Nimoy Log: This Is Big |
jump to navigation

Nimoy Log: This Is Big December 23, 2007

by Leonard Nimoy , Filed under: Nimoy,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

The following is our second guest blog from Leonard Nimoy as he returns to the role of Spock for the new Star Trek movie.

I have now spent several shooting days on the various sets of the new film. Security has been held tight.

Because of strong interest there has been an effort on the part of some to get unauthorized photos of actors going to and from their trailers, etc.

The size of the production impresses me. It’s a big picture. An imaginative and ambitious project. The director JJ Abrams is able to work on a very large scale while also paying close attention to the intimate work of the actors. The cast members are uniformly talented and enthusiastic. It’s a pleasure to be around them and to work with them.

My hopes for this film continue to be very positive.

Related: Read Nimoy Log 1


1. Deep Space 913 - December 23, 2007

When ever some one calls something “ambitious” that leaves the door wide open for it to be good, or to be crap. I hope we go in the right direction with it!

2. The Lensman - December 23, 2007

Well I hope it’s good, and I hope it’s a break from the same old Trek movie formula. I’ll start worrying when I hear them say “We’ve got a villain that’ll be just as good as Khan.” Seems like Berman said that about every TNG movie except FC.

3. Alex Trekek - December 23, 2007

Always a pleasure to hear from Mr. Nimoy

4. Dennis Bailey - December 23, 2007

#1:”When ever some one calls something “ambitious” that leaves the door wide open for it to be good, or to be crap.”

Exactly. The only way to guarantee that one *consistently* gets the results one is aiming for is to get very good at producing mediocrity and then produce it.

Anything that’s ambitious, anything that requires – to use the cliche – reaching beyond what one can easily grasp in one’s fist – runs the risk of major failure.

Give me ten failures and one brilliant success rather than nine *guaranteed* “crowd-pleasers.”

5. Mr Snuffleupacus - December 23, 2007

I don’t doubt Nimoy, but wasn’t Nemesis described as “ambitious” by the powers-that-be at the time? LOL!!

Nimoy I trust though…the fact he’s onboard this project speaks volumes to me.

6. Thomas Jensen - December 23, 2007

“Better and better, Mr. Spock”. From the “Enterprise Incident’

7. Thomas Jensen - December 23, 2007

“Better and better, Mr. Spock”. ….”The Enterprise Incident’

8. Kev-1 - December 23, 2007

One good Spock eyebrow from Nimoy is better than buckets of “ambition”. For me, anyway.

9. Dennis Bailey - December 23, 2007

Well, I wouldn’t pay eight bucks to see him raise his eyebrow. :lol:

10. miguel - December 23, 2007

Yay Leonard Nimoy! With all of the actors and production staff talking about the scale of this picture, I think it’ll be awesome, no matter what. Abrams pays attention to the details, a la LOST.


11. Miss PeeWee - December 23, 2007

Thank you for the update, Mr. Nimoy! :)

12. Jeffrey S. Nelson - December 23, 2007

I hope they ambitiously endeavor to get Shatner.

13. konar - December 23, 2007

One thing that his blog makes clear is that he is actually INTERACTING with the other cast members, which means he is doing more than having a flashback ot telling stories… he’s THERE! Cool!

14. James Heaney - December 23, 2007

#2: Actually, it was John Logan who made the Khan remark with regards to Shinzon. I don’t recall it being said of Ru’afo.

If it was, I intend to surprise Berman by calling in the Spanish Inquisition. He’ll never expect that!

Glad to hear Nimoy’s still excited about this project. He’s always had good taste. Well, I still don’t get that photography thing he does, but, with Star Trek, at least, he’s always had good taste.

15. chris - December 23, 2007

mr nimoy
legends never die -best luck for this film and i hope its the beginning of a new time for starTrek movies

a 26age older fan from germany since 1989

16. Pizza - December 23, 2007

Nimoy “It’s a big picture”

I would love to ask him to elaborate on that statement.

Big name actors? (not really)
Big budget? ($160 M) Rumour has it, it is.

