get him in the movie somewhere.

92. eastcoast86 - October 8, 2007

Jensen Ackles for Kirk!

93. JCool - October 8, 2007


I agree

No Tom Hanks!

94. OneBuckFilms - October 8, 2007

I got a bog kick out of the fact that the design elements are “more faithful than you might think” to the original show.

This makes me think that the Enterprise will look and feel as it did in the original show, but lit in a more modern way.

If they look at Trials and Tribbleations, and the mirror-universe Defiant story for Enterprise, then they’ll get it pretty much perfect.

Where I believe they can have more freedom with design and aesthetics is with the unknown places the Enterprise may be taken.

95. JCool - October 8, 2007

Thanks For the part 2 interview!

Im very happy!!

p.s. I want the movie to feel epic!!!

96. Iowagirl - October 8, 2007

# 53

Now, that a sovereign authority has told them, we won’t have to do it anymore (well, not that often, anyway – just a reminder now and then will do). Gives us more time and space to concentrate on that other part of our mission…;-)

# 79

Sounds good to me – let us hope so!

97. Mazzer - October 8, 2007

It’s great that Bob Orci and team are balancing in fan ideas. But here’s a big concern that I have…

Going overboard to stay with so-called “canon” and to please old fans can kill any freshness and inovation that the film desparately needs. Case in point: “Superman Returns”. I believe that Bryan Singer got so obsessed with pleasing the old fans of the 70s film, that he blew the new movie. “Superman Returns” was, to me, like watching the same film as the 70s “Superman” but just with different actors. Heck, even the sets were copied from the 70s! Nothing new, and pretty pointless.

I know you’re planning to balance old with new, but please don’t go too far down the Superman Returns road with Star Trek.

98. Harry Ballz - October 8, 2007

#55 Snake
“20th century Fox didn’t release an Empire Strikes Back trailer with Vader going ‘I AM YOUR FATHER’ and Luke screaming ‘NOOOOO!’ right at the end did they…”

Hey, what the……and I was about to watch that flick for the very first time!! Nice way to ruin it for me, man!! What am I, a lab rat to be used in proving your point??

Thanks, Snake! Grrrrrrrrr……….

99. Andy Patterson - October 8, 2007

I have a question I don’t think anyone’s asked, or thought of, and that is about the music. I don’t mean the theme; Alexander Courage or Jerry Goldsmith. I’m talking the inner music or otherwise knows as the incidental music. I grew up a huge fan of what those guys were doing. Those guys writing for those shows were 20th century music students and primarily 20th century stylists. I don’t just mean they were men living in the 20th century, they were products of that style of music. So many trained composers. So many great writers. Their music gave a complexity and sense of sophistication that many shows today lack. And to tell truth, that was my big beef with TNG. Just droning music with no thematic material. At any rate, knowing that JJ Abrams is such a music fan, and hearing the motives or special themes he brought back from Mission Impossible show to MI III….I hope there are similar attempts with this he, Giacchino and this movie. I know this is important to him and I think it’s a very important part of the movie to consider.

100. Devon - October 8, 2007

That was a terrific read. I’m still very hopeful about the movie! I think these guys will be great! Thanks Anthony!

I didn’t get to read through all of the comments and may have missed this in another interview so please forgive me if this has been asked.

A few vet members of Trek in some fairly recent interviews (featured on this site as well) have said things along the line that “I hope they give me a call to get my input” or what not.

I can’t recall who specifically said that but hopefully that rings a bell to everyone.

If you happen to do another interview with one of these guys Anthony, would you mind asking them if they have taken any of those people up on their offer and rang them up for their input or if they are trying to avoid outside (outide of this project, not Trek) influences?

Also, I’d be curious if they have sought the input of Majel Barret or Gene’s son.

If you already asked this in another interview, sorry about that!

101. StillKirok - October 8, 2007

#48–you are 100 percent wrong about that. Good shows get watched. I’ve never heard, “well, another show wasn’t watched, so that’s why this one isn’t watched.”

Enterprise STARTED with a 7.0 rating in the pilot. It just wasn’t good enough to maintain that audience. Good shows are watched, especially when they have a good word of mouth audience.

The reason Trek lost ratings every year was because they put out a lousy product and more and more of the audience got fed up with it until finally Enterprise was canceled.

#47–Enterprise was NOT respectful of canon at all. From the opening episode, the show doesn’t fit with what WAS said about the 22nd century. The tech alone, with the viewscreens, was wrong.

Not to mention Romulans did not have cloaks in the 22nd century. Enterprise was a full series equal to having Valtane alive. Just because Paramount says it’s canon doesn’t mean it actually FITS into canon.

Paramount can say “Sulu is a girl,” but that won’t make it fit with TOS.

Mr. Orci–here’s something you should consider and as a TNG fan, I know you know this:

bringing back Kirk would NOT violate canon nor will it violate Generations. As you must know from the TNG Episode Relics, Scotty, who disappeared from the 23rd century AFTER the launch of the Enterprise B, thought that it was KIRK who rescued him.

How can that be if Scotty saw Kirk die? Sure, there are fans that like to say he was disoriented or the like, but the bottom line is that you have a line of dialogue in canon that establishes Kirk being alive and well in his own century post- Enterprise B launch.

As has been stated earlier, you could easily use this movie to reconcile it.

102. Andy Patterson - October 8, 2007

I agree, BTW, that with or with out good music Kirk is Star Trek.

103. CmdrR. - October 8, 2007

Nice that he’s talking so openly about this being a full-on Trek adventure. Or so it seems to me in reading this. I have been concerned that we’d only get the whole gang on the bridge in the last minute of the film, and then only to set up the sequel.

I have to honestly say I’m over this Hollyweird theory that we must discover how every character’s parents met. Backstory is one thing, but don’t spend half the movie there. (The only trend worse in Trek is the idea that we have to know how characters die. Kirk, Chekov, Sisko [?], Trip, Hoshi. Sheeesh!)

I really, really, really want a fun, exciting thought-provoking, action-packed, groundbreaking, mega-movie with go-go-boots and breasts in it.
(Best Dr. Evil voice: Is that too much to ask?)

104. TK - October 8, 2007

Great interview. I want to be surprised, so please keep the plot secret!

Regarding casting, I really like the way Mr Orci communicates. The things he says…he’s got the looks… carismatic….. and he’s got brown eyes…. :)
And it sounds like he really cares about star trek

So my question is, can he act? If so, has he considered a career as an actor before?? (see where this is going?)

Q.E.D What about Orci as Kirk??? ;)

OK, I’m half joking here, but I’d say he’d be far more convincing than that Vogle bloke! In my eyes anyway!!! :)

105. Harry Ballz - October 8, 2007

CmdrR. “mega-movie with go-go boots and breasts in it”

Mr. Orci, out of any post you read and consider, I vote you give extra weight to THIS ONE!!!

106. CanuckLou - October 8, 2007

Oh and Mr. Orci please pass this along. The original communicators should be updated but please, please, keep the look of the original hand phasers! The best damn looking weapons in the entire Trek universe.

Above all, avoid the hand held dustbusters from TNG! They may be practical and ergonomic but they looked like crap!

Sorry folks. Sometimes my inner geek gets the best of me. ;)

107. TJ - October 8, 2007

Anyone else notice that Vogel is already listed on Trek’s IMDb page…though as ‘rumoured’????

108. Etha Williams - October 8, 2007

#88 — When you said “half romulan/half vulcan” the first thing I thought was Saavik — not as the villain, but as an interesting plot point. I’d LOVE to see her being half-Romulan canonized, and if the rumors about this movie are true, it could possibly fit in rather nicely.

109. Danya Romulus - October 8, 2007

29– Totally agree about Cromwell’s “some kind of star trek” line being stupid. BUT, that being said, I thought Q’s line in All Good Things of “It’s time to put an end to your trek through the stars” was awesome! See, I think it’s all a matter of subtlety when it comes to easter eggs.

110. Danya Romulus - October 8, 2007

66–I think you hit on one of the most revealing quotes from this excellent interview:

“Part of the reason we are purposely not saying if it is a reboot or not is that the solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherently part of what the story is and something we are reluctant to give away.”

Clearly there is some sort of plot device that will establish a new universe that is similar but not the same to TOS, which will allow them to explain the differences, including the very obvious ones like the fact that they are not the same actors. I doubt this will be as simple as a time travel-prompted timeline divergence, but it will be a way to do an “in-canon reboot” as I believe AICN called it before. In Trek reference people will refer to this timeline as the “Abramsverse” or something. If they are hoping to do sequels then it only makes sense, because I don’t think they’d want to impose a time limit of “we can only go up to 2266 when TOS starts.”

111. Danya Romulus - October 8, 2007

And one more thing, Mr. Orci I am delighted to hear that you guys read all these posts, so for posterity let me make one more suggestion: Adrien Brody as Romulan (or half-Romulan half-Vulcan, if that’s what we’re doing) villain!

112. Johnny Ice - October 8, 2007

This is a great interviews and has eased my concerns that i had for XI movie for now. .
Going throw the article the great bits are
1;What we want people to see is that the future that Gene Roddenberry of created, of Star Trek and Starfleet and Starfleet Academy and the Federation, are extension of what might happen…maybe tomorrow,,.
That is great and if you really want capture Gene vision of the future you scold focus more on TOS, TMP and TNG as those came closet to his vision of the future
2.,,Kirk is Star Trek,, and comparing relationship Spock and Kirk with Lennon and McCartney is spot on.
3. it, is a re-invigoration or re-vitalization. This is defiantly the right way Mr.Orci.This is essential, if you and Abrams want Star Trek XI to appeal to general public.
4. ,,the Enterprise design is awesome,,. I hope you mean new Enterprise design. TOS Enterprise design is iconic(so is TMP Enterprise but it just wouldn’t work now. Time have changed and I want new approach and i don’t want see same Enterprise as in 1960s. I would suggest smilier to this by Koerner as a starting concept.

,, That brings up a bit of a pet peeve of mine with previous Trek films. So often other captains were set up as patsies – like Harriman in Generations or Styles from Search for Spock.,,

I couldn’t agree more with this commit. Who wrote those awful characters(Harve Bennet & Nick Meyers hmm this makes you think doesn’t it.). I also liked Orci reply,, captain in Starfleet you are a cool mother f—er,

113. Ben - October 8, 2007

Thanks for updating us (orci) great interview (

can’t wait for the movie, all hints and so on – make me already highly anticipating the movie which is still 15 months away.

if you somehow can – please include Scott Bakula for a scene or two as Captain Archer, even if it’s only a recored speech on a viewscreen (see Enterprise Premiere)

This would be a great speech: ENT Season 4 Episode 21

“Archer delivers a rousing speech, urging all of the species in attendance to work together to explore the stars. Soval, the Vulcan ambassador who once disapproved of Archer and Enterprise’s mission, is the first to start clapping. Soon, the delegates are on their feet, giving Archer a standing ovation.”

LLAP – Ben – Star Trek Fan from Switzerland

114. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 8, 2007

Actor Jesse Lee Soffer (Will Munson) on the CBS soap “As the World Turns” would make a great Captain Kirk. Soffer is in the new movie GRACIE.

115. cd - October 8, 2007

99 – Don’t get me started on the atonal crap that passed for music in the later years of TNG. I think you could play the music backwards and it would not make a difference. (There was some really good music, The Inner Light, for example, I am not talking about that.)
As far as for the movie, I think the music should stay consistent with TOS, for example, the party music in “Conscience of the King”; keep that early 60’s feel.
97 – Singer couldn’t even get the suit right.

Mr. Orci is saying the right things. I hope that will translate into something good. But at least his trying to honor canon, and our opinions, is a much better starting place than previous PTB have done.

116. Andy Patterson - October 8, 2007


I agree. There are no recognizable themes and therefore no musical vocabulary established from TNG. It’s my understanding that only a handful of original TOS shows had their own scoring but as a result the recycled music was used to great effect. When there was a battle scene we had several examples to draw from musically. Same with light and whimsical moments…and there was drama and mysterious tracks to draw from in droves. It was very well done. You listen to Miguelito Loveless’s theme from that time period on Wild Wild West. Done by the same composers, Very sophisticated stuff. Just too great for words.

117. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 8, 2007

I DID enjoy the way that DS9 episode depicted the orignal 1701 crew as a bunch of horny swingers! (Which of course is what we suspected all along!) From the Captain on down, people were gettin’ LAID on that Starship! ;) Reminds me of this exchange from Free Enterprise.

Sean: “Even Kirk never had a threesome.”

Robert: “That’s just because they couldn’t show it on network television.”

Overall this was a fine interview. Very glad to hear that Shatner is still a possibility and I too hope #79 is correct! And I’m glad to see StillKirok posting. I was pretty sure he’d been forever banished to the ice planet Rura Penthe!

118. JCool - October 8, 2007

Captain Archer mention?

Please no! I beg of you!

119. Rick - October 8, 2007

I like Roberto’s comments about canon — well considered and thoughtful.

One can, and should, take canon seriously. Glaring gaps in continuity are almost always the result of poor or lazy writing (or lack of respect for the past).

That said, one shouldn’t be a slave to canon, either. TOS certainly wasn’t. We should be ready to forgive a minor canon gaffe so long as it isn’t the result of laziness or lack of creative thinking. And there’s certainly no hint of apathy, writer’s block or disrespect in this team!

*sigh* Christmas ’08 is a long, long way away….

120. JCool - October 8, 2007

Christmas 2008!


121. Ensign Red Shirt - October 8, 2007

Fantastic interview. I’ve watched TOS, which at it’s best was always about the story rather than the technology: ST:TNG & DS9, which also had wonderful casts with generally great writing; VOY, a nice premise but with an estrogen overload; ENTERPRISE, which got good about the time they killed it. If you movie guys truly read these posts, then explain just exactly what the rank “Fleet Captain” is (Fleet Captain Christopher Pike), and be sure to use the old RED ALERT klaxon (not the muted, sissified version heard on VOYAGER); everytime I heard that one, I thought Janeway’s microwave dinner must be ready to come out.

122. George Armstrong Custer - October 8, 2007

Anyone think of a plotline where Pike is Actually the Villian and the release of the menagerie. Think this. Pike ( Remember feeling tired of command in the menagerie, and disabled) is tired of living the life of illusion on Talosia and feels regret that he let the Enterprise command go and accepting command of a training vessel goes back in time with the help of the talosians or Romulans to prevent Kirk from rising in ranks to get the enterprise. Spock goes back to prevent him from doing so and since his loyalty still lies with Pike and Pike knows it, Young Spock is the only one who can stop him.

123. Ty Webb - October 8, 2007

There was an ‘Archer’ Easter Egg in the TNG episode ‘Yesterdays Enterprise’, where Riker talks about the Romulans having taken a “pasting on Archer IV”. Of course that was pre-Enterprise.

124. Ensign Red Shirt - October 8, 2007

Add’l comment–Chekov was part of the original crew, but he was in the bathroom for the first season. Ricardo Montaban must have used the adjacent stall, ’cause he remembered Ensign Bad Accent in the second movie.

Oh, and how about labeling the switches & buttons on the bridge? One week Sulu would hit one switch to turn on the wipers, and the next week the same switch flushed the toilets in sickbay.

God, I just want to see a good movie made by folks who’s primary motivation is to make a good movie. Stuart Baird effectively resigned everyone save Patrick Stewart to doing guest appearances on “Homeboys in Outer Space.” Yeah, NEMESIS could suck the chrome off of a trailer hitch. Otherwise known as “PLAN 9 FROM ROMULUS.”

