Nimoy Talks Spocks [UPDATE: and Shatner] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Nimoy Talks Spocks [UPDATE: and Shatner] January 4, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Nimoy,ST09 Cast , trackback

CBS 2 in Los Angeles has put up more video from their interview with Leonard Nimoy, with this one focusing more on Star Trek. Although he acknowledges that he helped shape the character of Spock (and therefore all future Vulcans), the actor gives most of the credit to Gene Roddenberry. Nimoy also revealed that the original plan for Spock was to use red make-up, but it didn’t work well on black and white TVs which were still prevalent in 1966. Nimoy also spoke about coming back for the new Star Trek, revealing a small spoiler.

Three Spocks for ‘Star Trek’
Nimoy joked that (like Michael Corleone in The Godfather III) “they pulled me back in” to join the cast for the new Star Trek long after he had put Trek and acting behind him. Although he wouldn’t talk about any filming details, he did drop a spoilery nugget, saying

I am Spock, and there is another Spock and there is another Spock. There are a total of three Spocks in the movie and that is all I will say about it

Obviously one of the other Spocks is Zachary Quinto who is playing the young adult Spock. The third is likely a child or adolescent Spock. This makes the casting of the 36 year old Winona Ryder as Spock’s mother Amanda Grayson make more sense. Of course this will not be the first time we would see kid Spock. In Star Trek III: The Search For Spock a number of actors portrayed Spock as he rapidly aged on the Genesis Planet.


Carl Steven as 9 year old Spock in STIII

How many points of time are there?
A year ago TrekMovie.com first reported that the new Star Trek would be non-linear (as is the custom for Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman) and jump around to various time periods. This ‘3 Spocks’ acknowledgment is just the latest confirmation. It appears we will see the following points in time (at a minimum):

From Zombies to Spock
Nimoy also talks about Vasquez Rocks (in general..not related to the new Star Trek), his history with the franchise, and more about his photography. He also shows off his last pair of Spock ears from 1968. Watch the whole “raw” web extra video at CBS2.com. Plus you can watch the edited version that aired on CBS 2 in Los Angeles, includes some classic clips of Nimoy from “Zombies of the Stratosphere” from 1952.


Nimoy shows off his ears

Nimoy in “Zombies of the Stratosphere”

UPDATE: Nimoy talks Shat and Sehlat
The actor also appeared Friday night on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson. Nimoy mostly spoke about his new book and photography show “The Full Body Project.” Before Nimoy came on, Lost actor Dominic Monaghan was on showing off a number of his favorite reptiles. Ferguson asked Nimoy if he saw the animals and Nimoy replied that he tried to bring in a Vulcan Sehlat but it wasn’t let in. Was that a hint? Might we see this new young ‘third Spock’ with the pet Sehlat discussed in “Journey to Babel”?

Ferguson also got around to talking about the new Trek movie. Nimoy described the new Star Trek as “a gigantic film.” He also stated that it was “spooky” for him to be wearing the Vulcan ears for the first time in 18 years. He also stated that William Shatner was not in the movie and that the reason was that his character “was killed off like four movies ago.” When Ferguson noted that he was killed off and brought back, Nimoy replied “I was resurrected immediately, he has been moldering for quite a while.”

UPDATE 2…VIDEO (sorry out of sync…deal with it)

Comments

1. Johnnie F - January 4, 2008

First!

2. scott - January 4, 2008

Go Spock Go!

3. RTC - January 4, 2008

Don’t forget we also saw the animated kid Spock in the TAS episode “Yesteryear.”

4. Q - January 4, 2008

Yay! The more Spock, the better! lol.

5. Aaron - January 4, 2008

And the baby Spock in Final Frontier!

6. kevin - January 4, 2008

and baby spock i the final froniter.

“he’s so human.”

7. kevin - January 4, 2008

in*

8. Xai - January 4, 2008

#1 Johnnie F
Fine, you have confirmed you can count…up to a point. Did you HAVE a point other than that?

This is hardly new ground. I recall multiple Spocks being discussed a few weeks ago in here. This just confirms it

9. cap - January 4, 2008

perhaps we will see the story of how spock used to run away into the hills in defiance of sarek as described by sarek from the next gen show. that would be interesting.

10. jamesintucson - January 4, 2008

Maybe post tng script can open some other doors for future movie/series. Would be pretty cool I think to open all new doors to the star trek world.