368 dtST

17. Eyewillit - December 23, 2007

God bless Star Trek and the ambition that it creates in us. Rock out with your Spock out Leonard! We can’t wait!!!

18. jonboc - December 23, 2007

Nimoy read what was, in his words, a great script. No doubt the characters of his “Star Trek” and the images of his “Star Trek” were filling in the voices and visuals. Now he is witnessing JJ’s vision replace those visions while he looks on from the sidelines. That could be amazing while at the same time quite jarring.

It will be real interesting to continue to read Nimoy’s take on the production. So far, it sounds like he likes what he is seeing and that makes me very optimistic.

19. trektacular - December 23, 2007

Its gonna be a trip to see Nimoy in a big budget film again.

20. K. M. Kirby - December 23, 2007

(Still not certain how the two actors will play one role)

Reminiscences of Spock?

Time travel?

Viewing of recorded events in the later period?

Nimoy doing narration?

Not a clue.

21. Roddenberry was a peacenik - December 23, 2007

Interesting. It’s too bad Nimoy has that dang NDA, so he obviously he won’t be able to reveal too much about the flick. Still, he could probably give some perspective without spoiling anything about the movie, or violating his non-disclosure agreement. I.e., What was his first day of shooting like? What’s it like being back on a Trek movie after all these years? What kind of emotions does that bring back? What’s the average day working on this movie like? Any interesting anecdotes or stories going around?

22. Anthony Pascale - December 23, 2007

RE 16
the budget is big but not 160…in fact that number came from moviehole…the same site that declared that they had the ‘final word’ from Orci that shatner would not appear in the film.

our report on the budget puts it closer to 135-140

23. The Lensman - December 23, 2007

“Actually, it was John Logan who made the Khan remark with regards to Shinzon. I don’t recall it being said of Ru’afo.”

Man, I swear it was said about the others, mainly because I remember rolling my eyes when it was said about Shinzon and thinking “enough with the next Kahn thing already!!!”

24. Iowagirl - December 23, 2007

Considering the quantity of kinsfolk that will be shown, it’s certainly a big picture.

25. Aaron R. (Sisko would not agree with the closing of - December 23, 2007

I think it is just great that Leonard is taking some of his time to come on our site and reveal some of his inner thoughts… Mr. Nimoy thank you so much for always being to gracious to the fans of your work. If all of Hollywood had your amount of class and insight it would be a much better place.

Second of all have some class people posting in here. Squabbling or nitpicking Leonard’s comments when he is so generously taking the time to give them to you is odd at best and borderline rude at worst.

Aaron R.

26. dalek - December 23, 2007

Thanks Leonard :)

27. flier1701 - December 23, 2007

Thank you, Mr. Nimoy, for giving us all that you can probably give on the production right now.

Although I always knew you are a great actor, I never realized just how great you are until I saw this: (Mr. Nimoy makes his entrance at 3:09)

Definitely one of the more interesting finds on youtube. Hats off to you, sir!

28. Cheve - December 23, 2007

Exactly what I need.

someone telling us regularly how nice time they are having.


29. Sean4000 - December 23, 2007

It’s good to hear from Mr. Nimoy but I would rather hear new information. Glad to see he’s enjoying himself on set though.

30. norm - December 23, 2007

I wish we could get a report on the uniforms. I’m so worried they are not Retro-TOS.

31. shuttlepod10 - December 23, 2007

We should get a cast picture any day now, right? I mean, the movie opens a year from a few days.

32. Dave - December 23, 2007

#4 ” –Give me ten failures and one brilliant success rather than nine *guaranteed* “crowd-pleasers.”

Well, We had 9 mediocre movies and “Wrath of Khan”, didn’t we?

Maybe First Contact Counts too.

33. Dennis Bailey - December 23, 2007

I think you’ve only got one or two ambitious films among all the Trek movies.

34. Classic trek - December 23, 2007

30# norm
totally agree. i need some reassurance in those TOS uniforms. positive thoughts from mr nimoy

35. Lindsay - December 23, 2007

Thank you, Mr. Nimoy!

The fact that he’s so supportive of this movie means more to me than anything anyone else involved could say.