125. Ivory - October 8, 2007

Mr. Orci:

You mentioned how Kirk and Spock are like Lennon + McCartney.
Well, a deranged lunatic made sure that nobody in the world had the thrill of seeing these legends (John Lennon + Paul McCartney) take the stage together one last time in the modern era.

Unfortunately there was nothing anyone in the world could do to change that. Those cultural icons can never be reunited and everyone in the world is worse off for it.

Kirk and Spock on the other hand are cultural icons that can be reunited and you are the person who can make it happen. What people wouldn’t give to bring Lennon + McCartney together one last time. While you literally can do the same for the ST universe by simply writing a role for Shatner.

You are in such a unique position to make so many people happy by making these icons saga complete.

In an era where the world truly needs as many hero’s as we can find (I know that’s a pretty bad cliche) YOU can reunite Kirk + Spock.

There must be a reasonable way to get this done.

While I fully support you Mr. Abrams and all the new actors about to take on these iconic characters. I cannot help but think that this film will not be complete without William Shatner as Kirk.

Why would you only have Lennon when you could have Lennon + McCartney?

Why just have Abbott when Costello is begging for a role?

I would agree with you when you say Kirk is Star Trek. I would aslo add that Shatner + Nimoy’s are Kirk + Spock to generations of people.

Why not close their story with grace rather than have Kirk fall off a cliff to a bloody death due to poor writing + Rick Berman’s (I am not a Berman basher) dislike of TOS. Or at least his preference for his version of Star Trek.

I love his version of ST also, but I would not throw Picard to his death for no reason other than having nowhere to go with the script.

Has any major fictional character ever died a worse or more meaningless death than James T. Kirk? Kirk’s death was useless + it has damaged the series.

Surely there are enough holes in that nexus storyline to bring Kirk out alive + well from it.

Here’s one. When Soran entered the nexus he in essence defeated Picard. Soran,Picard + Kirk were the only one’s alive. Picard in essence created a new time line when he came out of the nexus.

Thus, the original version of Kirk is alive + well in the nexus.

Anyway, You get the point. I’m not trying to tell you your job,but the nexus was so poorly explained Kirk must/could surely be alive in some alternate time line that it created.

Mr Orci this is the one chance to reverse Kirk’s terrible ending. This is a chance to allow these iconic characters to ride off into the sunset complete. A chance Lennon + McCartney never had.

We will never get the chance to see the Beatles on stage one last time, but we do have the chance to see the Lennon + McCartney of sci/fi together one last time.

You are one of the few people who can make this happen. I say bring Shatner back for no other reason than “It would be fun”


126. Trekmatt - October 8, 2007

Great interview :) Sounds pretty promising to me! Thanks Bob :)

127. New Horizon - October 8, 2007

115 – Singer couldn’t even get the suit right.

What was wrong with the suit exactly? Don’t say that it was wrong because there was no S on the back of the cape, because the S wasn’t part of the original suit…nor was it consistently drawn by artists. Colors changed a lot over the years as well, sometimes lighter, sometimes darker. The ‘S’ on the chest was smaller, but so was the original ‘S’ when Superman first came out. If anything, Singer stripped away years of interpretation and went back to the source for his particular version of the costume.

Singer’s version is just one more interpretation among many. It’s no more right or wrong than any other.

128. Viking - October 8, 2007

‘And the Enterprise design is awesome.’

Ah. Telling. It sounds like we’re going going to get our TOS Big E, with more detail, new pinstriping, and maybe some mag wheels, headers, and dual exhaust, IMO. Schweet! :D

129. Dr. Image - October 8, 2007

Whatever you guys do, don’t insult our intelligence this time around.
The people behind Voyager, Enterprise, and Nemesis dealt us quite enough of that service, thank you.

130. Kyle Nin - October 8, 2007

I’m relieved to hear that the movie will have connections to the (besides TOS – which is quite obvious) TNG, DS9, and ENT. It reinforces the fact that it’s not a remake/reboot and actually will fit into the established Trek universe. I can’t wait to see what they come up with.

131. Andy Patterson - October 8, 2007


Singer’s suit had the ittie bittie tights which made Superman look more like the ‘Metrosexual of Metropolis’. And I never saw the need for the weave design in the leotard just because Spider-Man did it. Plus the colors were too dark. Then, that’s just my opinion.

132. Thomas Jensen - October 8, 2007

Boy, Mr. Orci really seems to have the right idea about Star Trek. The ‘clues’ I’m getting from this seem to lead to a movie that gives us older Star Trek fans the original in idea and form once again.

But with some updating/changes that the story dictates. Clever. Perhaps then, fans will accept that some details are different because of the plot.

133. Ty Webb - October 8, 2007

Singer just didn’t get Donners Superman, despite claiming to be the biggest fan of the film. Donners movie had humour for a start, and a lead actor willing to put on two stone in real muscle so that he actually looked ‘super’. Rather than some skinny guy in a tobacco stained rubber suit with 5 inch heels on the boots. A disgrace and very boring movie I might add.

134. scott - October 8, 2007

#7 Love your site. The big question regarding the return of Shatner as Captain Kirk is my main reason for checking this site out every day. It is very important to me & a lot of other people. Rick Berman & company ran off half of the fans back in the 95 with Generations.
Like MLB & UPS, Star Trek lost a lot of its consumers with its own poor choices. The firing of Rick & the hiring of JJ was big news. That in itself is the best action Paramount has took with Star Trek in a long ass time. Another great thing besides the much needed new leadership is the idea of returning to the TOS era & the Kirk Enterprise. The death of Kirk was just wrong. Berman, Braga & Moore should always get shit for that.
Anyway I feel that Shatner’s Kirk should be resurrected Superman style.
Everyone knows it. It would bring back the millions of the ex-fans.
The ex-fans that went to see Wrath of Khan & Search For Spock over & over. Thats what Star Trek needs back. Repeat Business. Keep your fans like Star Wars & Stagate. And in the process of getting back the old fans, get some newer fans from Stargate & those other shows w/ creative casting (Hint, Hint). But the main thing for me & many others is the RETURN OF SHATNER AS CAPTAIN KIRK. Sounds simple anuff. It really is going to be a matter of making extra millions & saving the franchise. I say keep the Shatner the talk alive. Good luck Mr. Orci!

135. Oceanhopper - October 8, 2007

Cool interview, and sounds like a cool film!
Nnngh, Christmas 2008 is so far away!

136. mctrekkie - October 8, 2007

Star Trek is clearly in good hands with Mssr Orci and company..

Shame Nathan Fillion may be too old to play Kirk given the age range of the other cast members.

He’d be perfect.. and he handled some of that twisty Jos Whedon dialogue with aplomb.


1) Will the film be too dark (as in lighting) … everything is so damn dark these days in films,

2) Steady cam or that Galactica Documentary motion sickness cam?

3) Does your team write like Sorkin’s “Walk and Talk” or is your pacing different for this Trek Movie?

Finally, a request-

Great music, please…a sweeping memorable anthem, etc. Does John Williams have one left in him?

Thanks for respecting the fans, Mr Orci. I’m sure that Karma will reward you both critically and at the Box office.

137. Ty Webb - October 8, 2007

I agree it must have a good memorable score with memorable themes. Films just don’t have them these days, they play it safe with very forgettable samey generic scores.

138. Xai - October 8, 2007

Trying again…. my first post didn’t stick.

I am glad we are going to see a small nod to Enterprise and TNG. They are the bookends to this timeframe and I liked them, even if others didn’t. TOS is, of course, what everything is built upon, but I believe this universe is vast and has room for all the series and more stories yet to come.

Roberto, thanks for caring enough about this universe to protect it and help it grow further.

Someone above mentioned music. Yes, we have to have the dramatic music.

139. Xai - October 8, 2007

#125 Ivory,
Just to point out, Roberto Orci did address your concerns in the article…

“Roberto Orci: What J.J. said at Comic-Con is still true. We are actively perusing looking for a way to make a part that is worthy of him and that is not pandering to either his role in Star Trek or to the fans. ”

Anthony, sorry. I know what you said in #7, and I am not trying to push that subject along.


140. Penhall - October 8, 2007

Sounds good. I’m still hesitant about recasting everyone and stuff. Its gonna be hard as hell to accept other people in the original roles.

I’m glad Nimoy will be there and I really wish Shatner was gonna be included, but its not gonna happen. The script is getting locked down, they’re casting, they start shooting soon….if he was gonna be in it, we’d know about it.

It really sucks because Shatner and Nimoy together again in a new Trek movie would have been an EVENT.

141. Kevin - October 8, 2007

“So many of the design decisions are so faithful to what it was, much more faithful that you might imagine. We are trying to be so true to The Original Series in both look and the characterizations. And the Enterprise design is awesome.”

That’s what I wanted to hear. I wonder when they’ll let us see some of these designs.

“Why aren’t you doing what they did with Batman Begins and just start over and avoid opening yourself up to the critiques on breaking with canon?”

I cringed a little when I read that. But then smiled when I read

“The reason we aren’t starting over is because the people involved, both fans and behind the scenes, have worked so hard to specify what is canon – then to simply ignore it would be unnecessary. There is so much about The Original Series that is worth continuing. It is not like Batman where you can ignore everything.”

I’m actually getting excited here and it’s been a while since I could say I was excited about Trek. And no, I’m not bashing the BB era. Trek’s just been asleep for a few years.

142. last o' the timelords - October 8, 2007

Regardless of the final film I know in the dark theatre when it begins, if I hear the trumpet fanfare first I am going to let loose real tears.

Love avoiding the “prequel/reboot/remake” label. As Nimoy is in it and there is rumour of time travel. If bits of the movie cross the hundreds years of onscreen Trek history available then those labels don’t enter into it.

Future movies will be able to access the entire span of the franchise.

Title idea: Star Trek: Universe

143. Chris Pike - October 8, 2007

Fascinating interview. Very encouraging comments about production design being faithfull to what it was. Matt Jeffries was a genius, the look of TOS is so original and distinctive it would be crazy and very dissapointing to totally reimagine any of that. The most important design element decision comment was a little ambiguous – “And the Enterprise design is awesome.” – don’t know how to take that. The NEW design or the OLD design (upgraded in close-up detail etc)???? The latter being the most hoped for by most of us from a previous poll.

It’s great to know we do have a voice here, and that some of our thoughts do have some impact. Fans are writing this movie, and have taken on board the thoughts of fans. Couldn’t be better! Keep checking in on us…!

144. VOODOO - October 8, 2007

Ivory: 125


You said it all.

The guys making this film could really do something special with this film.

Although, I for one (I say this w/all due respect to Mr. Orci) feel that if they really wanted Shatner they would find a way.

Who knows, maybe they will find a way?

145. VOODOO - October 8, 2007

It is pretty cool (if true) that J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and others are actually listening to the concerns of ST fans on this site + others like it.

Do we get some type of writing credit?

146. Nathan - October 8, 2007

I want to be in this film.

147. Mr. Quatloos - October 8, 2007


Dude…you are so ON TARGET with this film it’s scary. Your approach to other Starfleet captains is right on the money — and something overlooked for a LONG time. I’ve always felt that the TOS episode The Ultimate Computer showed us what the other Captains were like.

Off topic: Thanks for your work/kudos on Jack of All Trades! I recently bought the DVD set and love the series! Great work there…and it was a really fun show! The sexual innuendo in there is HILARIOUS and it tends to come flying fast and furious. Too bad the show didn’t last as long as it deserved to.

Quite funny!

148. brendan - October 8, 2007

i hope to god that this is not going to have any “funny moments/lines” i dont know about your selves but the last films from the star trek 4 and onwards thought it nessary to make us laugh, when im watching a star trek movie (or any other si-fi film) i dont want humour i want pure si-fi, if i wanted to laugh i’d watch a adam sandler film (which i would’nt) im not a grumpy git, but i want this film to be a serious film, great special effects, great acting and great casting. with regards to shatner and nimoy then god bless shatner but really, he’s in no shape to be in this film as much as i love him in star trek films its time to move on, nimoy although in a little better shape would’nt fit in with this film either, im worried that casting this new bunch of actors will be very difficult, the tng series did a fantastic job, but the newest series “enterprise” is terrible.

in my mind this film is make or break for the star trek franchise, i hope they make it

149. Johnny Ice - October 8, 2007

Well i found Superman Returns suits work out just great and # 127 is absolutely right. Superman suit has changed over the years and Singer’s version is another interpretation. Dark colors for Superheros uniforms is that it is more subtle and not over the top bright colors like in 1970s and 1980s superheros movies. I like darker colors better

#133. I find sometimes the humor in Donner movies rather guffy and silly. I think Singer approach using less muscle then more the right approach also it actually works because off new tight uniforms define human muscle structure much better then older uniforms. Thou i agree, it wouldn’t have hurt the movie to have Brandon Routh put on two stone more muscle. However calling him skinny is laughable.

150. Captain Hackett - October 8, 2007

Wow, what a great interview!

Our best Christmas gift of 2008 is the best Star Trek ever made!


151. Camaro 09 - October 8, 2007

Post number 125

Is the best post ever. Nice job Ivory.

I liked that bit at the end.

Save James T. Kirk

It took some guts to challenge one of the writers like that.

I second you opinion.

152. Camaro 09 - October 8, 2007

Ivory (post #125) I loved your line that said,

“Why just have Abbott when Costello is begging for a role”

I actually did a spit take at my computer at work thinking of Shatner posting video’s on his site trying to get a role in the movie.

I enjoyed that post so much I showed my girlfriend + my mother. They both hate ST but understand that William Shatner as Kirk would be a big deal.

I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but I don’t think the film would be complete without William Shatner.

Mr. Orci please write a role for William Shatner.


153. cd - October 8, 2007

149 – I thought the suit looked bad. The combination of the small S and the neck tight collar detracted a lot from it. The bikini tights did not help. The short boots did not help. The S on the cape, I can take or leave. The changes to the suit make the difference between powerful looking and not.
The photoshopped pictures where that was corrected (yes,corrected) looked much better.
But besides the costume, the movie was disappointing. Singer made a bad redo of the original movie, and added ridiculous stuff like The Kid. Superman in SR was aloof, moody, and boring. Five seconds of Christopher Reeve is more entertaining than 2.5 hours of SR. Routh could be good as Superman, maybe he’ll get the chance someday.
Superman the Movie DID have problems, primarily the so-called humor of David and Leslie Newman, which was fully reveled (reviled?) in Superman III, and Hackman’s Luthor. Singer, via Spacey’s Hackman portrayal, mimicked that too.
Uhh, I just really did not like it.

154. steve623 - October 8, 2007

I’m missing the original universe already.

155. Mr. Quatloos - October 8, 2007

What was missing from Superman Returns was the fun. The storyline was kind of dark and moody, so it forced Routh to play it that way.

156. VOODOO - October 8, 2007

cd: 153

Superman Returns was weak + was not the best way to re-introduce Superman. I don’t blame Routh. I blame the melodramatic script.

It played more like the adventures of Lois Lane than an action packed sequel.

Plus, Kate Bosworth had zero charisma as Lois Lane.

157. cd - October 8, 2007

155 – Agreed. I think Routh has potential as Superman. But the only time I really saw him as Superman was when he talked to Lois after “saving” the plane, when he showed a little personality. (BTW, about the plane, I saw Singer talking about how much effort they put into making that scene accurately in terms of the engineering, with Superman bending the wing and breaking it. My question is: why would he have Superman break it? Superman would know how to grab the plane without destroying it. I think that gives some insight in how off the mark Singer’s thinking was on SR.)

158. cd - October 8, 2007

156 – Agree with you also. Lois Lane should have had more spunk. But of course she had to drag that kid around…

159. Nelson - October 8, 2007

Great interview, appreciate hearing what Mr. Orci said and Anthony for asking the kinds of questions on everyone’s minds!