11. CanuckLou - January 4, 2008

Three Spocks in one!

12. Blake Powers - January 4, 2008

Does anyone else still cry at star trek 2?? I just watched it again and i started crying.. Please oh please JJ continue this emotional attachment.

13. SolFlyer - January 4, 2008

I love how no one ever says “post-Voyager era”. Everyone just likes to remember the good times. ;)

14. section9 - January 4, 2008

Three! Three! Three Spocks in One!

15. shuttlepod10 - January 4, 2008

Star Trek: Attack of the Spocks!

16. Stanky McFibberich - January 4, 2008

Non-linear THIS!!

17. Odo - January 4, 2008

Let’s not forget the “crazy, shouty Spock” you see in The Cage and The Menagerie :P

18. Fortyseven - January 4, 2008

That was a really nice interview. I tend to cringe, however, when people ask the same exact Trek-related questions that they’ve been asked for decades. It was nice to see some of his non-Trek work though… especially his first camera, and the photo of his grandfather.

19. ster j - January 4, 2008

Too bad cbs2 can’t spell N*i*moy correctly.

The raw footage is–dare I say it?–FASCINATING!

20. Harry Ballz - January 4, 2008

Unless, like the use of Brando footage in Superman Returns, we’re going to see JJ brilliantly incorporate some scenes filmed many years ago of a young Nimoy Spock?

Hmmm, here a Spock, there a Spock, everywhere A SPOCK SPOCK!! :)

21. Bob Ritchie - January 4, 2008

Oooooh … Kid Spock
Vulcanian Badass!

22. TrekkyStar - January 4, 2008

Thats about 8 actors who played as Spock.

23. J.D. Lee - January 4, 2008

I read somewhere that mr Orci really likes Star Trek III

24. SPB - January 4, 2008

#23 –

Of course Orci would say that… TREK III was directed by Nimoy and it’s ALL about Spock! What’s he gonna say, that he really likes STAR TREK V and have Nimoy walk off the set??? :)

25. Gene L. Coon (was the Better Gene because he) was a U. S. Marine - January 4, 2008

#24 Or he could say he really likes ST V and have Shatner walk ON the set!

Sorry. It has been awhile since I saw a pointless BBK thread hijack. I’ll go to bed now.

26. TrekNerd - January 4, 2008

Don’t forget DeForest Kelley as Spock!

27. J.D. Lee - January 4, 2008

Hahahahhaa!!
He really looked like quinto in that “Zombies of the Stratosphere” clip

check out his eyebrow hehehe!

28. Daoud - January 4, 2008

If only we could get Zachary Quinto to do a music video remake of “Bilbo Baggins”… just in time for the coming Hobbit duology ;)

Excellent confirmation of multiple timelines… I know recently there was some speculation that old Spock was being brain-drained by Nero, and not actually travelling, but “replaying” his memories… I’d rather see a Gary-Seven-esque bit of time-travelling anyway…

Funny indeed about the red makeup note… as if we haven’t known that since “The Making of Star Trek” came out in the late 60’s…

29. Sean4000 - January 4, 2008

I’m kind of looking forward to the post-TNG aspect the most.

30. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#24: It always *has* been about Spock. For me, at any rate. }:-)

Three Spocks, huh? Fascinating.

#20, Harry: “Hmmm, here a Spock, there a Spock, everywhere A SPOCK SPOCK!!”

Old man Roddenberry had a farm
Ee-yi-ee-yi-oh! :)

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

31. TrekNerd - January 4, 2008

For this movie to be entirely the reminiscence of Spock, whether voluntary or involuntary, every scene would have to be from the point of view of Spock and include Spock.

For example, Spock would have to be present at the birth of Kirk.

32. Will Doe 68 - January 4, 2008

I just love Leonard.(sigh)

33. Kigs - January 4, 2008

Awesome Mr. Nimoy!:) Thanks Anthony.

Kigs :)

34. Jupiter1701 - January 4, 2008

Technically the Spock at the end of STIII and thereafter is not the same Spock who had died. His matter was reorganized into a baby of some sort by Genesis and regrown. His Katra was also not quite the same, as they establish in STIV that he had to retrain his mind. He had some of the memories, but I think they were more like echos or something. If the transfer was 100 percent, then Spock would have woken up and been totally himself. But he wasn’t.