36. Pragmaticus - December 23, 2007

31 – Roberto promised us that they’d be taking a cast photo by the end of the year, when everyone was on set.

37. CanuckLou - December 23, 2007

Nimoy has been shooting on more than one set – strongly indicates his role is more than one of simple flashback sequences but one of active involvement in the storyline! Excellent!

My big question – does he mindmeld with Quinto’s Spock to prove himself?

Be a great way to keep the existing canon with the new cast in future enterprises.

38. Spock Jenkins - December 23, 2007

32 –

Nine mediocre movies?!?


ST:TMP : Cinematic, and great SCIENCE FICTION in the vein of 2001 – excellent.

ST:II : Adventurous spirit of the original series – what can I say that hasn’t been said before – brilliant.

ST:III : Perhaps more low key than its predecessor, but enjoyable and poignant nonetheless…

ST:IV : Great fun and a great adventure!

ST: V : Has its flaws, but I don’t care I’ll take it over any NextGen Movie any day.

ST: VI : Thoughful, powerful and exciting.

Generations/Insurrection/Nemesis : confused/pedestrian/rubbish.

So in essence ( save First Contact ), the best Star Trek has always been with the original characters and universe…and with the new movie and Mr. Nimoy’s involvement and endorsement it will prove to be the same…

39. Noleuser - December 23, 2007

Mr. Nimoy,

It’ll be a treat to see you again as Mr. Spock. I’ve been watching the special features of your directed trek movies lately, and your talent is evident in your work and of your description of the fimaking process. I’ve been a fan of JJ Abrams for a while now, and with your support of him, I know this picture will be something special!

Happy Hannukah

40. mojonaut - December 23, 2007

#10 – “Abrams pays attention to the details, a la LOST.”

Pays attention to details? Like having an 8-month pregnant woman flying? (One cannot fly in the last trimester)

Or having the batteries go dead on a radio after the plane crashes, but a signal is mysteriously picked up on the island interior that had been repeating for sixteen years, with no explainable power source other than miracle batteries that don’t die?

I learned this from watching one episode of Lost… the pilot. After that, I couldn’t be bothered to watch it again. There’s poetic license and there’s swiss-cheese plots, and Lost certainly slots into the latter category. And there were other such points which I obviously deemed too unimportant to remember. Suffice to say, I just couldn’t like the show because of the carelessness to detail it portrayed. A simple lack of research (or even common sense).

Indeed this would be one of the areas I’m a little sceptical about in terms of Abrams’ ability to make a quality picture. However, he can attract a certain amount of other things, along with his (relatively) stellar name when compared with previous Star Trek movie helmsmen, that can be a real injection of life into the franchise that we all know it needs to survive.

This is a real make-or-break movie, and I’ve no doubt the ambition and enthusiasm, but as a lot of people have pointed out, he can do a complete Louis Hamilton (F1 driver) and be enthusiastic and gung-ho to the point where he’s doing so exceptionally well that he over-shoots the mark and puts too many eggs in the one basket.

41. Crusty McCoy - December 23, 2007

I lost you once, Spock. I don’t think I could stand to lose you again. Make us all proud, old friend.

42. Reliant - December 23, 2007

Don’t forget that J.J. Abrams is also responsible for the great cliffhanger series “Alias” starring the beautiful Jennifer Garner. Too bad she won’t be in this movie!!!

43. Scott - December 23, 2007

Sounds Cool!

44. cd - December 23, 2007

#42 – Number One hasn’t been cast yet; I am still hoping Jennifer Garner will play her!
Great to hear from Leonard Nimoy. Has he ever directly chat on here like Roberto Orci? That would be amazing. Good to hear the good things he is saying about the production.

45. J.D. Lee - December 23, 2007

Thankyou Mr. Nimoy.

Im a big fan!

You’re probably laughing at our discussions over here..I would too.

anyway thanks for your time.

46. Pizza - December 23, 2007

Re 22 (Anthony)

Hi Anthony, I just spent some time googling Star Trek budgets. For the sake of 20 million dollars, Star Trek 2008 is going to be twice as $$$ as the next most.