Seems he has said a lot! The Enterprise is in the movie, Kirk sounds like he’s the Captain, the crew is mostly there.

The only question that really sticks with me is when this film will take place. Of course, we’ll find out when the film opens. I only bring this up because whenever I see The Corbomite Maneuver, it really feels like early days for this crew on the Enterprise. The characters feel like they are still getting to know each other, like Kirk recently took command. From what I am reading in the interview is that the film could be taking place within this timeframe or a little earlier, only based on the actors age info that was disclosed earlier. Or it could take place during the show’s 4th season if that ever had happened.

Whenever it happens, it all sounds like it’s in great hands. Mr. Orci has disclosed a lot of great info, and Mr. Nimoy feels that the story is great. So it looks pretty good so far.

160. I AM THX-1138 - October 8, 2007

Okay, can we get past Superman?

I, of course, am in agreement with Garth and Harry. I have no problem with a definite nod to the original series sense of style. Now we all know about how sets had to be dressed brighter for the crappy TV’s of the era, but who’s to say that fashion hadn’t swung back around in that direction in terms of hairstyles, dress lengths etc.? And nobody ought to have a problem with the designs of Matt Jeffries and Wah Ming Chang. Classic, Iconic, Legendary. I trust that these chaps are going to write and produce a good story, I’m just hoping, for my ownself, that I can look at a movie and recognize the communicator and phaser. I don’t want the Enterprise to look like it just appeared out of the “Alien” universe.

And Roberto,I realize that it’s not your department but you could cast me as ensign redshirt Timmy and blow me to bits in the climactic scene where we learn that Shatner decided he didn’t want to be in the movie.

I’m just sayin’ is all.

161. VOODOO - October 8, 2007

Still Kirok #101

You bring up a good point about what Scotty said in “Relics” I forgot all about that.

Did you read post # 125?

There was some good stuff in there that fits your arguments.

Sorry Anthony, I will drop the Shatner bit now.

162. Kenly - October 8, 2007

Another episode of the TrekMovie Report “Agenda” trying to get it’s point across that Canon doesn’t matter and everything should be rebooted.

Where have the good star trek sites gone where people working on Star Trek were asked questions without the interviewer’s opinion trying to take center stage….

163. chrispikeswheelchair - October 8, 2007

Very happy to have confirmed the whole gang will be in it, McCoy & Kirk along with Spock! Sweet! Can’t wait to see the Big E even if Jame Cawley’s intel a few weeks ago said basically “not so much”. One can hope they are listening out here as Orci says they are.

If the Enterprise is radically altered from what our collective perceptions are……..well that will be a shame, I still think TMP version takes a major back seat to the TOS version. Can’t wait for the teaser pics that will start to make their way to us all in ’08.

164. I AM THX-1138 - October 8, 2007

#162-Flame On!

Seriously, who’s holding a gun to your head? If you don’t like it here, go IM your serious Trek buddies and let us wallow in our mediocrity, being spoon-fed our opinions by the AP webmaster overlord.

BTW, what’s YOUR agenda?

165. Jon - October 8, 2007

Nice interview.As a fan of production design and such production designers as John Barrie,Joe Johnson and Ralph McQuarrie who together contributed to the look and world of Star Wars (especially ep.4 ).Will we hear from Richard Chambliss and his team on the feel and vision of Trek’s future in an interview?Perhaps even get to see a pre-production scketch?Or an interview with the soundtrack composer?…That’d be COOL.

166. Sean4000 - October 8, 2007

I am just thankful that whatever you guys come up with, you’ll be working with real FX talent at ILM. After being consistently disappointed with CBS’ TOSR I could only wonder what would happen if they were to spearhead a major motion picture. Shivers.

I love CG as much as the next but I am also not afraid to speak out when I feel something needs to be done.

Keep up the good work and I can’t wait until Christmas Day 2008!

167. JCool - October 8, 2007

# 162

Why are YOU here anyway?

Of you don’t like it here then go to another Trek site.

No one is stopping you!

BTW Thanks Anthony for everything!

I’m staying right here :)

168. Granger - October 8, 2007

I teach 17 and 18 year-olds, and I find that most of them know precious little about TOS Star Trek other than some character names and basic outlines of the ST universe. They know about warp drive and transporters and the like, and somewhat more about TNG, but many don’t even recognize the old phaser, communicator, or tricorder. Since a big movie has to pull in that young audience, an alternate-universe story is a clever way to work around objections of hard-core old-style trekkies while updating the look and feel of the ship, equipment, and costumes to appeal to a younger audience. You can’t be so faithful to 40-year-old designs that a youngster rolls his eyes at the outdated look and feel. You need a show that looks like it might really be the 23rd century as we clumsily envision it today.

If they retain the basic ship design (primary saucer, secondary cylinder, two outboard engines on pylons) they could keep older fans on board while having fun with newer looks and, of course, new merchandising to go with it. And the movies were all over the map regarding costumes and phasers and communicators and tricorders, so those are certainly fair game for lots of updating.

In the end, all of that is just window dressing. Cool spaceships and effects can only take you so far – as the interview stressed, it is the interaction of the characters that makes or breaks a Star Trek movie. If they can capture the magic of the classic troika and not get bogged down in canon, that is key. Show us how the different strengths of each side of the troika combine to defeat a strong villain, one who has an understandable motivation that isn’t simplistic nor obscure.

The hard part is finding the right balance. TOS had many stories that were old stories cribbed from successful movies and short stories recast into a space setting, while other episodes were straight action/adventure with a slight scifi twist, and then some episodes went for hard-core classic scifi ideas – awe and wonder. Which type of episode makes a good movie?

The TOS-cast movies were various attempts at different aspects of the formula. The first movie went for a big idea as in true classic scifi, but got lost in overlong effects and wooden performances with an enemy that was too abstract for a mass audience. The second movie dialed back to the sort of story you might expect in the old show if it had ten times the budget and were more militaristic, with a great over-the-top villain. That was a hit and saved the franchise – what many consider the best of the TOS-cast movies.

The third movie spent time digging out of the Spock is Dead hole and going for Enterprise is Dead as the new gimmick, but was goofier in some ways. The fourth went for humor and was another hit, again moving away from classic scifi to fish-out-of-water humor in the present day with a scifi plot device and required little deep background about the show. The fifth had the glimmer of big idea, but had two silly villains and was a sad failure with lousy effects, sophomoric humor, uncharacteristic behavior from crew portrayed as fairly incompetent for laughs, etc. The sixth went for the retold plot, putting The Manchurian Candidate and some other plots in a space setting and bringing a welcome return of Nick Meyer’s militarism, true menace, and beat-up-old-ship stuff.

I’m glad that the new writers liked the second movie, as that could mean they’ll opt for a dashing militaristic adventure with the troika front and center combating a strong, motivated villain.

169. John Trumbull - October 8, 2007

Great interview. Since Mr. Orci is probably reading this, here’s what I’m hoping for in the new movie:

-A great story first & foremost.

-A part for Shatner as Kirk.

-PETER SARSGAARD as young Kirk.

-Paul McGillion as Scotty (I checked him out for the first time on Stargate Atlantis last night, and he’d be aces).

-Gary Sinse as McCoy ( I know this is pretty much a pipe dream at this point, but what the hey).

-A design asthetic that strongly reflects TOS, done with today’s technology (This goes for everything from the ship design to the gogo boots & miniskirts).

-Heroes that act like HEROES, not pc-whiners.

-No Archer (I’d frankly like to forget that ENT existed while I’m watching the movie).

170. New Horizon - October 8, 2007

Last thing I’ll say about Superman Returns.

I enjoyed it for the mature, thoughtful movie, that it was. Even my wife loved it. It just wasn’t as loud and abrasive as the other movies out at the time. Spider man 3 was a complete joke of a movie…completely shallow. I just don’t get excited by explosions and silliness anymore. Singer was able to hold onto the core of what the first Superman movie was about, and strip away the shallow parts that someone thought would be great in the original. There was still humor to be found in SR, but it was simply understated…so many ‘little’ character moments…it felt far more real. It was the first time I was able to truly relate to Superman on a human level and still see him as someone who had super human abilities.

171. T Negative - October 8, 2007

Mr. Orci,

I have to agree with #106

Keep the original Phaser #2 in this movie!! They were the best looking ones ever in Star Trek. Wah Chang was ahead of his time. Especially with the phasers.

Even though I am not a fan of “Enterprise” the Defiant bridge set they recreated was very good and would look great in the movie. Perhaps with updated panels, computer displays and modern lighting techniques the production designer could make the E more modern yet keep the nostalgic look of TOS at the same time.

I would also prefer the Enterprise exterior to resemble the ship that was used in the series run. Not the one from the pilots. The larger bridge dome, red nacelle caps and huge deflector dish were changed after the second pilot for a reason. They did not look good!!

Great interview!!

172. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 8, 2007

Hallowed be The Orci.

173. Jeffrey S. Nelson - October 8, 2007

Be nice to see Morgan Woodward as Captain Tracy. Just take away his phaser packs.

174. VOODOO - October 8, 2007

John # 169

I agree on all points except Peter Sarsgard as Kirk.

I don’t see him in that role.

175. Xai (likes them all...) - October 8, 2007

Up, up and….. out…

I enjoy Superman (my soon to be son-in-law went to high school with Routh), but this is Trek.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
One (or two) to beam up…

To those of you awaiting an announcement for the actor(s) playing Kirk, I think you may still be waiting awhile. And to top it off… since this is a “surprise party” you may never see an official announcement of Shatner in the film until it releases. That is… if he’s cast.

176. Tassieboy - October 8, 2007

The more I hear from Orci, the more enthusiastic I feel about this movie. I have confidence and faith in the team.

177. Nelson - October 8, 2007

T-Negative, apologies for my geek comment to come regarding the Phaser 2, actually Matt Jeffries designed the phaser, Wah Chang later twealed them by adding some metal bits and detail and changed the color. The black and white phasers of the first few episodes probably didn’t photograph well. Wah made huge contributions never the less, such as the communicator, tricorder, salt monster, Balock, etc.

All classic design elements and what visually made Trek stand out and still cool today. I am also a fan of production design and I will be curious what this new team will do for the look of Star Trek. It’s an important element. Granted story comes first and the cast has to gel. But the look is just as important, IMO.

178. cd - October 8, 2007

170 – Hmm, well, I will agree with you about Spider-Man 3, very disappointing.
Enough of all that, back to Star Trek.
As far as design, following the Jefferies and Wah Chang aesthetic is good, and I would love to see some of the Franz Joseph/Star Fleet Technical Manual designs mixed in too. I think what they did the ship in Charlie X was great: take design elements from TAS but bring them in consistently with TOS design.
And now for something completely different, how about Yoko Kanno to do the music? >;>}

179. T Negative - October 8, 2007

177 Nelson

No problem with the correction and thanks!! I was referring to the “final” Phaser 2 version we see during most of the series run. Jefferies deserves most of the credit for the appearance of the weapon, however Chang’s final version is the best Star Trek weapon ever created by far. Pictured below from “Gamesters of Triskellion”.×16/The_Gamesters_of_Triskelion_028.JPG

180. jonboc - October 8, 2007

#168- “They know about warp drive and transporters and the like, and somewhat more about TNG, but many don’t even recognize the old phaser, communicator, or tricorder”

Well, on one hand I can agree as my nephew is 17, he and his friends know very little of TOS. But he loves the my master replica’s phaser, communicator and Tricorder every bit as much as the light saber. When he and his group drop by to shoot some pool they love to pick the props up and play with them. And I happily give them a little TOS 101…”Dont pull the trigger on that setting…you’ll vaporize the entire pool table and I’ll lose.” They don’t roll their eyes in disgust or scratch their head. They think they look cool.

They particularly like the design that plugs the smaller hand phaser into the pistol phaser. It not only looks badass and futuristic, it makes sense. They also like the “bling” factor of the gold grid on the communicator and love flipping it open..a bit too much I might add…I have to take it away. And they also like watching the moire spin. But when they ask me what it does…I have no idea what to say. lol

Anyway, I haven’t heard one kid say, my cell is smaller than this and does more. These kids get it IF they are exposed to it. I don’t think there is an inerent dislike of it…it’s just not on their radar.

This movie can put TOS back on their radar, and make long term fans happy at the same time. And it looks like Mr. Orci and company are on the right track.

181. T Negative - October 8, 2007

Try again…..

182. Noleuser - October 8, 2007

Shouldn’t we here about final casting soon, this sucker starts shooting in a month?! Also, how about a fan puts in a line of dialogue like they did for Transformers?????? : )

I’m glad to hear there will be nuggets of info from all the treks

183. Iowagirl - October 8, 2007

If Kirk IS Star Trek, then there has been no Star Trek after Generations, nor will there ever be Star Trek again, because the character died and Star Trek died with him. Consider that, Mr. Orci. This is not just an opinion – this is a logical conclusion from what you said.

184. Alex Rosenzweig - October 8, 2007


I have to say, this is an excellent interview, and a whole lot of what Mr. Orci has to say is very exciting to me. It sounds to me a whole lot like he and his compatriots have a great love of Star Trek, and we can expect to see a lot of that made manifest on the screen next year. And if all goes well, it’ll be a wonderful film!

The only thing thatmakes me at all concerned is this line: “…the solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherently part of what the story is and something we are reluctant to give away.”

If, as was said just a bit before that: “The reason we aren’t starting over is because the people involved, both fans and behind the scenes, have worked so hard to specify what is canon – then to simply ignore it would be unnecessary. There is so much about The Original Series that is worth continuing.”, then why does there need to even be a specific story point to “liberate” yourselves?

I can’t speak for everyone, but I could understand that there might be choices to judiciously adjust things. To add another quote: “That being said there are some things that have never been specified fully in canon that we take liberties with.” And that’s fair. Not to stray too far into the side-debate on “Enterprise”, but it really had very, very few actual continuity errors, far fewer than TNG did relative to TOS, actually. It did, though, stake out very different territory than what many fans *assumed* about that era, and soe folks were quite upset about that. I’d not be surprised if “Star Trek (2008)” embodied similar such things about the TOS characters, and maybe that’s a good thing, if those new wrinkles serve the story well.

I just have difficulty reconciling the obvious respect for the Trekverse that Mr. Orci expresses with that word, “liberate”. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, especially since so much else in the interview made me feel good about the film. I guess all I really am saying is to express my hope that we’re either in the same Trekverse at the end of the film that we were at the beginning, or one so close to it that the differences really don’t mean that much in the long run. I certainly wouldn’t insist that the writers divulge their surprises before they’re ready ;) , but that one teensy bit of reassurance would go a long way with me, especially in the context of how many other cool things Mr. Orci had to say.

But, hey, anybody who can happily slip Trek novel references into a major motion picture has to be at least somewhat on the right track, eh? :)


185. ZoomZoom - October 8, 2007

As others have said, I reckon Shatner is in it. A month away from shooting, the story- if not the exact dialogue- sounds more or less locked down to me. I can’t imagine they will be altering the story that much now. So if they are still looking for a way to put Bill in it at this late stage then it will end up being exactly what they don’t want it to be. Done just for the sake of doing it.
Just get it announced will you!

186. Komack - October 8, 2007

Mr. Orci, you have my blessings. I get the feeling The Great Bird of the galaxy, will be pleased. It was many years ago that he voiced the desire to give Star Trek a re-birth, without constraints. You, JJ, and co. must breathe life into this entity while under the microscope of millions of trekers faithful to the franchise. In the sixties, Gene had the unenviable task of translating his futuristic vision to a contemporary audience, and although he was extremely successful, it was obvious that what he wanted for the show was much more grander than anyone could have imagined at the time. Now it can be done.