Actually, as much as I love STIII, there are some serious plot holes with the whole concept of Spock being reborn. How old was he when he was recreated — was he literally a gob of cell and then a fetus? How would that even had been able to sustain itself inside the tube? Even if he was a baby or a small child, where did he get his nutrition in order to grow? Matter is just not created out of thin air, he’d at least need to be eating constantly in order to build up his mass in order to grow.

And since he was made with the same stuff as the planet, he should have kept right on aging like the planet and eventually died (just as quickly as the planet). Getting off the planet wouldn’t have made any difference. His matter would have been equally unstable.

Kirk goes back to the planet to retrieve Spock’s body — but when he shot the torpedo into space at the end of the previous movie, it was intended to decay in orbit. Hence, no body to go back and get, from his point of view. David and Saavik were suprised that the tube was on the surface, so why would Kirk even consider going back there — because it would have been pointless. In essence he was stealing the ship in order to go back to a place where the body had been destroyed. It was only a fluke that Spock was even there, or alive for that matter.

And when Spock put his brain into McCoy at the end of STII, the final exchange with Kirk and Spock happened after Spock melded with McCoy. So when the katra is put back into Spock, there should be no memory of the last words spoken between Kirk and Spock in the death scene. But those were the first words spoken by Spock after he had his katra put back into his head. (The only way around this is if Spock’s katra was somehow zapped into McCoy when Spock’s body died, and Spock had merely prepared McCoy for the soul implantation prior to going into the chamber.

Again, it’s one of my favorite movies — but when you stop and think about it, it doesn’t make a whole lot of logical sense.

35. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#28
If only there was a mind meld available to erase forever from my memory the musical stylings of Mr. Nimoy’s “The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins.”
{{{{{{CRINGE}}}}}} It’s like the Eldar hearing the language of Mordor at the Council of Elrond in “Fellowship of the Ring.”

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

36. Robogeek - January 4, 2008

34.: It’s called science-fiction. ;-) Just go with it.

37. toddk - January 4, 2008

and don’t forget “Coffin Spock ” from star trek 2-3 :)

38. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#34

Honey, have some more popcorn and just sit back and enjoy the movie! Vulcan mysticism is not easily explained in 1.5 hours. :)

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista

39. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

!
}:-|

40. Jeffrey S. Nelson - January 4, 2008

Wow! What a nice house and what a tour. Very gracious of Leonard. He looks great…must be pumping iron to be so fit.

41. Driver - January 4, 2008

The Cloverfield Monster is……………………………………….SPOCK!

42. steve623 - January 4, 2008

Leonard sez Shatner not in the movie.

Not in the movie.

43. steve623 - January 4, 2008

“And when Spock put his brain into McCoy at the end of STII, the final exchange with Kirk and Spock happened after Spock melded with McCoy. So when the katra is put back into Spock, there should be no memory of the last words spoken between Kirk and Spock in the death scene. ”

McCoy heard everything, so he was remembering the exchange via McCoy’s recollection. Ha!

44. Daoud - January 4, 2008

Nothing new in the Craig Ferguson interview: it was mostly about the Full Body photography book (not that that was bad).

Then Nimoy gave the same “Shatner’s not in it, his Kirk died 4 movies ago.” and “His body’s been molding there for a while” in response to Craig’s pointing out that his Spock had died too and was brought back….

45. Harry Ballz - January 4, 2008

Okay, now I’m pissed off………just watched the Craig Ferguson Show and had to endure some young git from Lost coming out first before Leonard Nimoy! Nimoy has been around 40 years and even Ferguson introduced him as an “icon”. The snot-nosed brat from Lost has been on the scene for 10 minutes and HE gets the preferrential treatment of being the first guest to be introduced? Adding insult to injury was that the kid spent his entire segment time showing off snakes and bugs like he was at a high school science fair! All valuable time wasted where Nimoy could have had more air time to talk about what he’s been doing these last number of years. Outrageous!!!

46. ZoomZoom - January 4, 2008

Star Trek: Meet the Spockers.

47. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#44

And what a load of crap we had to sit through to get there, although Dominick Monaghan was kinda cute with the animals and all.

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

48. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#45 Harry

Seems like the show had disintegrated before airtime. Comcast listed Dean Evans (? some of you young whippersnappers fill me in) and Harry Conick Jr. as scheduled to appear as well as Nimoy. I was actually looking forward to Conick appearing. Dominic Monaghan seemed like some kind of pull-our-asses-out-of-the-fire-till-Nimoy-gets-here situation.