12/11/1998 Star Trek IX: Insurrection $70,000,000
12/13/2002 Star Trek X: Nemesis $60,000,000
11/22/1996 Star Trek VIII: First Contact $46,000,000
11/18/1994 Star Trek VII: Generations $38,000,000
12/7/1979 Star Trek: The Motion Picture $35,000,000
6/9/1989 Star Trek V: The Final Frontier $30,000,000
12/6/1991 Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country $27,000,000
11/26/1986 Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home $24,000,000
6/1/1984 Star Trek III: The Search for Spock $18,000,000
6/4/1982 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan $12,000,000

12/25/2008 Star Trek: 120,000,000-150,000,000 ???

Regardless of where in the above range, it is still some serious money.

368 dtST

47. Anthony Pascale - December 23, 2007

I think it is important to realise that the new Star Trek movie is a whole new kind of Trek movie. It will be bigger and have a wider audience appeal than any Trek film before. Probably the closest comparison would be the first film, which has an inflation adjusted budget over 100 mil. Paramount are shooting for box office comparable to the recent Batman and Superman films, which were also franchise restarts (from a biz point of view).

What Mr. Nimoy states above is evidence of this epic view.

Star Trek The Motion Picture was really the only ‘epic’ film. The rest of the TOS films felt like medium sized movies and the TNG films really felt like extended TV episodes.

RE: comments ‘didnt we hear this with Nemesis’
I am always amused by comments like this. Perhaps it is the battered child syndrome. Yes sometimes people involved with Nemesis would say they want the film to have wide appeal or some would talk about how they were fans…but actions speak louder than words. Paramount and the Abrams team have literally put their money where their mouths are. Just look at the cast and the creative team and you realize that we are in a whole new league right now.

The proof will be in the final product, but so far it appears that all the lessons from Nemesis have been learned.

48. mojonaut - December 23, 2007

I’m surprised at how low down that list STVI was (which is my favourite movie) and FC (which would be my second favourite). VI had the best “look” for a Star Trek film, I think. It was within the universe yet expanded upon it a great deal. There was *real* attention to detail in that movie. And First Contact was easily the most impressive (as is generally agreed upon by readers of this site, it seems) TNG film, and was quite cheap, relatively speaking (I don’t know where all that money went on Insurrection – into an incinerator by the looks of it).

And then there’s the old favourite. STII. Made on a shoe-string (relative to TMP, the most expensive film ever made, at the time), and a lot of people rate it as their favourite ST movie.

It just goes to show that big budget doesn’t always mean big results. TMP was a flop, in terms of cost vs. earnings, and we’re lucky that STII got made, and was a success, because of the relative failure of TMP. I have a feeling the new Star Trek film won’t be the catalyst of renewed popularity for the Star Trek franchise that we all think it will, let alone comparing it to Batman Begins. I think Nemesis did a lot to tarnish the reputation, in terms of not putting new fans’ bums on seats. And the funny thing is, it was existing Star Trek fans that criticised Nemesis (myself included – so much potential gone to waste), when, were it a film belonging to A.N. Other franchise in a stand-alone context, it probably wouldn’t be half bad, or entirely unsuccessful.

But that’s all past, and I hope my cynicism turns out to be baseless, because I love Star Trek too much to see it fizzle out like that.

49. Pizza - December 23, 2007

Anthony: I recall being in the line up for the Motion Picture, and literally freezing my short hairs in anticipation. I have suffered through the highs and lows of the good movies and not so good movies. The last two in my opinion were dogs. I have been to all Trek movies on opening night. (At least I think I have). But the last 2 comments beg the questions. Can you step outside your Trekkie suit and say this movie will be as big as the Batman reboot? Batman in my opinion has/had a larger general fan appeal to begin with. Star Trek does not. Therefore a larger hurdle to cross to promote this franchise. It will be interesting to see how the marketing machine handles this. I will be seeing Cloverfield more for the Star Trek trailer, the movie itself is an after thought.