In addition, I have read alot about casting rumors, and how important it is to find the perfect portrayers. Let us not forget that many viewers were more fascinated by the Enterprise, herself, than with any cast member. The Enterprise is majestic, she’s miraculous, legendary. In some ways she has a life of her own. Like Admiral McCoy said to Data in the end of the first half of ST. TNG pilot Encounter at Farpoint, “…(Enterprise) she’s got the right name. Treat ‘er like a lady and she’ll always bring ya home.”
This element was waisted in the latest Enterprise series, and I believe this movie MUST have this element.

187. Leonel - October 8, 2007

Awesome interview.

Now about that music: I think it would be neat if the opening credits somehow incorporated elements from the original Star Trek TOS theme with The Enterprise theme from The Motion Picture.

188. Leonel - October 8, 2007

Forgot to include – I once listened closely to the music for The Search For Spock, and it sounded like they took Spock’s theme from Wrath of Kahn and basically ran with it.

So incorporating the two themes has got to be possible!! :-)

189. Demode - October 8, 2007

I am looking more and more forward to this movie. I really hope Shatner comes back, even if its just at the end. To bring him back would be wonderful, and having Spock (Nimoy) have a scene with Kirk (Shatner), who he hasn’t scene in over 80 years.. just imagine the emotion! That would be an amazing scene, for sure.

190. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 8, 2007

#125 – Damn right! The power is in YOUR hands, Mr. Orci. Make some real history!

#142 – “Regardless of the final film I know in the dark theatre when it begins, if I hear the trumpet fanfare first I am going to let loose real tears”

Agreed! Let that fanfare blare loud & proud! When used at the appropriate moments, it can indeed move people to tears.

#189 – A great point! As much fun as it would be for us in the audience just to see Nimoy & Shatner together again, it would be even more emotional knowing that the characters of Kirk and Spock had been apart for decades! I daresay Spock might flash another 10,000 watt smile, like he did when he saw Kirk alive in Amok Time! :)

191. George Armstrong Custer - October 8, 2007

I wonder if we will see Captain Tracey before he went nuts

192. Iowagirl - October 9, 2007

– Being a captain in Starfleet should be a special position and we don’t feel that another captain has to be diminished in order to elevate Captain Kirk. If you are a captain in Starfleet you are a cool mother f—er. –

Agreed – but Kirk was the coolest mother f—er of all!

193. theARE - October 9, 2007

While these interviews have reaffirmed my faith in the new team to some degree, I still have some concerns.

The “solution we have for maintaining canon while liberating us is inherently part of what the story is” line seems to give some credence to the rumored Romulans playing with time story.

I think most people have had enough of time travel, and want a proper “Star Trek”. Travel through the stars, don’t travel through time!

Also recasting everybody is a concerns – Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Scotty is enough to establish in the first movie. With just those you can show Kirk coming aboard as Captain for the first time. McCoy and Scott may not be department chiefs, McCoy a junior doctor, with Piper still there, and Scott an assistant engineer.

You could tell a straight forward first mission story, showing how the relationships between these characters came to developed without the need to violate, or take “liberties” with any canon.

I understand fully that the this film needs to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. Personally i think a “Captains Kirk’s First Mission” film will appeal more than a “Romulans change the timeline and Spock has to stop it” film.

194. FSL - October 9, 2007

Re: 26

I never thought about that until now. The last Trek movie we got here was First Contact. Good point. (I’m from Hong Kong)

195. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 9, 2007

If the plot rumours are true and the movie takes place in an alternate timeline, I don’t understand why old Spock from the real timeline has to play the saviour.
Why not the old Spock from this alternate timeline?
Why should Spock help some people from an alternate timeline? Would meddling with an alternate timeline not violate the Prime Directive?
If he would save his own timeline, I could understand it. But then, canon could be changed, which is obviously what they don’t want…

Actually I wouldn’t mind if canon would be changed to some degree. Everything we have seen as of yet happened the way we saw it until the point where the enemy travels back in time. It had to happen this way, it was destiny. If the enemies would then start to change things, so be it. Canon wouldn’t be violated as everything we saw happened. It lead up to the timetravel. Without everything happening like it did, maybe the enemies wouldn’t be able to travel back in time. So even when they start to change things, every series and movie would stay canon as they lead up to this event.
Please, no alternate timeline.

196. Notbob - October 9, 2007

Ok. That’s it. Roberto Orci has done a pretty good job at convincing me that the film is in good hands. He said a lot of things that—made me feel like their all going about this in a smart way.

Just as long as the movie does not end with Spock in Washinton DC looking at a statue of a Monkey headed Abraham Lincoln. Man that messed up Planet of the Apes.

And his Terminator 2 point was interesting; however (note the semi colon) it would have been just as strange if we saw John Conner with two Terminators approaching, not knowing if either was good or bad, only to have the two terminators come face to face, drop their weapons and star dancing.

Note: Just because I am happy with what I read I will still continue to second guess, rant and criticize because….hey, it’s me. And my girlfriend won’t let me criticize her so….who else’s left?

But, seriously Roberto Orci, Abrams, et al sound like they all have some good ideas and based upon this it sounds like this could be cool.

197. CTIII - October 9, 2007

It seems like they are getting most of their ideas from here and not from the official Movie message board at To me that seems kind of odd.

At any rate…assuming they really do read all these comments, are they gonna put Dr. Piper on the ship as CMO? Because McCoy came *after* him…and even though everyone wants to see the Spock/Kirk/McCoy chemistry, if they follow canon and this movie is set before the TV episodes of TOS, Piper is the Dr.

Additionally, while Chekov can be mentioned and seen in passing, assuming he was serving on the ship elsewhere in the TV series, he should not be on the bridge at all, as he wasnt seen there until the second season…and until this movie, we took it as canon that he wasnt even on the ship, but whatever.

Lastly, is Sulu gonna be wearing blue as a physicist in the movie, b/c thats how it was in the original series before he took his position on the bridge.

198. Sebi - October 9, 2007

# StillKirok
What did you expect from ENT? 60s TV-show design or something crappier like that? My opinion is that it was more realistic in comparison to our own time. Nobody in the 2000 would build a starship like they imagined it in the 1960s (I’m not saying TOS wasn’t great). And there weren’t soooo many things told about the 22nd century in the other series, so who cares?

Maybe one reason ENT was cancelled and ST in generall isn’t successfull anymore is because of die-hard-fans like StillKirok who can’t tolerate something new. If you expect an original TOS-design (bridge sets, hallway sets) from STXI and everything fitting into canon, you’ll be very disappointed…

199. StillKirok - October 9, 2007

My big question is, what does “we’re trying to find Shatner a role” mean? What exactly are they doing? Logically, that would mean negotiation, but Shatner has said that nothing’s happened on that front. Logically, that would mean he would be in the script, but that was never the case according to both Shatner and Nimoy.

This isn’t finding the cure for cancer. In the nicest way possible, I’m trying to ask what are they doing? It’s been nearly 3 months since Comicon. Hope for me on this issue is about as dead as Enterprise.

Maybe some of that hope would come back if I had a clue what the comment actually means.

200. theARE - October 9, 2007

On the Chekov thing. Given that some of the filming is happening in Iceland, maybe the film features a recently settled, barely habitable human colony, settled by Russian families?

Chekov may be a local kid, his family having recently emigrated there. At the end of the movie Kirk could sponsor Chekov to go to the academy.

Bit of a coincidence maybe, but we know very little about Chekov’s background.

201. COMPASSIONATE GOD - October 9, 2007

101. StillKirok – October 8, 2007
“The reason Trek lost ratings every year was because they put out a lousy product and more and more of the audience got fed up with it until finally Enterprise was canceled.”

True; as a witness to the fans running away from the series, to news accounts (for anyone still in denial) about fans abandoning the series (and fanchise with the last two TNG movies), Berman’s arrogance and desire to avoid the legacy of TOS led to the death of the franchise. Despite any influences from other series, still it is all too telling why we are back in OS era

About Shatner: TOS is such a rich canvas, certainly talented writers should be able to use the VERY flexible backdrop of science fiction to find logical and entertaining reasons for the Kirk character’s participation to the degree of Nimoy’s involvement.

202. Holo J - October 9, 2007

Considering ENT has brought lots of young fans to Star Trek. I believe James the lad who Nimoy has invited to the premier of the film was a big ENT fan and I know lots of other kids who have come to Trek through that series, my nephew being one of them so why not give ENT a nod in the film?

I believe ENT made a good Job of connecting the world as we know it to the world of Trek. As sebi said “it was more realistic in comparison to our own time” and I enjoyed a lot of the blanks in Trek history that where filled in. So to ignore it completely from canon would be very unfair I feel.

Great Interview Anthony I have enjoyed reading both part one and two of this interview. Roberto Orci seems ,like a big trek fan. When he mentioned that Christmas with his uncle was for Trek. And that he didn’t think a Christmas had gone by, to this day, that they didn’t give each other Star Trek stuff, it made me smile. It’s just like that with my nephew now, He cant get enough of Star Trek and that’s all thanks to watching ENT.

I think the younger audience on the whole find TOS the hardest to get into, I love it myself as it where I started my Trek love affair so I have been trying to get my nephew to watch it more and slowly he has come around to it ( He already loved the TOS movies just found the effects of TOS series hard to swallow I think). I reckon this movie should try and capture the look and feel of TOS as much as possible but with just with a more modern feel to it. As I would like it to tie in with canon as much as possible. I think what I would really like this movie to achieve is to make people who don’t know the Original series want to watch it and a see what it was about.

I would love to see this make CBS Paramount do more to the effects for the original and give us a more complete update for the effects of TOS and give us a Special Edition on DVD because of this movie creating more interest from the kids who can’t look past the dated effects. (Because CBS there is so much more that could be done, given the time and money and you know it!!!)

But mostly even if its only hinted at I would like to see old resurrected Kirk, (Shatner) with old Spock (Nimoy) have a happy ending.

203. Ivory - October 9, 2007

Camaro 151 + 152:

“The best post ever”

You are making me blush.

When I went back and re-read it my post came off a little arogant.

I meant no disrespect at all to Roberto Orci or any of the other people working on the film.

It was just a heart felt thing I typed in about 30 seconds (as you can see by my spelling errors) but thanks to you + all the other who liked what I had to say.

204. Iowagirl - October 9, 2007

# 199 StillKirok

I share your questions and your doubts, but I hope that Orci would not just perpetuate his admittedly imprecise statement just to calm the fans, if it was nothing but a barefaced lie. This would seem a very unwise marketing strategy.

205. Ivory - October 9, 2007

# 204

Roberto Orci has no reason to lie. If they didn’t want Shatner they would just say there is no place for him in the movie.

206. Mark Lynch - October 9, 2007

He looks like a geek, talks like a geek and has the kind of collection a geek would move out of his parents basement for.

We are in good hands…. :)

Looking forward to Christmas 2008, except it will probably be March 2009 until we get to see this in the UK….

207. RJO - October 9, 2007


208. Snake - October 9, 2007

Mr orci, if you are reading – i was wondering what you consider to be your order of the trek films – best to….not so best..

I know from the prev interview that u consider Khan to be best (as does just about everyone) but what do you make of TMP? Search for Spock, First Contact etc etc..? It seems TMP has certainly risen in the opinions of most Trekkers over the years….yet SFS still seems to get a bum rap – yet its second to Khan imo

Would you agree with this listing?:


Great ones:

Pretty goods:
I, Gen

Not so good:
Nem, V, Ins

209. Cervantes - October 9, 2007

#99 Andy Patterson

One of the factors I’m most looking forward to in this Movie will be it’s soundtrack, and the subject of referencing some TOS incidental music for this score has indeed been brought up before. See the ‘Catergories’ list on the right where there has been 6 Music topics, for comments on that.

#106 CanuckLou

Agreed with this Movie having handphasers being somewhat similar to TOS ones…but I have to stick up for the original ‘communictators’ too…
Now I don’t expect the Movie ones to look *exactly* the same, but I do think that it looks better cinematically to have an actor have an prop in his hand and ‘flip’ it open, rather than say, touch a ‘badge’ on his uniform ( which was a logical enough evolution, due to ‘miniturization, ), considering this is a supposed TOS-era storyline.

No two sets of film-makers/writers in the world would come up with the same looking Movie production, and I guess I’m a little jumpy with this particular set of film-maker’s talk of them being ‘liberated’ as long as they don’t undo ‘established canon’…which by utilising a ‘time-travel’ / ‘alternate timeline’ story ( which if true, I am against, just for the record ), they certainly will be, but it won’t necessarily *look* much like the Original Series as we know it. I don’t apologise for wanting a TOS *looking* Movie, which even ‘Star Trek:The Motion Picture’ and it’s sequels weren’t at the end of the day.

I guess it’s the designer in me, and the fact that I’d like a TOS-looking Movie to generate interest in the classic series…

210. litenbug - October 9, 2007

Some are back to hoping, wishing and praying again…
1. Some wish that all the other series never happened.
2. Some say that Shatner must, MUST be in this film.

1. Too late and too bad and if you feel so betrayed, why did you watch it? Yes, the thundering herd of Trek fans abandoning the franchise still echos…
2. It may happen, it may not. But why must every other thread devolve to “solutions and pleas” for it to happen?

Go see what the site owner said in #7 and if you feel censored, talk to him

211. Leonel - October 9, 2007

Yes – very little is known about Chekov. Talk about an opportunity to explain how he got to serve on Enterprise.

I do remember somewhere hearing that it was established that he greatly admires both Spock and Kirk. So, whoever suggested Kirk sponsors Chekov for the academy, cool idea. I’m suddenly also remembering the following interaction between Kirk and Chekov, upon seeing a Sulu at the helm of Enterprise-E. A very brief moment, which suggests that they have a history beyond the time portrayed in the second season of TOS:

Chekov: “I was never that young!”

Kirk: “No — you were YOUNGER.”

212. Snake - October 9, 2007

I wonder in 10 years or so when they’ve done all sequels etc if you’ll be able to watch them in order like the Wars prequels…

i.e Star Trek 1, Star Trek 2, Star Trek 3, TOS, Movies I- VII

btw i hope what happens is that after this Paramount concentrates all its energys on continuing THE FILM Franchise and not go off and do about 3 tv shows with diff casts as that will just dilute the appeal of the features…

213. Star Trackie - October 9, 2007

” If you expect an original TOS-design (bridge sets, hallway sets) from STXI and everything fitting into canon, you’ll be very disappointed… ”

Allow me to direct your attention to Mr. Orci’s statement in the above interview…I guess you missed it…

Roberto Orci-
“So many of the design decisions are so faithful to what it was, much more faithful that you might imagine. We are trying to be so true to The Original Series in both look and the characterizations. “

214. NCC-73515 - October 9, 2007

in the ENT mirror episodes, all the designs were accurate (except t’pol’s uniform). it was a big success, i think.

215. Snake - October 9, 2007

This film will surpass Titanic as biggest ever grosser.

oh and no Shat in the movie?

like having a prawn pasta salad without the prawns…

216. Jay - October 9, 2007

To my fellow Trekmovie’rs:

This movie sounds great, i think we can expect a really good representation of TOS in this film… short skirts n all lol, however my only concern atm is the lack of Shatner and the quality of the Villain… for me Shatner is essential, it seems stupid to have Nimoy in the film and not the Shat man, and Nimoy has even stated that the film would be better with the Shat in it… I rest my case on that one. As for the Bad guy or ‘Villian’ as i put it, i think a Romulan would be a cool idea, i remind you that in Nemesis it was mostly the Remans that we dealt with and the actual villian in that film was human, so why not? hasnt been done before in a film at least. In fact, for me, the Villains race is really not important, whats important to me is that the Villain is menacing and has a fantastic screen presence… like Kahn did, or better like Darth Vader in Star Wars V – although i prefer Trek by miles Vader had menacing screen presence!!! Being British myself im used to you Americans :P using Brits as the ‘Bad guys’ and i think thats a great idea, Brits make great bad guys… its like a gentlemanly shakespearian evil HAHA so having a brit as the Villain in this film would be wicked.