Wonder what really happened?

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

49. Harry Ballz - January 4, 2008

Don’t know……otherwise I like Craig Ferguson who is always clever and funny!

50. The Vulcanista - January 4, 2008

#43

And Spock heard it too. At the point of Spock’s “deathbed” conversation with Kirk, Spock’s katra had not fully glommed onto/with(?) McCoy. Full-on glomming takes place at the moment of death. Therefore, Spock’s final memories of that conversation would have been transferred to the katra residing in McCoy as Spock died.

As I stated before, Vulcan mysticism isn’t easily explained in just one full-length-feature movie. Oh, no. Not at all.

Well, that’s *my* fanwankery, and I’m stickin’ to it! }:-P

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

51. steve adams - January 5, 2008

I think its safe to say this film is going to follow JJ’s style …. Lost, Alias a little of MI3 and possibly some cloverfield thrown in……
^
Dosnt make me feel good to be honest…. His past work not to mention transformer
producers,,, gheesh this could royally suck plotwise allthough be visually stunning…?

52. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

Quite interesting interview. I especially liked the bridge he was building when talking about his childhood, about feeling isolated, and the analogy to Spock; closing with “..finding a home in Starfleet”.

#31
– For example, Spock would have to be present at the birth of Kirk. –

And at his rescue and resurrection from the Nexus. With the combined resources of 3 Spocks in 3 different timelines, it should be a worthwhile challenge instead of vain endeavor.

53. Alex Trekek - January 5, 2008

nice. the more spock the better! but seriously, thats cool. i do hope this movie revitalizes trek.

and btw… dude, just cuz youre first… woohoo. please stop the first! stuff. it was cute at first, but now its so so annoying. you yell “first!” but then contribute nothing to the forum. woopee! you have nothing better to do than to watch continuously to be the first. no prob. but contribute!

54. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

12

Totally.

I cry at Star Trek 2 every time. I get teary eyed just listening to James Horner’s soundtrack on my IPod!

55. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

23

yes. I think of Trek 2, 3, and 4 as a true trilogy.

56. Anthony Pascale - January 5, 2008

I have updated the article with some comments from Nimoy during the Late Late Show. As noted before not much new, but he did make a joke about a Sehlat. Now that we know there will be a child Spock I would not be surprised if we see his pet Sehlat (which we also saw in the TAS episode “Yesteryear”)

oh and hi Mr. Orci…nice of you to drop in….Happy New Year

57. trektacular - January 5, 2008

James Horners score for both Treks 2 and 3 are wonderful all by themselves.
Nimoy is such a great guy, he felt guilty about photographing thin women so he decided to go the alternate route. Pretty special if you ask me.

58. TJ Trek - January 5, 2008

Don’t nock Dominick. Yes he has only been around for a while, but I think he’s quite alright. He did great with LOTR and the same with Lost.

59. AJ - January 5, 2008

Nimoy was especially great in TWOK. Spock as balanced and “happy, ” his two halves reconciled and at at peace. His banter with McCoy, and relationship with JTK. THAT was a great Spock movie.

60. S. John Ross - January 5, 2008

#12 – Yes, every time.

61. johnny - January 5, 2008

Actually, yes I do get quite emotional every time I watch ST11. This may sound strange? Well maybe not, but sometimes when I’m in the shower I pretend that I am Spock when I am behind the glass shower wall (like when Spock was separated from Kirk in the chamber). I recite the dialogue from that scene….. Spock: do not grieve admiral. It is logical…the needs of the many out weigh Kirk: the needs of the few…(Spock) or the one…I have been and always shall be your friend (and then I put my hand on the glass like Spock, and give the Vulcan salute. and say….live long and prosper.

I love Star Trek!!!!!!

62. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

Kirk has been mouldering there for a while!
eh? So it wouldn’t be possible, via the magic of Hollywood, to forget that in real life 14 years has passed?
Mr N. is clearly spending too much time with the writers!
And don’t feel guilty about photographing slimmer gals Lenny. Delight in their ability to take care of themself!
Thinking about it that guilt thing just sounds like an excuse- he likes em big. Pure and simple.

63. J.D. Lee - January 5, 2008

when are they going to announce the actor who’ll play child spock?

and what about those cast photos… a certain writer promise us we’ll get to see before new year….

hmmmm?? ;) kidding…

but I am very curious..