Most passionate Trek fans have taken this movie to heart and then some. For example, look at the camps regarding Shatner. It is encouraging to see the Paramount / Abrams put so many eggs in this basket. As I have heard a few times and agree, this movie could literally make or break this franchise. Everything indicates a positive outcome. ;-)

50. ShawnP - December 23, 2007

#48 – I second the hope that your cynicism turns out to be baseless.

51. Anthony Pascale - December 23, 2007

note i never said that they are guaranteed to be Batman Begins big, what I said was that is what they want it to be….and more importantly that is what they are building and funding it to be. I say that with my trekkie hat off and am looking at the film in context of what Paramount expect and what the buzz is in Hollywood. Do you think Steven Spielberg would be dropping by the set of another 60 million dollar TNG movie directed by Frakes? Think back to my interview with Orci, when he said that they were thinking Transformers big and Star Wars big. I have heard other people on the film and at Paramount talk like that too. Although they do accept that it wont in the end hit 700 million in sales like transformers, they are thinking on a whole new plane than any of the TNG movies.

Paramount want Trek to be a big earner for them again…like it was in the 80s and more. They have put together the right team and right budget to do that. Nimoy above notes that…bearing in mind he has seen them all…big and small.

However, there are no guarantees. Once you have a wider remit you need to hit all sorts of demos…I see a few areas of concern:
1. Women…especially middle aged/ married women
2. Asian markets (trek doesn’t play well there…no big name to help)
3. Latino & African Americans (cast is not exactly diverse)
plus there is the issue of rebuilding the Trek brand. But remember a lot of general film goers dont even know about Insurrection and Nemesis, neither of which were marketed well or broadly. A lot of Trekkies think the market was saturated with trek, but many in the general public havent gone to see Trek since First Contact and didn’t even know about Star Trek Enterprise.

The marketing campaign for Trek will be very interesting…most in the genpop dont even know about the new movie. The trailer with Cloverfield is really just the beginning of a year long campaign. I do not envy the task, but I happy that they are trying. The days of just preaching to the choir are over.

52. Craig - December 23, 2007

Anthony can Trek also be marketed to a mass audience with a new Trek TV show? Weren’t the last few Trek series except for TNG geared only for Trek fans?

53. Pizza - December 23, 2007

Thanks Anthony for all your comments and opinions. It has been a pleasure. It is just too bad this particular Paramount mindset didn’t happen sooner. Scrooge had to wait before seeing the ghost of Christmas future before he changed his thinking. Metaphorically speaking perhaps the suits at Paramount have seen the ghost of the Christmas 2008 future.

54. Anthony Pascale - December 23, 2007

craig…Trek on TV is a harder sell. Although many of the top films of all time are scifi and even ‘hard’ scifi (space ship, etc)…space ship type scifi on TV has more failure than success. I have spoken to a number of producers who have worked on trek or other trek tv series and all agree that it will not be easy to bring trek back to TV, but it isnt impossible. Regardless it would ahve to be be sold to the wider ‘Lost’ ‘Heroes’ ‘Smallville’ etc type of audience.

RE: suits at Paramount
bear in mind that most of the suits at paramount are mostly different, especially President Brad Grey who is the guy who brought in JJ Abrams and called him ‘the next spielberg’ These people dont think of trek in the same way as the Lansing regime with Berman did…they do not carry that TNG era baggage. That being said the production executive who shepherded Trek through the system is an old guard and pro Trek guy…so they are not all new.

anyway…enough pontificating…but as producer Damon Lindelof (who is as big a trek nerd as all of us) says…this isn’t your Daddy’s Star Trek

55. Michelle - December 23, 2007

We very much appreciate you taking the time for your busy schedule to post here, Mr. Nimoy. :) Thank you!

56. Fansince9 - December 23, 2007

Somebody here correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is the first time an audience has had the benefit of reading an actor’s point of view from over the course of making a Star Trek movie. As many others have said, I too thank you Mr. Nimoy for taking the time to do this. It is so cool, and we appreciate it. :)

57. S. John Ross - December 23, 2007

Many groovy thanks, Mr. Nimoy.