To Mr Orci:

First things first… Roberto Orci is such a snuff name man, its wicked! respect to your parents on that one *high fives*

moving on…

Im really excited after reading that interview and to be honest it rested alot of bad feelings that i previously had about this movie… i think its safe to say that this movie is in safe hands!!

However there is one thing that i believe needs to happen…. Shatner – I wont say anymore on that topic.

Just to round things up mate here are my musts for you guys to consider:


2) A good story line that is easy to follow and is TREKISH!

3) A Villain that makes me Sh!t my pants and commands the screen

4) references to other known trek events n stuff – always been a strong part of trek.

and finally 5) a great ending that makes me want to cry

My sincere thanks to you Mr Orci for being such a dude and good luck with this project.

217. zn - October 9, 2007

I want a good movie. I don’t care if Shatner is in it or not. The casting of the young spock (“sylar”!) is brilliant. Make a good film based upon the rich material bequeathed to you by the Federation Chronicles (ie. the earlier Trek films and shows) and it will be a great thing. Don’t listen to fuddie duddies who want you to just repeat the original series—re-render it, don’t repeat, like Goya repainting a Rembrant (or pick your own overstated analogy).

Story, script, casting, and an eye for the trek universe and the options it gives you to come up with a great film…all I care about.

Good interview.

218. zn - October 9, 2007

Oh and one more thing.

The original series was best when it faced the mysterious and strange in imaginative ways.

It was awful when it tried the JFK grandstanding or silly attempts at humor or cheap moralizing.

If you guys can capture what’s best in your own original creative ways, you have my vote.

Thanks for doing this.

219. Snake - October 9, 2007

Please try to get RUSSEL CROWE as a villian or as some starship commander – that would just be flat out AWESOME.

I know he’s booked up with about 20 ridley Scott movies but he must have a window in his schedual somewhere…and his role wouldnt have to require the full amount of shooting days..

Just throw 10 million at him for a few days work Brando style and his name will add intrigue and curiosity from Mr Joe average movie goer – ‘Hmmm xmas time…what to see?…whats that? a star trek movie starring Russel crowe?! ok one to star trek please…’

220. JBS - October 9, 2007

Great interview. Mr. Orci says all the right things – getting us excited without giving away much. Yes, I do want to be surprised, but I have no self control, so please don’t tell me too much – just like you are doing now.

I don’t understand all the bad mouthing directed towards the Enterprise series. I have only seen a few episodes recently (I didn’t watch it before because I didn’t have cable – in order to keep my kids from watching too much tv), and I have been impressed with what I’ve seen.

I agree with #198 Sebi. One should keep an open mind and accept that change happens (that’s life). I plan on going to the movie with a completely open mind, and I’ll bet I will enjoy it much more than someone who goes with such fixed expectations as has been expressed in other posts. Let’s relax and have a good time!

221. chris - October 9, 2007

Bob you’re a Hottie send me an e-mail

222. Ian Fults - October 9, 2007

Just to clairfy what you are about to read here, I am a HUGE Trek fan, been one ever since I can remember, have a tattoo on my chest. Enough said.

But I feel I am SO in the minority with most people here. I would LOVE to see a new Trek film, but not now.

When I was 14 years old, I watched Star Trek III the Search for Spock, and had to wait 2 years for the next movie. Inbetween, all I had were the novels, THEN ST:TNG came out, so I was excited to be watching Trek every week. 5 Years Later ST : DS9 comes out, NOW I get 2 shows a week! I am in HEAVEN!!!

ST : TNG is done, in comes my most HATED show ST : V, still have 2 shows of Trek a week, but only one is any good . . .

Then ST : DS9 is gone, and now I am only left with one show a week, Star Trek Voyeure as I like to call it . . . .

FINALLY it finishes its run, so what do they try to do? HEY lets go BACK in time in the trek Universe and show the First Warp Ship, and call it just ENTERPRISE!. It was a great Idea! The problem. ALL the writers EVER knew how to write were NEXT GEN Universe episodes, so for 3 years we are given stories that involve Nosicans . . Ferengi!?!? .. . BORG!!??

Then someone WAKES up in the 4th season and we finally get stories about the birth of the Federation, showing how we met the races of the original Trek, but too little too late, they went to the well too many times and when they finally filled it up, we all moved away from the well onto other shows.

This movie will be coming out only 4 years after the last Trek show was cancelled. During those 4 show’s run, in 17 years we got 25 seasons of Star Trek which, on average, means we have roughly 575 episodes of Trek, not including TOS or the films.

Let Trek STAY AWAY for another 6 years, let the fans CRAVE it first, and when you do, PLEASE let go of Nimoy and Shatner! If you want new actors to play these roles, they have a hard enough time doing this in the Shadow of those who played them before, now you want to actually INCLUDE the original actors with this movie!!??

Imagine how hard it is going to be selling this to the fans. If you are going to do this, then do it with a CLEAN Slate, be Brave and Do a “BATMAN BEGINS”, press the Reboot button, but not now, in 6 years.

I will be gathering with my friends to see this film on opening night regardless if you make this next year or 6 years from now, but the only question remians, WILL you make a good enough film that I will CRAVE to see it multiple times?

From what I have read here, I do not think that will be possible . . .

223. I AM THX-1138 - October 9, 2007

#222-From what I have read here, I do not think that will be possible . . .

Please elaborate. From what I have read here, I’m licking my chops for this movie. You point out that it has been four years since Enterprise was cancelled, but for a great many of us, Star Trek has been gone much longer.
Don’t get me wrong about Enterprise. When it was on, I didn’t much care for it as it seemed out of place with it’s apparent disregard for canon. And I’m not a devout “canonista”, I just like things where they belong and how they should look in my minds eye. My wife and I are actually enjoying watching it these days for some entertaining diversion that is “somewhat” Trek related, but I look at it like some of the novels. Fun but not real.
Please don’t find me argumentative, Ian, I just found some of what you said contradictory.

224. Dennis Bailey - October 9, 2007

#223:”Fun but not real.”

None of it is real.

225. Harry Ballz - October 9, 2007

And sometimes it was real fun!

226. StillKirok - October 9, 2007

Including the original actors in the movie actually provides a means to establish that they are indeed following canon, and are passing the torch properly. I think it’s a great idea if done right.

227. Ian Fults - October 9, 2007

Actually I point out that by the time this film comes out, it will be 4 years since Enterprise was off the air, and I say they should wait another 6 years to make fans CRAVE it more.

My final statement was ellaborated on in my rant about Star Trek history, the fact that they are bringing this movie out so soon to me is a big Mistake.

And if you really want to pass the torch, Watch STAR TREK VI : THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY again, and you will see that movie was intended to Pass The Torch.

Put yourself into an actors shoes. Here you are playing an Iconic Character that you KNOW if you screw it up, SO many fans will lambaste you badly.

NOW Add the fact that having the original actor playing that same character WITH you, while you are trying to emulate and make it your own, it will make your job 10 times harder.

I am not being contradictory when I mention all that I think is wrong with what they are doing, and then concluding that what I have read here will not make me want to see this film over and over again. I HOPE they score, but I have LOW expectations.

If they go above them, and I see this film at least 5 times, then i was proven worng, only December 25th 2008 will decide that.

The Fourth Season of ENTERPRISE is the BEST TREK I have seen in a LONG time, but it was too little too late.

228. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

I think it would be cool if the new movie, just like every episode of TOS, did a little pre-credits teaser! Give us a hard start with the first scene, establishing what the basic plot is going to be, end that scene with a really cool reveal (perhaps the grand entrance of Leonard Nimoy … God, seeing him onscreen again for that first moment is gonna be awesome!), then – bang! The opening titles/theme. Star Trek V was the only one of the features to do this! (I don’t count the recap at the beginning of III.) And it was a nice little throwback to the storytelling framework of TOS. You can have this idea free of charge, Orci. :)

229. Gary - October 9, 2007


Sorry for the ludicrous title…

I just wanted to add that one of the things that made TOS very special was the relation the show had with their ship, the Enterprise. The Enteprise on TOS acted out as another character on the show and kirk had a love hate obsession with it something the later trek shows lacked. So remember to make the enterprise quite graceful and full of life, because it was also a character on the show.

230. JCool - October 9, 2007

Paul McGillion For Scotty!

231. Johnny Ice - October 9, 2007

#162. What is more important canon or Star Trek. I say Star Trek.
As for interviewer’s opinion taking the center stage, well you do have a point but i found this interviews to be great. f.e. i liked his opinion about bringing in strong female characters and pointing out the patsies captains like Harriman in Generations and Styles from Search for Spock.
#168. Good points and i agree for most part on updating the look and feel of the ship, equipment, and costumes to appeal to a younger audience
I think by blending both TMP and TWOK storlines you would have great Star Trek film.
I really dislike Nick Meyer’s militarism and wouldn’t welcome it back.
#170. Completely agree. Major trap many bad superheros movies falls into is f.e. Spider-man and XM3 is too many villains. This would lead to endless Repeation(spelling?). Introduce villain number 1, fight with villain number 1 and repeat this with villain number 2 and 3 e.c.c.)

232. OneBuckFilms - October 9, 2007

A note to the “Bring in Shatner as Kirk” lobbyists:

This is a low priority for anyone who wants to see a good movie from this project.

This is precisely the kind of decision that could ruin the film.

If having an older Shatner works for, fits in with and enhances the story, then bring him in.

Otherwise, spend the story and screen resources telling the story, and not on Fan Special Interests.

Star Trek has always been more than the sum of its parts, and the character of James Kirk is ALREADY a part of the film. A MAJOR one.

Do we want Shatner, or do we want JAMES TIBERIUS KIRK?

If the story gets too complicated, it becomes too hard to follow for those unfamiliar with Star Trek.

Writing a role fro William Shatner as an older James Kirk, then writing a plot to involve him, may make the story and movie far too complicated.

I heard a quote somewhere that you should never ask the audience to believe more that one incredible thing at a time.

As a Spock-centric story, should we really dilute the focus from the central story this far?

That is one of the things that later Trek series had to fight: Over-complicated plotting that required too much prior knowledge.

Minimize complications, minimize exposition, and tell a great story first.

The Enterprise is a vehicle for great storytelling, and that should be respected more than having a small audience clapping as William Shatner makes a pointless cameo.

233. Anthony Pascale - October 9, 2007

This site has an agenda to remove all canon? wow really? Dammit why doesn’t anyone send me the memos on these things?

people need to bear in mind that sometimes you ask provocative questions on purpose, they are not necessarily the opinion of the one asking. Also…some insight into the interview. Originally this was just going to be a ‘trekkie questions’ interview…which was part 1, but we ended up talking and talking as two trekkies would and most of the above questions were just spontaneous things that came up in our chat, since Bob was kind enough to ‘go into extra innings’ on the interview.

For the record, and as stated here before, I am in the ‘flexible’ camp. Not a ‘canonista’ and not a ‘total rebooter’ My ‘agenda’ is simple…I want Star Trek to be a big popular fun franchise again…period. That is part of the reason I created this site.

Thanks for the feedback everyone and it will only go to making the next big interview better.

234. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

#232 … Damn it! I was hoping for a movie chock full o’ pointless cameo goodness! That’s what I want XI to be like – a 2 hour, live action version of Family Guy!

235. roberto Orci - October 9, 2007


no worries

236. CanuckLou - October 9, 2007

If Shatner is in the movie – leave it as a surprise.

The best, most dramatic, and guaranteed to bring the house down with cheers of approval is to have Nimoy’s Spock returning to his own time and, in unannounced cameo, have Kirk there to greet him.

The only thing that would better such a moment would be to have Bones there as well.

Alas that is no longer possible.

237. Komack - October 9, 2007

#229, #232,
I agree that the Enterprise herself is a great storytelling “wagontrain to the stars”. As a pretty idealistic trekker i must add, She was the star of the show. Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and co. were like ornaments on a tree that took on lives of there own. With there brilliant gold, blue, and red colors. Whenever I see those colors I think of Star Trek. Another key element for me was the sounds. Those chirps, beeps, whirs, and such. And the thrumming of engines in the background. Almost like a cat purring…

238. CanuckLou - October 9, 2007

Darn! Missed by one post!;)

Good to hear Mr. Orci! – on 97.

And nice proof that you are reading everything!

239. CanuckLou - October 9, 2007

@233 – and Anthony you are doing a most excellent job! Thank you!

240. JL - October 9, 2007

“My ‘agenda’ is simple…I want Star Trek to be a big popular fun franchise again…period.”

Wow. What an AWESOME thing to say!

I could not agree more.

We all have our nit-picky comments, various ideas, creative vision, et all, but honestly, at the end of the day, ALL I AM HOPING FOR IS THAT THEY DROP A FRIGGIN’ EMPIRE STRIKES BACK/WRATH OF KHAN/EPIC SCALE STAR TREK MOVIE ON US!!!

241. JL - October 9, 2007

And hey, we can put a spin on its level of awesomeness as a Trek movie and all, but let’s face it ST:TMP is NO EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. SO I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT FOR THIS TIME – NO – NOT EVEN ST:TMP LEVEL IS GONNA CUT IT!! WE NEED HEAD-SPINNING EPIC SCALE here.


242. JCool - October 9, 2007


Amen Anthony Amen!

1.I really miss Star trek!
2. I want Star Trek Back!
3 I want it to be successful again.
4 Star Trek’s important to so many people!
5. I do NOT want Star trek to DIE.

Christmas 2008!!!

243. Harry Ballz - October 9, 2007

If this trilogy of films is to be set in an alternate reality timeline, then the writers will have a challenge in getting the old time Trekkers to accept this concept. It’s hard to picture a viable storyline where old Spock must go back in time and interact with young Spock where the climax/punchline of the movie has old Spock leaving, with the alternate reality left intact to carry forward as the Trek we are to watch AND EMBRACE in the next few years……….I dunno……..sounds kinda Timothy Leary-ish……..

244. Bono Luthor - October 9, 2007

Once again, just want to say that this site is great.

Without a lot of the info I have gotten form here I would not be as excited as I am about this film right now.

Also want to say I love the idea outlined above of keeping Shatners involvment secret.

Also, I have read somewhere (maybe elsewhere on here) the idea that you just have Shat appear at the end and don’t explain why or how. Leave it to the audiences imagination.

I LOVE that idea also.

It’s just great to be excited about Trek again and excited about it being GOOD again.

As a huge Lost fan I have had a good feeling about this since the start and nothing I have read so far has changed that so far, only enhanced it.

Pretty please just get Shat in there.

Anthony, I apologize.

Also, can I ask does anyone know anything about remastered Trek in the UK?

It stinks to be left out on that one.

245. New Horizon - October 9, 2007

For God’s sake. Enough of the Shatner crap. I’m really getting sick of this inability to accept the film unless Shatner isn’t in it. I don’t want the film makers to shoe horn Shatner in out of desperation. Let the film evolove on its own. Shatner made his choice to accept killing off Kirk in Generations. I’m honestly tired off all this resurrection crap.

246. JCool - October 9, 2007

I was watching the First season of Psych on DVD last night…
and I was like WoW! I love James Roday’s charisma!

I hope you find someone who’s got charisma, smarts and leadership qualities to play young Kirk.