64. trektacular - January 5, 2008

62. Nimoy felt bad when he replaced the actor who was to replace Spock in the aborted Phase II series. So its not unheard of that he would feel guilt about filming thin models over heftier ones.

65. Kirk Thatcher - January 5, 2008

AICN has an update containing spoilers from someone who supposedly saw the shooting script. It doesn’t sound positive. At one point, the relationship between Old Spock and New Spock is described as a “Buddy Picture”

66. Chris Clow - January 5, 2008

STILL 11 and a half months away?

DAMN!

67. Adam Grima (from Sydney) - January 5, 2008

I’d be interested to know which of the TNG era films is Mr Orci’s favourites , if any?

68. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

#65 hey, as long as the car chase is good!
Leonard may like fat birds but I doubt he’d go along with a buddy thing for Spock. He does have some taste.

69. J.D. Lee - January 5, 2008

yea…I just read acin.

yikes!!!

Mr Orci …do you have anything to say about this,.

please tell me its not true…

70. J.D. Lee - January 5, 2008

Please save the day, Anthony and update soon about the new acin rumors!! You are our only hope.

71. J.D. Lee - January 5, 2008

also…if the rumors of the plot are true

Mr Orci must be a really big Terminator fan…

thats for sure….

72. Gary Seven - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci-and Everybody,

You know, I just wanted to share my feeling how wonderful it is that Mr. Orci and the fans get to chat a bit on this board. It is a testament to the good opportunities of the internet, as well as a good aspect of Mr. Orci, in my view. Before the internet, when would fans get a chance to converse at all with a writer of a Star Trek (or any film) project on a routine basis? And when it is in production, no less?
Maybe because I’m old enough to have lived a long time before the internet that I really can appreciate this. Not to mention the other half of the equation- that Mr. Orci is a fan, just like us, but he is also heavily involved in creating this movie-and that he takes the time to read what we say ANDtalk to us. It is really great, and we should NEVER take it for granted. Thanks, Robert!

73. Gary Seven - January 5, 2008

And thanks Anthony, for making all this possible as well, of course.

74. ObiWanCon - January 5, 2008

Get over to Aint It Cool News they have a lot of information on STAR TREK I don’t know if it’s real or not but go a see for yourself but don’t read if you’re sensitive.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35208

75. Chris M - January 5, 2008

Awesome interview. Great to see that clip from the 50’s!

76. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

#62
– eh? So it wouldn’t be possible, via the magic of Hollywood, to forget that in real life 14 years has passed? –

Yeah, I’m with you on that.

Very uninspired and highly illogical as well, or a tasteless joke, Mr. Nimoy.

Moldering for quite a while relates to OUR time, i.e. the screening of Generations. There will be different timelines in the film as 3 Spocks demonstrate and it may very well be possible for the upcoming film’s story to tie up to the events in Generations.

77. YUBinit - January 5, 2008

Has anyone read this yet? Certainly warrant’s some attention… OH and probable spoilers galore, and the Apocalypse is neigh…

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35208

78. VOODOO - January 5, 2008

Kirk as a frat boy doesn’t do it for me.

79. Stanky McFibberich - January 5, 2008

re: 77
Making Kirk out to be a brat kid having a ‘chick’ help him cheat would be an idiotic move, even if the character is somehow redeemed later.

I don’t know if any of that report is true, but I’m sure whatever the truth is will be just as bad or worse.

Disregarding the recasting (which is impossible to do), the whole prequel, reboot, reimagining, whatever it is idea, more and more makes me sick to my stomach. Not one piece of information that has come out has given me any faith in this project. Not one.

The sad thing is, if it turns out to be what I think it will be, it will likely be popular with the “mass audience” and those particular things that make it so will further drag Star Trek into the ground.

There’s always the chance that I could be wrong, but so far I’m not seeing that as a likelihood.

80. GraniteTrek - January 5, 2008

I’m surprised some folks haven’t let go of the idea of Shatner being in the movie yet. Even if he wanted to be in it at this point, with the writers strike on they couldn’t rewrite the script to add him to the movie – and any last minute thrown together changes would just wind up being awful (like the ending of Generations – which, by the way, by his own admission, he was perfectly fine with doing even though everyone expected him to change his mind and say that he didn’t want Kirk to die after all, which they would have probably changed the end of the movie to accommodate).