58. CmdrR - December 23, 2007

The comments here make my head spin. All Mr. Nimoy said was that he likes what he sees. That’s good for me for now. We’ve only got 366 days to wait! I agree with Anthony that the look will be utterly new to Trek. I’m kinda hoping they throw in effects that are next generation (no, not TNG) so Trek is the film to immitate for a few years. A serious upgrade on CG if they must use it. And better camera work than we’re used to. That’s my two quatloos. And now, back to your speculation…

59. Jupiter1701 - December 23, 2007

So how do the ears feel after all these years? Is it like riding a bike?

60. Mike Thompson - December 23, 2007

Mr Nimoy:- So Pleased that Spock is back, enjoy!

61. trektacular - December 23, 2007

It feels as if Trek, as an idea, has been exploited too much for any kind of major comeback.

62. Kigs - December 23, 2007

Mr. Nimoy,
Thank you for another wonderful update!:) Hope all is going well and I can’t wait to see the result.

Keep up the good work and have fun.

(the quote girl from LV – Howard Lindsay :) )

63. The Vulcanista - December 23, 2007

Mr. Nimoy,

Thanks for sharing and have a wonderful holiday!

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|

64. mojonaut - December 23, 2007

“Think back to my interview with Orci, when he said that they were thinking Transformers big and Star Wars big”

Which are the sort of levels they should be aiming. But Transformers and Star Wars are good names to trade upon, whereas “Star Trek” could be the very thing that stops the wider audience from attending cinemas. I’m not suggesting for a minute that the name be changed, but that expectations are not as high.

65. Zed Drebin - December 23, 2007

He actually sounded like Spock in that quote :)

66. Crusade2267 - December 24, 2007

Thank you, Mr. Nimoy for caring about your fans enough to drop us a line every now and again!

67. Michelle - December 24, 2007

Yes, Nimoy’s two blog entries have both seemed very Spock-like to me! Especially this last one He must be really getting into character.

68. ensign joe - December 24, 2007

i have to tell you… all this “grand scope” talk is exactly what i want to hear.. i totally agree that most of the films besides tmp felt closed in, medium sized. its space, its grand, open it up!

69. TheGreatBird - December 24, 2007

Re: “this isn’t your Daddy’s Star Trek”

Ahem. In other words, it’s not Star Trek.

I’d rather see more New Voyages installments. That’s the only show of real interest, and it IS Star Trek.

70. Miss PeeWee - December 24, 2007

Anthony said:

However, there are no guarantees. Once you have a wider remit you need to hit all sorts of demos…I see a few areas of concern:
1. Women…especially middle aged/ married women
Excuse me — this is one middle aged woman who has watched ST since it’s inception in 1966, and I’m excited about the movie. And I know other women ST fans my age, and of all ages. :)


71. Jupiter1701 - December 24, 2007


I don’t get it. With the New Voyages you have new people playing the original roles. With the new movie you get the same. With the New Voyages you get a shoe-string budget. With the new movie you get a $100+ million budget.

How are the New Voyages any more Star Trek than the new movie? Also, how can you hate on something you haven’t even seen yet?

It’s not logical.

72. Viking - December 24, 2007

You’ll pardon me for reserving judgement in either extreme until I see both tangible and intangible assets to form an opinion from. Terms such as ‘imaginative’ and ‘ambitious’ are ambiguous enough to gloss over or rationalize a great many possible points of contention in the story, characters, art concepts, etc.

Show me some goodies first.

73. Sam Belil - December 24, 2007

#71 — Here is the thing (s):
1-New Voyages features the one and only orignial NCC-1701 as it SHOULD appear!
2-The uniforms look the way the they’re SUPPOSED to for that period in time in STTOS history.
3-With the exception of the “Chekov” episode, NV remains true to ST continuity, (note the great ATTENTION to detail, especially in the Doomsday Machine episode that features Pike and Crew).
4-For the most part, really good storytelling!
5-Cawly and crew may have a shoestring budget, but to me they bring a lot of heart to their game!

Merry X-Mas to All!Happy, Healthy, Safe & Prosperous New Year!!!