I don’t know about Vogel. :(

247. roberto Orci - October 9, 2007


cool title idea.

248. JL - October 9, 2007

I also like that title – has a bitchin ring to it. But. Isn’t it officially being called “STAR TREK?”

249. JL - October 9, 2007

Wait. Holy crap. #247!

That was Mr. Orici himSELF!

250. roberto Orci - October 9, 2007



251. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

:) :) :)

252. vorta 2342321323123 - October 9, 2007

I really hope this doesn’t turn into a ‘reference fest’ like they did with the Transformers movie – it was just filled with sketches and lines that related to things as if to go “HEY! LOOK! SEE? WE SAW THE CARTOONS AND FIRST MOVIE TOO! THERE YA GO!” but they had no bearing on the actual story or film, which they treated as little more than an in-joke to be laughed at, not (god forbid) taken seriously as a fantasy/drama.

I just hope this Trek movie isn’t wall-to-wall in-jokes, as much as I’d love cannon references, lets hope they’re IN the story and not out side of it.

253. M Harrison - October 9, 2007

Dear Mr. Orci,

I’m a reader that doesn’t post. As a long time trek fan I think it’s really cool that you take the time to talk to the community about the film. Thanks for that, it’s definitely been interesting to read about how you are developing this idea, and I’m fascinated to see how it turns out. You sound like you have a great schema for what the best Trek is about. I really do feel that you will make great creative choices, so I hope they let you do everything you want to. I did, of course, have one comment.

It’s my emotionally subjective view of Trek that it was at it’s best when it was grappling with issues of morality and even philosophy, and of course the big three were the perfect characters to examine profound issues. Spock and McCoy would weigh in, and Kirk would do… something. Usually, something awesome.

When Star Trek first came out, it WAS bold. It was a touchstone for the civil rights movement and the peace movement and for that I love it. That was revolutionary. I would humbly submit that similar themes are found throughout the others series. I feel that Trek’s boldness came from it’s humanism, and from it’s ability to explore contemporary issues, often symbolically. It perhaps best exemplified courage by daring to be a sci fi show that broke social conventions and the common narrative. To paraphrase Abrams (I think), it was another world, yet it was our world. Trek had something to say. I hope that Trek will be so “bold” this time. Star Trek came out of the idealism of a generation, and if you really want to recapture the spirit of TOS, I humbly submit that these are the shoes you have to fill. When I was a kid, Star Trek really did help me envision a future where we could all live in peace, working together towards our goals. It informed my idealism. I hope that your interpretation can do the same for a new generation.

Thank you. Sorry this was so long. Good luck and good health.

254. roberto Orci - October 9, 2007


Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.

255. Jake - October 9, 2007

One night I was with my girlfriend…..she asked me why I like Star Trek. I said it was because they are explorers and scientists. She said really…..then how come all the movie you made me watch always had battles.

People who do not know Trek, and have only seen the movies think Star Trek is a cheap imitation of Star Wars…

Give us some exploration……

256. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

#183 … So that makes Orci Spock and my buddy IowaGirl Valeris. Standby for involuntary mindmeld!

257. Danya Romulus - October 9, 2007

247–Mr. Orci– I thought the title was for sure going to be simply “Star Trek”?? I really hope that hasn’t changed!!

258. jonboc - October 9, 2007

#222: “Let Trek STAY AWAY for another 6 years, let the fans CRAVE it first”

I HAVE craved Star Trek since 1991. Are you kidding, this past 15 year gap is longer than the gap between the cancelation of TOS and TMP. Believe me…I’m craving it, as are many many more.

259. Terence Akins - October 9, 2007

Thank you for easing some fears Mr Orci. I started REALLY getting into TREK when TNG premiered in 1987 because my mom was such a fan of TOS. We were mandated to be quiet for an hour on Saturdays and it became our family time. I loved all the movies feraturing the original cast, and I was in sixth or seventh grade when “The Undisovered Country” (one of my all time Original series Movies)came out.

Now at 28, I have I have had the pleasure (absolutely) to watch DS9 VOYAGER(two of the most underrated TREK series) grow and become part of the TREK lexicon. And now to know that TREK still lives is delightful to me. I hope that this is a rebirth of TREK in the way of a new series(?) Go and make the BEST TREK movie and make GENE and it’s fans proud.

260. StillKirok - October 9, 2007

#198–what did I expect from Enterprise? Competent writing and sticking to known continuity. DS9’s Trials and Tribbleations showed a TOS Enterprise that looked like it belonged in modern times that didn’t look cheesy. The effects would never be the problem in the Berman era.

But TECH is much different.

For example, it is stated in Balance of Terror that cloaking was impossible in the 22nd century. Romulans didn’t have that tech. Yet in Enterprise, they did!

It’s not about an inability to tolerate something new. It’s about an inability to tolerate lazy and incompetent writing. The show stunk. But more important, these writers not only thumbed their nose at continuity, they were arrogant about it.

A show set in the 22nd century could have been fine. A prequel to TOS could have been very good. But not with those guys at the helm.

You can’t run a Star Trek series when you don’t like TOS.

There were no viewscreens in the 22nd century. Yet, Enterprise had them.

261. nscates - October 9, 2007

257 – Danya
The title of any production is generally subject to change up until just prior to its release. In fact, I think it’s a mistake to consider any specific detail as nailed down until you watch the final print of the movie. Scripts get re-written, part get re-cast, scenes get deleted. It’s all part of the time-honored process of motion picture production and post-production.

Nice interview, by the way. I am definately looking forward to Christmas 2008. As a lifelong TOS series fan, I am extremely interested in how you folks pull this off. Casting is definately going to make or break this picture, I believe. All we can do is wait and speculate.

262. I AM THX-1138 - October 9, 2007

Dennis, I think you missed my point. Or you’re yanking my chain.

263. Johnny Ice - October 9, 2007

#245For God’s sake. Enough of the Shatner crap.
I agree. Actually i don’t want Shatner in XI movie. Heck i am not sure if i want Nimoy either. What is next, George Takai for Sulu(spelling?)

I really want the writers and producer show some balls like f.e. Abrams did with his Superman script! (thou i did loved Singer´s Superman Returns)
I find the freshness and innovation Abrams wanted for Superman works much better for Star Trek Universe.

264. Alex Rosenzweig - October 9, 2007

-260- “There were no viewscreens in the 22nd century.”

At no time did “Balance of Terror” (or any other part of Trek) ever say that.

It said that the Romulans were unseen by either any Terrans or allies, that there was no visual communication. It didn’t say a thing about *why* there was no visual communication.

Is it really so incomprehensible that a secretive, xenophobic race might simply turn off the cameras? ;)

That idea had occurred to me 20+ years ago, long before ENT was even the glimmer of an idea in anyone’s mind. After all, we have viewscreens *now*. Why would we then not have them in the 22nd Century?



265. Bono Luthor - October 9, 2007

All this talk of quality Trek has gotten me so buzzed I’m off to watch Wrath Of Kahn in bed.

G’nite all.

The best part is that we have just over a year to wait.

266. VOODOO - October 9, 2007


How could Shatner + Nimoy be a bad thing for this film?

If the rumors are to be believed we will be getting quite a fresh look at the ST universe. While at the same time getting to see some old friends one more time.

If it is announced tomorrow that Shatner has been castin this film, the Star Trek community on the net would explode.

It would be the single biggest moment in ST since TMP came nearly 30 years ago.

Shatner appeals to Stat Trek’ long lost huge fan base.

The mainstream media would be all over that story. That combined with the characters need for a decent ending is why you bring Shatner back to play Kirk one last time.

267. Johnny Ice - October 9, 2007

#252. This is great post. This is essence of Star Trek.
#253.,,Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.,,
You are scaring me now Orci(quote from Star Trek 6?)

268. The Realist - October 9, 2007

I am looking forward to this even more now. It seems that all involved in the Movie wants to acknowledge all incarnations of Trek, which can only add another layer of depth to the movie. What I find interesting is how they are going to have Leonard Nimoy in the movie. Is he going to be set in the 24th Century? Is that one of the big easter eggs? Or have they got another clever way? Either way it seems that the franchise is in excellent hands, and I also have a feeling that we may not have seen the last of the 24th Century either.

269. Johnny Ice - October 9, 2007

#266. Shatner and Nimoy got their farewell in Star Trek 6 and 7. I feel its time to let go and focus more on Quinto and the actor who is going to play Kirk and rest of the recasting. . I don’t think bringing back back Nimoy a bad thing. I am very interesting and open how he is going to fit in XI movie. However by inviting Nimoy back in XI movie it also open the door for Star Trek fans
wanting the same thing for Shatner.

270. OneBuckFilms - October 9, 2007


I don’t think Shatner in as of himself appearing in the movie is either a good or bad thing.

Great for publicity, and might make a stronger connection to the original franchise to see an older Kirk.

The issue is that it may not fit the story for the movie in a good, clean manner.

Which would you prefer:

1. James Kirk making a Cameo, but providing no reasonable contribution to the story.

2. A great story told without Shatner being present in the movie.

A list of priorities, in order:

1. Good Story.
2. True to the source material.
3. Good design work.
4. Good score and sound design that helps tell the story.

In the end, the new actors also need the space to breathe on screen as the characters.

It is possible that William Shatner could overshadow the new cast, which would be detrimental to the movie.

If it enhances the movie, by all means bring him aboard.

If not, don’t damage the film with an unnecessary cameo.

271. billymatt - October 9, 2007

Shattner shouldn’t be in it…didn’t he die in that awful generations movie.
Plus, with Vulcans living longer, Nimoy can pull off an older Spock better than Shatner could pull off an old Kirk.

If Kirk was real he would never look like Shatner does today.

272. cd - October 9, 2007

So, some people here want the new Star Trek movie to be like Superman Returns?!? Yeesh!
“Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad.”

273. cd - October 9, 2007

I guess I read that wrong, the Abrams script, not Superman Returns. Never mind. (my new contacts are on order.) >|>p

274. Kevin - October 9, 2007

I really don’t get this “Superman Returns” comparison. It’s pretty pointless and like comparing comics to warp cores. Can we just drop it, please.

Personally, I’d like to think of it more like the Star Wars prequels only without the childish humor and a better director (no one tell George I said that). At least now I’m comparing warp drive to hyperdrive.

275. cd - October 9, 2007

I agree about dropping talk of SR. But please don’t start comparing Star Trek to Star Wars, OK?

276. YES MAN - October 9, 2007

okay so I’m quite a way down here but I think Kirk should be very involved in this movie. If it’s all Spock then I’ll be upset personally. McCoy also arches his eyebrows and I liked him just as much as Spock and Kirk. Scotty and the rest aren’t really that cool. Actually I could care less about anyone else besides those three.

277. JCool - October 9, 2007

Eric Bana is the new villain.

Check Star

278. VOODOO - October 9, 2007

I really like Bana as an actor, but he is far from the “big name” that has been rumored as the “bad guy”

Not that it really matters if he is a “big name”

I think he could be quite good.

279. VOODOO - October 9, 2007

# 250 Roberto Orci

I’m glad you read post #125 and found it as “compelling” as several posters including myself did.

That post really summed up what many of us have been trying to say for quite some time.

280. jonboc - October 9, 2007

#271 – “If Kirk was real he would never look like Shatner does today. ”

This is the type of thought process that I have real trouble understanding…

281. Xai - October 9, 2007

Unless the story is about the resurrection of Kirk, I do not see the point of this constant advertising campaign in the threads to bring back Shatner. Death becomes meaningless if we revive the characters over and over. “Iconic” and “heroic” won’t apply to them if they face no peril.
If Shatner wanted to be true to his one big memorable character, he would not have helped kill Kirk off. JJ and crew will get some scolding for “not writing him in” should he not appear, but no one will be mad at Shatner for killing Kirk in the first place. Someone will believe that Berman held a gun to his head during Generations filming and told him “you must die!”

In #232. OneBuckFilms said it best and I refer you back to that compelling post about “good story” and “keeping it simple”.

282. Xai - October 9, 2007


Kirk wouldn’t weigh as much as Shatner does now. Tough to do flying dropkicks at 280 lbs.

283. tony - October 9, 2007

this movie sounds confusing…its not a prequel but it has original characters and new characters in it….he totaly sidestepped the batman begins question…i don’t know…i mean lost sucks…why didn’t they get michael bay to remake it if they keep comparing it to transformers

284. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

Anyone who criticizes Shatner’s appearance is a moron. The man is 76! Hell, my grandfather is 76 and looks near death, as do many men his age. Clint Eastwood is about Shatner’s age and he is beginning to look very frail, as did De Kelley and Jimmy Doohan in their 70’s. Shatner looks GREAT. And if you watch him on Boston Legal, he’s still a dynamo of energy. We can all only hope we’ll be as lucky.

285. Xai - October 9, 2007

#283 Tony..

bay would blow up the Enterprise.

(oh, we’ve done that a couple times too… nevermind)

286. Xai - October 9, 2007

284. Shatner_Fan_2000 – October 9, 2007

“Anyone who criticizes Shatner’s appearance is a moron.”

Back off bud. You stepped over the line. If you don’t like a valid opinion, it’s too bad. No one insulted you.

287. Shatner_Fan_2000 - October 9, 2007

Well, my valid opinion is that it’s unfair, shallow and stupid to criticize the appearance of a man who any sensible person would agree looks outstanding for his age. What, you can’t make your argument that you don’t want to see the guy in the movie without resorting to lame fat jokes? If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the engine room, bud.

288. Ralph - October 9, 2007

Great interview. There were three things I believe that were said which makes this a great movie. They follow canon. The surprise party (script secrecy) and “If you are a captain in Starfleet you are a cool mother f—er.
“. The latter being accurate and cool because when other Captains were introduced during TOS, you can feel the testosterone of men in command positions.
Some might believe the reading of everyday as the most important part of this movie.

289. Anthony Pascale - October 9, 2007

ShatnerFan….warning for ignoring my comments on campaigning and flaming
comments to

290. Iowagirl - October 10, 2007

# 289

Anthony, I perfectly understand your point of view, but so far your first warning was observed almost completely. We all behaved very well, didn’t we. We stated our opinions without campaigning and flaming. If you look at those recent posts again, you may find that the the campaigning was actually re-introduced by someone else. Thank you.

# 254

Thank you, Mr. Orci – wisdom is a good launching pad…

291. Dreamweaver2098 - October 10, 2007

Things sound good….it always helps to start with a great staff of writers and it sounds like the research has been done, but I had a few moments of terror during the interview(a ‘revisioning’ along the lines of Batman Begins). I’ve been a huge trek fan for a majority of my life(TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT), followed it through it’s ups and downs….I’m hoping that this movie can keep Trek on the high mantle it deserves!

292. Ivory - October 10, 2007

Roberto Orci #250

I am glad you found my arguments “compelling”

Thanks for listening to us.

293. JL - October 10, 2007

I would say that given Mr. Orci’s credentials (both professional and as a Trek fan), he has already addressed the key aspects of making this thing explode with awesomeness:

1) TOS feel (otherwise, what’s the point? This is an important aspect which Mr. Orci has already dedicated himself to)
2) Gripping story (the stakes are high and some major sh– is going down)
3) Great acting
4) Drama intensifies as the movie progresses
5) Action (something ST:TMP pretty much ignored; the worm hole sequence was the best part)
6) Exciting score
7) Sense of WONDER! (something long forgotten in our fast-paced world, and TOS had it in spades)

Just had to get that out of my system. I am so excited about this film! If you are still purusing the board, thank you, Mr. Orci

294. Xai - October 10, 2007

287. Shatner_Fan_2000 – October 9, 2007
“Well, my valid opinion is that it’s unfair, shallow and stupid to criticize the appearance of a man who any sensible person would agree looks outstanding for his age. What, you can’t make your argument that you don’t want to see the guy in the movie without resorting to lame fat jokes? If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the engine room, bud. ”

It wasn’t a joke. It was opinion. I think Kirk, if real and “alive” in his 70’s, would be in better shape that Shatner is now. Shatner is heavy, that’s a fact. And it’s tough for anyone of size to do a very athletic move such as I mentioned. Frankly, at his age… any age, he’s heavy. That’s being fair.