81. Nimoy Reveals Three Spocks in ‘Trek XI’ - January 5, 2008

[…] by Empress Eve  |  January 5th, 2008 at 9:57 am  |  Trackback Trek Movie Report points us to two video clips from CBS 2 News’s exclusive video interviewwith Leonard Nimoy, who reveals that there will be three Spocks in J.J. Abrams’s Star Trek XI. […]

82. Chris Pike - January 5, 2008

79 yes indeed every bit of that “report” makes very depressing reading. Only hope is that it’s all false. Is this going to end up like the Planet of the Apes/Thunderbirds/Avengers etc disasters?

83. jonboc - January 5, 2008

I’d take the AICN reprort with a grain of salt the size of a Salt Vampire’s Thanksgiving feast. Some talkbajers there have read Shatner’s “Academy” novel, and say these “plot points” mimic his tale to the letter.

84. Crusty McCoy - January 5, 2008

Roberto,

Internet rumors are hell, ain’t they?

85. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

#80 Hope springs eternal!
Still, from some of the stuff thats appearing of late ol’ Bill may end up happy to have missed this one.

86. What is it with you? - January 5, 2008

#72

I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been saying that all along.

It’s great that he interacts like this given the level of security around this movie.

Thanks Mr. Orci!

87. Pizza - January 5, 2008

Nimoy: “Moldering”
To crumble to dust; disintegrate. To cause to crumble

Nimoy: “a gigantic film.”
Shatner: TWOK “…………ABRAMS!!!!!…….. ………ABRAMS!!!!……. ”

355 dtST

88. What is it with you? - January 5, 2008

#77

Don’t believe AICN. Remember the Guardian of Forever rumors? AICN has been highly unreliable in the Trek department. They don’t check facts unlike good ‘ol AP here at Trek Movie.

89. Ralph - January 5, 2008

At least we know where Leno’s and the other writers are hanging out during the strike.

90. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

#86 sorry, but what, exactly, have the writers said on here to deserve such praise? I duno, some people get their heads turned so easily.

91. Go Spock! - January 5, 2008

awesome!

92. Johnnie F - January 5, 2008

#3 – Xai

Yes I have a point. I think it is kind of sick the kind of support Nimoy/Spock is getting while everytime Shatner opens his mouth, he is accussed of whinning. Now it’s the more Spocks the marrier. I have nothing against Nimoy or Spock, they are both very important to Star Trek, but Shatner/Kirk is just as important. I for one would like to hear some other news about the new movie beside what Nimoy is going to be doing in it.

93. What is it with you? - January 5, 2008

“54

“I get teary eyed just listening to James Horner’s soundtrack on my IPod! ”

Proof positive that Mr. Orci is the perfect guy to help bring Trek forward. I consider myself a huge fan, but I’ve never listened to any of the soundtracks by themselves.

Even though I didn’t fall in love with Transformers (I’ve never liked Bay’s work) – I have faith in a story written by a True fan.

94. Dr. Image - January 5, 2008

#79-
Part of me totally agrees. Given the sorry state of mass-market film today, I’m trying to hold out hope.
As I’ve stated, the movies that will exist in our minds via spoilers could end up being superior to the actual final product, I fear.
Unlike some actually involved with the project, I think we all have pretty damn good imaginations as far as Trek goes.

95. What is it with you? - January 5, 2008

#90

93 was pointed at you. And I just want to add that when have you seen this sort of interaction with someone so close to a movie that is this guarded. That’s what I’m praising. It nice for him to get on and interact.

96. Johnnie F - January 5, 2008

#3 – Xai

Oh Yea, I forgot. You proclaimed First sucks 1/2/08. I guess you could never make it.

97. Johnnie F - January 5, 2008

Excuse me – #8 Xai

98. Noleuser - January 5, 2008

The AICN rumors are interesting if not distressing, but movies are made in the editing room and in post production. Gladiator didn’t even have a finished script when it became filming, and it’s a great film that won the best picture Oscar.

99. Joel - January 5, 2008

Good, I’m glad he cleared that up. While it would be great to see Shatner back up playing Kirk again, his character did die and it wasn’t just for one film like Nimoy. When Spock died, it was easy to write up how to “save” him. Shatner…I don’t know. I think it’s something that is still best left to the literary-Trek world and Shat should just let this film go.

100. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - January 5, 2008

BIG NEWS Over at Aintitcool If you don’t want to be spoiled don’t go If you don’t want to have your hopes for this film crushed, don’t go

Prepare to be angry!!!!!
The Lord is not very happy right now!!!!

101. 1701 over Gotham City - January 5, 2008

Comparing the Enterprise to the Millenium Falcon in detail??? GODS NO!!!!
The Enterprise is class… sleek… the grand lady of space. The Falcon is a souped up Pinto in need of a new muffler

I’m really really not surprised that the comment was made that canon is being blatantly ignored in most cases. After all, so much of recent Trek did too. I hate to admit I’m seriously getting worried… Comments about the ship… the uniforms… McCoy described as a wildcat? oof. Save me from the Star Wars fans in charge of this. We’ve got enough Star Wars.

102. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

“I’ve got a bad feeling about this……..” :)

103. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

If any of the rumours on AICN turn out to be true, then cancel our plans to get the group together for watching this film. I wouldn’t cross the street to watch such a travesty, let alone travel to a different city! Disgraceful, if true!!

104. sean - January 5, 2008

I though Monaghan was great last night! Sure, I’d have liked a little more time with Nimoy but no one ever gets too much on these shows. Still, I thought the bit with the animals was pretty funny (particularly Craig’s avoidance of the hissing cockroaches).

105. steve623 - January 5, 2008

Re the AICN story – anybody remember Kirk at the Academy? “Positively grim”? “A stack of books with legs”? “In his class, you either think or sink”? Hardly a “fratboy”.

And the Enterprise buit at Area 51? Feh.

106. sean - January 5, 2008

I wouldn’t put much faith in those AICN rumors. I am EXTREMELY scepitcal of anyone reporting to AICN claiming they’ve seen the entire shooting script. Haven’t we heard report after report that Nimoy & Quinto are pretty much the only ones that’ve seen the whole thing? What peon on this shoot is going to see the whole script and go running to AICN? Give me a break.

107. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

#95 this is aimed at you… well, as I say, some people are easily impressed. For my money there has been no interaction.
Not that I’m expecting there should be. Indeed, why should there be? There aren’t going to be any big secrets divulged. That would be madness on the writers part. We already know these guys are fans. Its why they were so keen to get involved in the first place.
And for what its worth, Roberto, I’ve come to change my opinion of Transformers. I haven’t been overly kind about it on here.
I sat down and properly watched it over the Hols. Maybe it was watching it with a 7 year old or what- I don’t know- but I really enjoyed it on this pass.
Thanks for your part in helping to entertain a small boy and his pop one cold Christmas night. ;)
Heres hoping you can achieve that same miracle next Christmas!

108. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

I’m sorry, but the same people who put a lot of credence into these rumors are the same people who don’t believe the word “gullible” isn’t in the dictionary.

No, really, it isn’t. Go check. Go on and check.

109. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - January 5, 2008

Sorry denialies but AICN is usually right on target with their sources and if true I am seriously pissed off right now.

Harry B – have you picked up the new Blade Runner set for your high def extravaganza???? I was blown away but the Final Cut

110. DEMODE - January 5, 2008

About how Spock should have no memory of what Kirk told him before he died in ST 2…. McCoy was in the room with Kirk and Spock when they said their final words to each other. So McCoy would have remembered, and when McCoy transfered the Katra back to Spock, that knowledge would have been retained.

Anyways, I bet dollars to donuts that Shatner is in the new film. Nimoy can say that he isn’t, but Nimoy is someone who is always able to keep a straight poker face. I don’t buy it.

111. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

#80
Yeah, I’m surprised too that some folks like Orci and Lindelof haven’t let go of the idea of Shatner being in the movie yet, according to their own statements.

#92
– Yes I have a point. I think it is kind of sick the kind of support Nimoy/Spock is getting while everytime Shatner opens his mouth, he is accussed of whinning. –

Exactly. Shatner may have not always displayed the most consumer-friendly behaviour most recently, but Nimoy‘s way of handling the situation leaves a lot to be desired, too.

As regards the rumors on AICN, I don’t know how reliable they are; the only definitely reliable source for me is trekmovie.com. But IMO, the rumors would perfectly be in line with what we learned about STXI so far, as they say that the Spock roles were consistent with canon probably due to Nimoy’s involvement and that only Kirk’s portrayal was far off. This would go with the “banging” rumor to some extent. And I’m sure, all this would definitely appeal to a much wider public.