74. trektacular - December 24, 2007

Seriously this negativity is really annoying, if its bad, so what? They’ll make another one. They’ll keep making them until they get it right trust me. They’ve done that before and they’ll do it again.
Its Paramounts golden goose after all, and I’m sure want it to succeed.

75. Sam Belil - December 24, 2007

#74 — it’s not so much negativity as it is apprehension!!! Most of us WANT to be VERY EXCITED about this film, and I like most will see it no matter what. Having said that (being a fan since the show aired on NBC) — if they make changes just for the sake of change (different uniforms, different looking Enterprise, etc) and bring in a whole new set of “bells and whistles” — it will hurt this film, especially if it does not match the period in TOS history that it is supposed to be taking place in (“Pike-era film). I’m also very bothered by the fact that Gary Mitchell will not be included in this film, after all him and Kirk were best friends and went through the academy together. No #1 (perfect role for Julianne Moore). How do you bring in all these TOS characters (I mean Sulu, Chekov and Uhrura, I’m guessing their supposed to be teenagers in this movie????) Unless — this ends up being an “alternate universe movie”….

76. Bob Tompkins - December 24, 2007

Don’t forget that Nimoy only had one strong entry in three attempts. The Search for Spock was something of a dog, as was The Undiscovered Country —the plot holes [the boots in the air duct?”, the telegraphed ‘mystery’ [if the Vulcan chick isn’t Saavik, then she’s the bad gal and you know Chang is somewhere on the other end of the deal] and undecipherable stilted dialogue [“You should have trusted me, Spock…” Huh???? I could have written several lines that would surpass that. A Simple “Why drag me into your mess?” would have been more effective.]All this weakened a film with the potential to be so much more than it was.

77. sean - December 24, 2007

Wow, couldn’t disagree more # 76. TUC had extraordinarily strong dialogue. What exactly is so undechipherable about ‘You should have trusted me’?? And why would the uniforms being in the air duct be a plot hole? Scotty finding them might have been a stretch, but it’s not a plot hole.

I’d agree Valeris stood out too quickly, but Rodenberry wouldn’t allow them to use Saavik, so they were sort of backed into a corner there. Would the movie have been stronger with Saavik as the conspirator? Most definitely.

That aside, the movie has some terrific exchanges, especially at the dinner scene early on and between McCoy & Kirk on the penal asteroid (‘What is it with you anyway?’ still makes me laugh out loud when I hear it).

78. J.D. Lee - December 24, 2007

“I could have written several lines that would surpass that”

ok, so why don’t you?? Let me see YOUR Star Trek movie …Action speak louder then words…you know.

79. TheGreatBird - December 25, 2007

I’m interested in seeing what Nimoy and Quinto and perhaps one or two more will do, but none of the other cast members impress me. Every bit of news coming out makes this film sound less and less faithful to GR’s vision of Star Trek. The “Not your Daddy’s Star Trek” statement is a big nail in the coffin for me, as it shows the contempt these people have for the original series and GR’s vision. Can you blame people who love the original for being skeptical? Or are fans so desperately hungry for every scrap of “official” Star Trek that Paramount craps out? As another middle-aged fan since 1966, I’m far more satisfied watching the New Voyages, particularly the most recent installment, and it is from that direction I have seen emerge a far more faithful treatment of the Star Trek “franchise.” My hopes are not with Abrams, but with Cawley.

80. sean - December 25, 2007

“The “Not your Daddy’s Star Trek” statement is a big nail in the coffin for me, as it shows the contempt these people have for the original series and GR’s vision”

How exactly do you leap to that? These people have done nothing but wax nostalgic about TOS and the characters. Just because they’re updating a few things doesn’t mean they don’t have respect for Gene Roddenberry or the show itself. They just recognize that a big screen version of the original show isn’t going to fly. This thing needs to be big and different from what’s come before for Trek to survive. Lest we all forget, Nick Meyer & Herve Bennett weren’t ‘fans’ of Trek, and they played pretty fast-and-loose with GR’s ‘vision’.

81. section9 - December 25, 2007

Trek had to be taken out of the hands of the TNG folks because they were killing it.