You don’t like the opinion? I really don’t care and you’ll get over it. But I didn’t insult you. You don’t have to agree with me… but I’d accept an apology.

295. Iowagirl - October 10, 2007

# 294

Do we actually need flying dropkicks from a 70 year old? If we get Shatner as post-Generations Kirk, he doesn’t have to do that move for me – I promise to content myself with him just sitting on the villain and suffocate him.

296. Xai - October 10, 2007

#295 Iowagirl

The question was about the shape Shat is in and how Kirk would likely be in better shape… if he were alive..which he curently isn’t.

time to get back on subject…

297. Style - October 10, 2007

Ewan McGregor ironically woude make a perfect Kirk!

298. StillKirok - October 10, 2007

The story doesn’t have to be about the resurrection of Kirk to include Shatner. Judging by the leaked spoilers, the character could easily come back without “harming” the story at all.

299. Iowagirl - October 10, 2007

#296 Xai

Sorry, but it was you who raised this absurd flying dropkick topic. We don’t need flying dropkicks from any 70 year old, whether he is in good shape or not. Besides, Shatner being heavy IS a fact, but shape is more or less a matter of vitality combined with personal taste and no one can say that this man does not have enough vitality. And as for taste – well, I like my men…strapping. And Kirk never had the shape of an asparagus, had he? So, our Kirk in his 70s can still be a very imposing, vital person, if they just let him. I won’t ask for more!

Apart from that, my post 295 was written with tongue-in-cheek, but humor isn’t understood by everybody (isn’t that what is usually said about us Shatner brigadiers…?)

Apologies for interfering in your banter with ShatnerFan; I will shut up now in order to let you get back on subject – whichever you may pick (somersaults, loops, death-defying leaps, shape-shifters…).

300. jonboc - October 10, 2007

“Kirk wouldn’t weigh as much as Shatner does now. Tough to do flying dropkicks at 280 lbs.”

Yes, flying kicks at 280 lbs would be absurd.

Equally as absurd is your assertion that they would have a 75 year old Kirk even attempting such a thing. Just guessing here, but I’d bet the rent that IF Abrahm’s had Shatner in the movie, would play an elderly Kirk, in a role written with dignity and respect…not a 75 year old man trying to play the role as it was written 40 years ago..which you and everyone else who like to complain about Shatner’s physical condition, seem to be inferring.

Please don’t insult the movie’s writing team’s intelligence.

301. Xai - October 10, 2007

#299 And #300

Oh please. Some people take little things far too literal. I would not expect any 75 year old to attempt one. My father’s that age and in great shape and I wouldn’t want him to try. The dropkick comment was an attempt at humor… apparently an attempt wasted on some.

You honestly think I’d suggest a 75 year old actor play a part as it was written for a 35 year old? Please…

“…not a 75 year old man trying to play the role as it was written 40 years ago..which you and everyone else who like to complain about Shatner’s physical condition, seem to be inferring.”
To clarify, I responded to #271. billymatt – who said…
“If Kirk was real he would never look like Shatner does today. ”
I agreed, I felt the character (if “alive”) would be more fit than the actor. So? It’s an opinion, sorry if you don’t agree.

Nobody stepped on anyone’s intelligence, give it a break.

302. jonboc - October 10, 2007


Sorry, guess it is my fault. Next time I’ll try to understand what you meant rather than what you wrote.

303. Xai - October 10, 2007

Roberto Orci.

Another (the quad-rillionth, I am sure) piece of fan advice.

You could do far worse than following what was suggested by #293. JL.
Thanks for particpating.


304. Xai - October 10, 2007

#302 jonboc.
I made a joke, maybe a bad one. I acknowedged that already. But think about it… you are on me about a comment suggesting a near-octagenarian should be doing a highly athletic combat maneuver. There’s no sense in that and nobody would seriously suggest it even if the man was in top form.
I wasn’t serious. I thought that would be self-apparent.

If you needed to prove a point about something else…..?


305. VOODOO - October 10, 2007

Why would anyone want to see a 70+ Shatner doing flying jump kicks?

What I would like to see is the 70+ character alive and well and aging in a realistic manner.

306. Xai - October 10, 2007

yeah, I guess he made it difficult to do that when he helped kill his character.

307. Decius is Stonn, Stonn is Decius - October 10, 2007

orci seems nice enough, BUT…

his credits are completely hack-ish. Xena? Hercules? The Island? Zorro? MI:3? Transformers? i mean, seriously, who gives a sh*t about any of these VERY mediocre titles?? i don’t!

not exactly stories rooted in “relationships” or characters that rise to the level of Shakespearean archetypes. JJ&Co are going to take an intergalactic spin on nothing less than iconic faces, to boot. i’m predicting a “Butch and Sundance: The Early Years”-level of crash and burn. i suspect their weakness as writers will be hidden to a degree by the quantum leap in FX and production design, but just go ask George Lucas how much the fans truly loved HIS prequels.

also, the fact that orci prefers (and came of age on) TNG does not bode well. i’m reminded of all the tepid writing/acting/directing we see today of high-paid pop talent who went to the Fanboy School of Cinema, unlike the TOS writers (i’ll put the top 25 episodes of TOS against the rest of the canon ANY day), who came out of the theatre and live television from the 1950s.

tell me i’m wrong, but you know in you’re heart i’m right.

308. THE USS STARQUEST » Blog Archive » Trek XI details finally given - October 11, 2007

[…] has an interview with Roberto Orci, who is working on the script for the upcoming eleventh movie installment of Star Trek. He gives details on the characters, some casting, and more. It looks like it focuses on the Big Three of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy (with Spock being a focal point of the story), but Chekov and Uhura have been cast as well, with Anton Yelchin (Alpha Dog) and Zoe Saldana (Premium) respectively. IKt does seem that they are squeezing a few too many of the original characters in…and I head rumors of former Stargate Atlantis regular Paul McGillion may be up for the role of Scotty. Unlike the late James Doohan, he was actually born in Scotland, although he moved to Canada when he was 2, so he also puts on the accent when needed. Update 10/10: The Hollywood Reporter is reporting that Chris Pine (Smokin’ Aces) is in talks to take the role of Kirk, and Eric Bana (The Hulk) has already signed as the villain, Nero. […]

309. PostColouristGuy - October 11, 2007

All this ST nerd asks for is…good VFX. The last few outings have had, shall we say, a slender VFX budget comprising mainly CG. Which weren’t bad, but they weren’t great.
Go old school and make models with good lighting – then finish in the computer.

Look at ST2 and ST3 – most of the effects (not all…) stand up today, and in many cases look better than any CG you’re likely to see – because it’s real (of sorts). And use the effects to tell the story, not to draw attention to themselves.
But whatever, have fun with it, and enjoy the ride…

310. King Anthony - October 11, 2007


Time will tell.

Right now, it’s telling me this movie will likely bomb.

311. Ivory - October 11, 2007

Xai #306

Every major character in Star Trek has been “killed off” at one point.

312. Snake - October 11, 2007

Ye know – with all the TNG talk from Orci i’m begining to think that maybe..just maybe..Patrick Stewart might feature in a Picard cameo…
(e.g if Nimoys Spock scenes are initially set in the TNG era)…

and if so i think Stewart would do it …..Both TNG and the X men have finished so he’d probably jump at the chance of flying over to LA and collecting a sizable pay check for a couple of days work….after all London theatre dosnt pay as much as movies….

plus this film isnt just another TNG knock off produced by Berman whilst multi tasking with 2 other TV shows and directed by a cast member…this is star trek done BIG! its being diected by JJ Abrams and has a script thats attracted Eric Bana and Leonard Nimoy (with probably 1 or 2 more big names to follow) so i doubt Stewart would turn down an offer to be involved with something as high profile as this..


313. Snake - October 11, 2007

*adding on from 312* – also despite how Nemesis fared at the box office, Patrick Stewart is still a HUGE name in Star Trek (2nd only to Shatner and Nimoy really) and TNG was (at its peak) even more popular and successful than TOS…and the Orci himself has stated his admiration for it and that it’ll have some refernces to it…so who knows…

I think fans would go nuts if Patrick was in this movie briefly…

314. Xai - October 11, 2007

#311 Ivory

yes, we know…. and that’s part of the problem.

315. Iowagirl - October 11, 2007

#212, 213

Please, no crossover anymore. I am fed up with this crossover mania, even if it’s just done in a cameo. IMHO, the time is ripe for “purism”. I memorize very clearly the awful yield of mixing TOS with TNG in Generations. I don’t think there is a place for Stewart in this film. Abrams & Co. have decided to go back to the roots, to TOS. If we are talking about different timelines – and I am in favour of different timelines – it should only be within the TOS universe. TOS offers so much, there are so many things Abrams & Orci can show us and tell us about, especially as they are going back to a time(line) that will fill a gap in canon. If they start to mix things, it will become messy. Besides, it would become a bit crowded with all the cameos and captains around, wouldn’t it…;-)

Just my opinion, Snake, no offense against your hope or Stewart (no, I will NOT do that).

316. Iowagirl - October 11, 2007

Sorry, should have been 312, 313

317. TJ - October 11, 2007

#307 – Xena & Hercules were meant to be hack-ish which made them amusing, fun and light-hearted, so I think its a little unfair to be quite so harsh about those!

But ‘Transformers’ disappointed me bigtime. It wasn’t really about the Transformers as characters themselves, more the kid, hot chicks and shed loads of VFX without any real ‘substance’. Hell the Transformers characters weren’t cool, they were the comic relief! ‘The Island’ however had a very interesting concept, a pacey plot, great characterisation/acting and looked amazing. The key words being ‘plot and characters’.

I really dont want another ‘cool’ Hollywood movie. I want a film with a decent plot, great 3 dimensional characters with ‘depth’ so I give a crap about the people in it and the story is their adventure, rather then being little more then plot devices to string the VFX together!!!

Paul McGillion for Scotty!

318. Ivory - October 11, 2007


I think it would be great if Patrick Stewart would make a cameo.

I also think TNG should get a better ending than Nemesis.

319. billymatt - October 11, 2007

THe TNG movies were good, but the series was just one big talkfest. Talk, talk, talk, …where was the action….where was the dramatic tension….it just wasn’t there……………I am so glad they got rid of Berman because they couldn’t do any worse then him anyway. The only TNG episodes I liked were the Bork ones, the Q thing was boring and ridiculous.

No Patrick Stewart please…..maybe another time.

I know, try to stay on subject.

320. TJ - October 11, 2007

TOS was called a ‘wagon train to the stars’, and its format kinda reminded me of all the classic western series & films! That spirit of adventure, exploration into the ‘wild frontier’, fight for survival etc. I’d love to see that kind of format and style in the new movie!

321. Decius is Stonn, Stonn is Decius - October 11, 2007


like bay, abrams has never made an A-list film. he has a penchant for repetitive weirdness for weirdness sake (alias, lost)… that never really goes anywhere, never says anything meaningful, flattens the characters, etc… which is fine (at first), but with rumors of an altered timeline plot for this ST film, i’m not optimistic. at first we hear he’s a major ST fan, then, well, maybe not so much. his screenplay for superman was supposedly real dreck. and i thought MI:3 – his only feature – was rather mediocre. better than i thought, but this guy is not on ANYONE’s list as an A director.

and for what it’s worth, even the best TOS action episodes – ‘balance of terror,’ ‘doomsday machine,’ ‘tholian web,’ ‘galileo 7,’ ‘enterprise incident,’ ‘arena’ etc., weren’t the kind of typical, simplistic fanboy conflicts we KEEP SEEING today. in almost every case the complex characters/situation drove the tension. the lack of a mega FX budget forced them to go back to the storytelling basics. the transporter was created, for chrissakes, because they couldn’t afford to shoot the Enterprise landing on a planet each week.

nobody knows how to write anymore, i swear to god. you realize, don’t you, that the writers for this ST film cranked the script out in a couple of months, then did another draft in a few weeks (which orci claims is “better”)… they’re shooting a few weeks from now, and casting is not complete. with real talent in such a scenario, sometimes happy accidents happen, but with this hastily thrown together group of B-C-level people, it’s bad news.

322. Iowagirl - October 11, 2007


Good point! TOS was originative and its main ingredients were convincing acting and IMAGINATION. The people behind it made things happen, they were creative in the true sense of the word. They still could give people a feeling of wonder and surprise which you can do without state-of-the-art technical equipment and a mega budget. And, as you said, they knew how to tell a story. This is why TOS has become such a legend.

Yet, let’s hope for the “happy accidents”.

323. VOODOO - October 11, 2007

TJ #317

Cut these guys some slack.

Did you expect “Transformers” a film about machines banging into each was going to rival Shakespeare?

It was a fun summer film that had some (especially in the 1st half of the movie) character.

I think their idea about an alternate universe is quite good. It allows for the ST universe as we have known it to stand + at the same time take the series in a new/fresh direction.

324. Etha Williams - October 11, 2007

I don’t know how I feel about the alternate universe thing…one the one hand, I can see the merits #323 points out, and I know that Trek has done some great things with alternate universes in the past (eg, mirror universe), but at the same time, it makes me a bit sad to think that there might be people who will go see this movie and then see this alternate universe as THE star trek universe. It would just be weird — imagine if someone’s entire idea of the star trek universe was the conquests of the Terran-Vulcan Empire. Bizarre, IMO.

325. Xena & Gabrielle - October 11, 2007

anth…why shatner….

326. Alex Rosenzweig - October 11, 2007

#324 – I know exactly how I feel about an alternate universe. Yeah, there’s precedent for it in Trek, but the idea that TPTB would “liberate” themselves from the existing continuity (as if there’s anything about it that really requires such “liberation”…) so that they can move on from this point as if the rest of Trek didn’t happen? Nah, that doesn’t sit well with me at all.

With all the gaps available in which to take liberties, as Roberto points out, and with TOS, of all the various Trek series, having the most open range to add new stories without stepping on the old ones’ toes (something that it’s much harder to say about TNG, DS9, or VOY), I just don’t see why it’s even necessary.

Admittedly, I wonder if we’re all still chasing a red herring based on that AICN story, and that the solution Roberto mentioned so obliquely isn’t creating parallel continua at all. Still, I’d rest a lot easier if someone could just tell me that we’ll still be in the same Trekverse at the end of this film that we were at the beginning. Or at least one similar enough that what’s established in the rest of TOS and the other series still “counts”.


327. Harry Ballz - October 11, 2007

I’ve got a bad feeling that Nimoy is simply being used as a “bridge” between everything we know and have enjoyed all these many years….over to an alternate Star Trek universe that allows the producers the opportunity to “start over” from the very beginning and take it wherever they’d like to go with it!! This way there are no preconceived notions as to who dies or what might happen…………and we’re supposed to be drawn to THIS as entertainment?? I dunno………….

328. Andrew Salmon - October 11, 2007

It sounds like Trek is in good hands.

But for me, the film must have Shatner. Period!

If not, it’ll be a rental for me. I’m in favor of this reboot, but without the real Kirk, my interest level drops. I hope the movie is good, but it’ll take the Shat to get me psyched and get in line. I really, really hope they work him into the movie.

And what about Gary Sinise as McCoy? He would be 100% perfect. Is there any way to make it happen?

329. Alex Rosenzweig - October 11, 2007

328 – I’m almost the reverse. While having Messrs. Shatner and Nimoy in it would be cool, if the result is some sort of reboot, that’s a deal-breaker for me, even if they starred in the entire film.

To put it in straightforward economic terms, a reboot guarantees the loss of somewhere between $100 and $200 from at least one potential moviegoer, based on the amount of times I would be prepared to see an actual Trek film in the theaters, vs. the once (at most) I’d see any film that eliminates the established Trekverse (or a close facsimile thereof that continues to acknowledge the events and material established previously as “valid”) as the focal point of the current or any future productions. And we won’t even get into the down-line losses from any ancillary and licensed materials relating to “alternate universe Trek” that I likely wouldn’t purchase, either. (e.g., I have spent not one thin dime on anything from “that newer show that bears Galactica’s name”, but I have and would continue to actively support material done in the original Galactica-verse.)

I’m sorry if this comes across as harsh, but I believe very strongly in the principle that says that if one is unwilling to play in the universe of a property that bears a given name, one should not take on the responsibility of using that name for new material. In short, if you don’t want to play in the Trekverse, don’t make Star Trek. (Ditto any other fictional world.)

I am still trying to remain optimistic, but reboots (back-door {i.e., alternate universes or whatever, because in my book, if it has the net effect of severing new material from the existing universe, it’s still a back-door reboot and it does not constitute respecting the material} or otherwise) are my line in the sand, and the more TPTB back away from the original statement that the new film “respects and embraces” Trek’s continuity (which had me completely in the film’s camp and totally supportive at the time), the less enthused I get. Roberto seems to be saying things on both sides of the line in this interview, which has left me confused, but if the team really does view existing continuity as something from which they need to be “liberated”, it doesn’t bode well.


330. Ivory - October 12, 2007


“The film must have Shatner”

I’m with you on that one.

As exciting as this project may be. It will not be complete without Shatner.

How can they have the great Leonard Nimoy + not write a part for William Shatner when they know he wants to be in the film?

331. StillKirok - October 12, 2007

Considering that this movie will have over double the largest budget in Trek movie history, it’s impossible for them to not pay off Shatner if they truly want him. The money’s there. It’s a question of choice.

332. roberto Orci - October 12, 2007


Nothing I love more than low expectations.

We’ve never had as much creative freedom as on Trek, and
we will prove you wrong and rock your world with this one.

or your money back!

333. Anthony Pascale - October 12, 2007

money back guarantee bob? wow

RE: 307
My quick view the work of Orci/ you come away with three things
1. They do value relationships over mindless action (just look at MI3 v MI2)
2. They are craftsmen (Transformers may not be your thing…but that script was written to do exactly what the producers and directors needed….take a geeky franchise and make it play to multiple demograhics)
3. They are true geeks….even though they know how to do broad appeal, you can see the geeky love in Transformers, Xena and Alias

That being said of course it isnt all great (sorry Bob). I didnt care for the Zoro sequel for example, but I think Bob’s comments about creative freedom is key. Something like the Island is a good example…that is a great scifi movie trying to fight its way out of a mindless Michael Bay explosion-fest. I imagine if that film were being made by Abrams or someone who might give the boys total control it would have been more logans run and less Armageddon

With Trek Paramount have given Abrams and his team more creative control than any other Trek film….even more than Meyer and Bennett. Remember this is a Bad Robot co-production. I have the sense that the guys are really going to be unfiltered and we will really see what they can do here.

by the way….if you want to see some crazy Orci/Kurtzman unfiltered work….Rent “Jack of all Trades”….it is a crazy Bruce Campbell in the 18th century comedy/adventure thing that ran for a season or two. It was produced and written by the guys along with Raimi

334. roberto Orci - October 12, 2007

I would agree Zorro is the one that didn’t work. Our first movie, even though Island came out first.

335. Snake - October 12, 2007


I LOVED ‘The Island’…i can only assume it was you that did that wonderful ‘Captain Kirk ‘reference when they go into the bar right? Mr Orci

I have The Island standing PROUDLY on my dvd shelf…and i consider myself to be a Sci Fi connoisseur… do many Sci Fi fans..i thought it was a great movie

right i bid you all a farewell..i’m off to the bar for a well earned drink!

Good evening untill monday.

336. Alex Rosenzweig - October 12, 2007


Hi Roberto!

>Nothing I love more than low expectations.

Well, I can’t claim to have low expectations, for two reasons. 1) With one big exception, I’ve liked almost everything you guys have had to say regarding this film, and 2) I enjoyed “The Island”, “Mission Impossible III’, and “Transformers” very much.

BTW, let me share with you the moment in MI3 when you guys won me over. In the middle of his rant about Davien, the IMF Director says, “He’s like the goddamn invisible man–Wells, not Ellison–” and just keeps ranting. It was a great literary bit that you just assumed the audience would pick up on, as opposed to having to rub their noses in it. And from that moment on, I was hooked. Bring that sort of assumption about the intelligence and awareness of your audience to Trek, and you’ve already gone a long way.

>We’ve never had as much creative freedom as on Trek, and
>we will prove you wrong and rock your world with this one.
>or your money back!

Well, I’m looking forward to seeing if you do indeed rock my world, though I’d still really appreciate it if you could just give me that one bit of reassurance I’ve been seeking, so I can go back to being unhesitatingly bouncing-off-the-walls excited about this film. :D


337. Cygnus-X1 - October 12, 2007

I enjoyed the Island enough, but it was disappointing.

It was a compelling story that was treated like a ten-dolla-ho by the director and editor.

What I remember most is how annoyed I was by the attention-deficit-disorder-pandering editing.

Chop, chop, chop…splice, splice, splice….Never mind about the deep reservoir of implications, we gotta keep moving!! Run, run, run!!!!

And, don’t stop blowing things up!!!

…what about the theme?

BAM!! There’s your friggin theme!!

338. TJ - October 13, 2007

#323 – VOODOO

Um, did you read my post? I said NOT to be so harsh on Xena & Hercules which were meant to be a bit of fun and ‘hackish’, not some gritty historical epic. They’re good old fashioned romps and great fun. Hell, I’d watch just to see the gag ‘No goats/small children/cameraman were harmed during….’ in the credits and laugh my arse off!

And I LOVED ‘The Island’. Yes, lots of flash bang whollop, but you could easily see past surface to a very interesting concept and moral delemma underneath. It was well played and made me THINK. I like that. I like leaving a movie and remembering it past picking the remains of the popcorn out of my cleveage and dashing to the loo which I’ve needed to do for the past hour but didn’t want to miss anything no matter how bad it was! A good film (or very bad) you leave the cinema talking about for days after (or bitching if its bad). Either way, it generates discussion this is good for ‘word of mouth’. Apathy towards a film is the kiss of death.

I think Transformer was several ‘cool fx’ sequences too far. Not to mention random bits of pointless, bizzarre and WTF? humour (aka Bumblebee ‘lubricating’ on the annoying as hell government dude). It was ‘cool’ and certainly not a bad movie but left me apathetic. For a film called ‘Transformers’, it didn’t have a huge amount to do with them. And just because they’re CG doesn’t mean their ‘character’ isn’t important and you cant connect to it (ala Gollum in LOTR). Thats the risk of a remake, especially one so well known. You have an established ‘image’ and fans with high expectations and many preconceptions to deal with besides all the usual pressures.

So Roberto I’m hoping for a movie more on ‘The Island’s’ lines, lots of kick-ass action, clever interesting plot and great character interaction!

339. JTK - October 13, 2007

How about this scenario: Spock (Nimoy) is lecturing at the Academy during which he makes several references to James Kirk…as the lecture winds down, a cadet awkwardly raises his hand and states that he is not familiar with Kirk. Spock dryly tells the cadet that he needs to brush up on Federation history ( or something to this effect) Several similar instances lead Spock to research in which he discovers that Kirk died in an accident as a 1st year cadet. At this point he has no choice but to time travel back and stop the villian who has changed history. The grande finale will have a successful Spock reunited with Shatner in the closing moments. Not sure how this will leave an opening to continue stories featuring the new actors…..

340. Loccy - October 15, 2007

A quick message to Roberto, if he’s still reading:

Have you been following the “fan” project, Star Trek: Of Gods And Men? (I put “fan” in quotes because there are so many ex-Trek pros involved in it, it seems a bit of a disservice to call it merely a fanfic project. Maybe “independent” would be a better word).

It seems to me that they are sharing a lot of your prospective (albeit in some cases, rumoured) plot-lines – alternate timeline, Kirk being a pivotal person in history, Kirk being removed from history to create a new timeline.

341. GaryS - October 15, 2007

Mr Orci ,
I just want you to know if you can find a way to include William Shattner
that great but either way i will go to a sequel if you guys can create a story that is both faithful to Trek and a damn good story

342. GaryS - October 15, 2007

Mr Orci ,
I just want you to know if you can find a way to include William Shattner
thats great but either way i will go to a sequel if you guys can create a story that is both faithful to Trek and a damn good story

343. GaryS - October 15, 2007

one added point,
125 does make a compelling argument but i would rather kirks return not be explained by references to the nexus.
while there is technobabble
there is also time travel babble or Chronobabble, if you will .
if you find a way to bring Kirk back do not tell us SHOW US
in a very simple way that is connected to the story you are trying to tell .
after all, a lot of the new fans you are trying to attract may not have even seen Generations.

344. Ivory - October 15, 2007


The Nexus seems like the easiest way to get Shatner involved. Plus, rumor has it that the film deals with various timelines.

Perhaps, the nexus (an alternate time line itself) created an alternate timeline from where Kirk could have survived.

To me it just seems like the easiest way to do it. I’m sure there are many other ways this could be done.

I really don’t care how it’s done as long as Shatner is involved as Kirk.

345. b r i a n - October 15, 2007

To make Star trek relevant again:

Step on toes, have no sacred cows, don’t rely on the tired formula of the arch-villain vs. the federation… Start over, make it edgy, a little dark, bury ANY sacharine, nostalgic pablum…

Just as Ron Moore made Galactica bleeding-edge current, hyper-relevant, and razor-sharp… write a story that portrays a civilization you’d actually want to be a part of (not the boring white-collar, white-bread, white-skinned world of latter-day Star Treks), that portrays issues that mean something (and are the kind of issues an evolved civilization might wrestle with), and show us something HUGE and HUMAN at the same time… which is to say: Show us an evolved human (or vulcan) acting and reacting in the face of immense forces (social corruption, inner demons, natural disasters, inexorable historical trends) not just another pathetic little villainous piss-ant, like some episode of Bat Man.

346. Alex Rosenzweig - October 16, 2007

345: Well, I would tend not to use “That Show That Bears Galactica’s Name” as much of a model for Trek, but I do agree that one problem a lot of Modern Trek had was that it was a lot “safer” than it should have been, and could do with some harder-edged exploration of real issues. TOS had it right on that front, and today the use of science fiction as a vehicle to explore issues of today would allow Trek to go a lot further than it could in the ’60s.

Mr. Orci can comment on this if he chooses, of course, but what he’s said so far seems to suggest that he and the rest of the team may have that on their minds.

339 – Yup, that scenario could work, though admittedly, it might still raise the question of how different the timeline might be if Kirk hadn’t died on the Enterprise-B. Maybe not at all, maybe a lot. And maybe it’s a can o’ worms best left unopened.

But as for openings for future stories, I think that what a lot of people forget is that the span of time covered by canonical “Classic Trek” in its entirety is not only quite long (3 decades), it has a lot of gaps in it, and those gaps would be plenty big enough to do a lot of storytelling.

For example… Let’s assume that we’re talking an open-ended, multi-picture arrangement with this cast, with a new film every 2-3 years. And let’s also assume that the producers/writers are dedicated to storytelling in the established Trekverse, at least insofar as TOS is concerned. Allowing for the passage of time in fiction as well as reality, there could be a progression much like this, running in parallel with and still not stepping on the toes of TOS and the original-cast films:

ST XI (2008; and just using numbers as shorthand, to keep things organized): The “origin story”; how the key characters came together and formed the team we came to know so well.

ST XII: In the midst of the 5-Year Mission, maybe between eps of TOS, maybe afterward. A straight-up TOS story writ large enough to be worthy of the Big Screen. (For example, just how cool a movie would _Prime Directive_ be? :) )

STXIII: The end of a trilogy, and of the 5-Year Mission. At its end, the Enterprise comes home and goes into drydock for refitting.

STXIV-STXV: Between TMP and TWOK. There’s 13 years between those films, room for several movies!

And that’s as far as I’m gonna go with this little fantasy. ;) Well, except to say that as the film’s progress, Paramount could also be doing what’s being done with several other franchises: New and/or peripheral characters could be introduced, and if the audience shows particular affinity for them, there’s the potential for spinoffs, such as is happening with Magneto and Wolverine spinning off from the core X-Men franchise. And so on.

So is there room for continued storytelling in Trek, even with the new cast? Oh, heck, yeah! And no need to be “liberated’ from existing Trek in the least. :)


347. DragonWorld.TV | Blog - Home of news about Knight Quest, the medieval combat reality TV series about jousting, archery, sword-fighting and horsemanship. - October 23, 2007

[…] Trek Film Details Confirmed Filed under: Movies, Fantasy & Science Fiction, Syndicated — SCI FI Wire @ 1:00 am Roberto Orci, who with partner Alex Kurtzman is writing J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek movie, confirmed to that the movie will focus on the core characters of Capt. Kirk, Spock and Dr. McCoy. Syndicated Article […]

348. SciFi Surplus » Abrams to Continue Directing Star Trek XI During Strike - November 6, 2007

[…] Kurtzman and Orci completed the second draft of the script in early October.    Leave a Reply […]

349. Michael J - November 14, 2007

One of the most obvious “Easter eggs” is also a very easy DS9 connection, and it isn’t even a stretch … the meeting of a young McCoy with Emony Dax. (Remember Jadzia saying, “He had the hands of a surgeon”?)

350. Samuel A. Falvo II - November 29, 2007

#346 — I agree with your proposed movie schedule. However, at the end of the trilogy, just as the Enterprise is pulling into drydock, AT THAT MOMENT, and not a moment before, should the theme music switch to ST:TMP’s music. Indeed, the opening credits should start with TOS’s music, but should close with TMP’s. (of course, the obligatory, “The adventure is just beginning…” message should show too!)

351. Brandon M - January 28, 2008

NOOOOO Time Travel! Anyone with me?

352. Rich T. Anderson - March 28, 2009

Brandon, I may be with you. Time will tell. lol.

I just needed to say this out load somewhere.

A villain is going back in time and completely altering the history of the characters we know.

This means all kinds of things will now be different from the canon that Orci and Kurtzman say they are following and respecting basically has ceased to exist. So they don’t need to follow or respect it. Once the timeline has been altered, they can do what ever the hell they please.

I’m thinking they did this intentionally so wouldn’t have to pay attention to any continuity points that they did want to. Like whether Kirk can drive a car or if he was a ‘stack of books with legs’ as Garey Mitchel described.

That isn’t to say, I’m going to hate it. If it is indeed a well written story, then I still may enjoy it, but at this point it seems like they’ve made a cop out, so that they can take the liberties they wish to. That does not bode well.

*crosses fingers*

See you all in May.


353. Roulette - July 14, 2011

I’m really impressed together with your writing skills well with the structure in your weblog. Is that this a paid subject or did you modify it yourself? Either way keep up the excellent high quality writing, it is uncommon to look a great blog like this one these days..

354. ARIEL - October 17, 2011

@speakingsuppers 1 unfollowed you between 6AM and 7AM. See who: is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.