I had always believed that TNG had drained the action and adventure from TOS, and had made the critical error in deciding to get up on the platform and preach to the general audience. I think it was Sam Goldwyn who remarked that if you wanted to preach to people, you needed to get a soapbox.

What I think they are doing is getting back to the action and adventure, and remaining true to the original spirit of the script idea that gave birth to “The Cage” and “Where No Man Has Gone Before”.

I believe that it is in those early eps from the pilot and the First Season that will give you an idea of where JJ and Orci are going. I truly believe that people will be surprised at the level of devotion to the spirit of the First Season that people will see in the Movie.

No, the Big E will not be exactly the same, but she will be close enough. No, the uniforms won’t be the same (after all, we’d have to sit through the first third of the movie taking over and under bets on how many Redshirts would by the farm by intermission, now wouldn’t we?). No, Uhura probably won’t have a beehive. But the Trek is in the story, the script, and the acting, and the devotion to the general outline of the Trek Universe.

I don’t think they will throw the baby out with the bathwater.

James Kirk, meet James Bond.

82. Gary Mitchell in the house! - December 26, 2007

Re: 71. Jupiter1701 – December 24, 2007
” don’t get it. With the New Voyages you have new people playing the original roles. With the new movie you get the same. With the New Voyages you get a shoe-string budget. With the new movie you get a $100+ million budget.”

C.G. responding:

1. All one can expect from NewTrek’s efx is the hope for state of the art work. This says nothing about the APPEARANCE of the ships in the new film, which will be open for debate.

2. For a fan-film with the alleged “shoe-string” budget, the efx seen in ST:NV’s last couple of episodes are still superior to the work seen on CBS’s Remastered project, with the latter’s shiny, video game ship.

“How are the New Voyages any more Star Trek than the new movie?”

Because ST:NV actually takes place in the same universe as TOS, and unlike “Enterprie” and what NewTrek appears to be, is not a reboot, reimagining, or any other cannibalized version.

83. Gary Mitchell in the house! - December 26, 2007

Re: 1. Deep Space 913 – December 23, 2007
“When ever some one calls something “ambitious” that leaves the door wide open for it to be good, or to be crap.”

Agreed. As in the case of Dick Tracy, Sky Captain and many of Tim Burton’s films (Batman, Planet of the Apes, etc.) all were said to be ambitious, but in the end, they were crap.

“I hope we go in the right direction with it! ”

Only time will tell.

84. sean - December 26, 2007


Batman was crap? Really? It’s one of the biggest money-makers of all time, and brought Batman to an entirely new generation of fans. He may have played it fast-and-loose with comic book lore, but that film made possible the various cartoons & films that followed it (some of which were good – Returns – and some of which are best forgotten – anything after) including Begins. No need for us to retroactively label it a dud.

I’ll agree Planet of the Apes was a tragic misstep, but otherwise Burton delivers stellar films (Big Fish, Sleepy Hollow, Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood).

85. Closettrekker - December 26, 2007

#30–more likely something along the lines of a transition from the jumpsuits in ENT to the wool uniforms in “The Cage”.

The only thing that worries me is justifying the entire TOS crew being in the film if it is set prior to Kirk’s command. Then again, perhaps at least a portion of it is not. I am trying to keep my mind open.

I am, however, glad to see that Nimoy is lending his presence to the project. He is an artist, and I am sure his opinions about the characters merit their due attention on the set.

86. Jeannie spock - December 26, 2007

Mr Nimoy – keep those blogs a’coming – we will be hanging on your every word.
I know you’re busy, but every crumb of information you throw us will be discussed and dissected.
It’s great that your part seems to be a lot more substantial that the cameo we were at first expecting.
I suppose many of the old stresses and strains will be surfacing but please know that your presence there is lending credibility to this project. Above all, relax, have fun – see you at the Oscars!

87. Mikey Doofer - December 27, 2007

Frankly I just cannie wait for this movie, Nimoy will make this film, what a result for all the fans that he’s back on board the Enterprise!

88. RealMacbeth - December 28, 2007

Now if only they could find a place for the original Kirk in the movie I would be a happier fan. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.