Either way, the whole thing is getting more and more irritating and pesky.

112. Shatner_Fan_2000 - January 5, 2008

Props to Ferguson for expressing the view that Shatner can and should be brought back. It’s what most people in the mainstream audience would enjoy seeing.

As far as AiCN … I’m not clicking on that link! Now that spoilers will likely be coming fast and furious, I’m going to stay away from these forums more often. I want to be as spoiler free as I can! But I did notice that some of you here are reacting angrily to the AiCN story, and that has me nervous…

113. Closettrekker - January 5, 2008

#111- What exactly has Mr. Nimoy done that leads you to suggest his “way of handling the situation leaves alot to be desired…”? Leonard has always seemed to be much more dignified in his geriatric years than Bill. At least that is my opinion.

114. Sam Belil - January 5, 2008

I just clicked on the most recent Ain’t It Cool News link. (it is now 1:00 in the afternoon Eastern Standard Time in the U.S.) Needless to say (for the most part) I’m now one very un-happy camper. I’ll let the rest of you (especially long time/hard core trekkers like myself) — judge for yourself.

115. Oregon Trek Geek - January 5, 2008

Star Trek XII: The Search For Kirk

Nimoy is a funny guy. He’s just ribbing the shat a little bit. They are best friends. Shatner might get his chance in the sequel, which I have thoughtfully suggested a title above (numberous times on this site).

34–Don’t ruin it for me! You can pick apart just about any movie or book like that. Follow Vulcanista’s advice :)

#54–me too. The Return To Vulcan theme from III is some of the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard. I would have a very hard time having to pick my favorite between Horner and Goldsmith. Not to mention the STVI music was seriously cool too.

Let’s keep the Shat healthy and feature him prominently in the next flick!

116. Sam Belil - January 5, 2008

I’ve been a regular visitor of AICN for many years, they tend to be very reliable, most recently they were right on target with Casino Royale (I’m also a long time Bond fan, and LOVED Casino Royale almost the same way I loved From Russia with Love). Sorry as it seems, Abrams and company seem to be outsmarting themselves. Never-the-less for those of who live in the NYC area (I will be bringing my swig of Bailey’s), we can all share a drink(s) before seeing Star Wars VII on December 25th 2008.

117. Oregon Trek Geek - January 5, 2008

Someone should kidnap the shat starting right now and take him to an island where his diet is solely salads and tofu. With afternoon exercise class. Yoga and Taekwondo in the evenings. swimming in the mornings.

Then in a year – 18 months he’s allowed back to film ST XII and return to his prime rib diet. :)

118. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

#113

Please also read #76.

His statement refers not only to Shatner, but primarily to Kirk, the character we all cherish. I just don’t consider his “moldering” remark as appropriate with respect to Spock, the character he’s about to portray one more time. Spock is Kirk’s best friend, his brother, and he would either do anything to save him or, if this wasn’t possible, honor his memory. Nimoy’s statement isn’t smart as it conveys the reverse. If he’s joking, as some are suggesting, I could maybe understand it, but it would still be quite tasteless.

This isn’t to say I don’t differentiate between the character and the actor, but they were talking about Spock, and STXI, and Shatner’s involvement, and Kirk and all I’m asking for is keen sense of the characters’ relation and significance.

As to Nimoy himself, we all know what the present situation is like and different views are possible and should be respected, but his remark is just poor and lacks his usual quality.

119. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

69

Yeah. AICN for some reason has never liked us. The best example was one of their review for Transformers. I forgot which one of those wannabes wrote it, but it basically said how much they loved the humor, the characters, the sequences, and the structure of the movie, but they hated the script. Classic.

If this movie works, these same folks will say that JJ “saved” a crappy script with his directing, just like Shia “saved’ our dialogue by “making” it funny.

Whoever wrote that piece HAS NOT read the script, and I would trust Nimoy to tell us if we know anything about the Trek universe over just about anybody else.

120. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

72

Thank you for caring about Star Trek.

121. Thomas - January 5, 2008

I followed the link to AICN, read the story, and came away thinking, “This story sounds bogus.” Maybe it was the style of the writing, the way it seems to divulge spoilers in a slightly off-handed manner. I won’t give it any creedence until Anthony can get some confirmations of his own.

122. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci, thanks for setting us straight on these rumors.

123. Red Shirt - January 5, 2008

What gets me is that everyone is upset about what is purported to be wrong with this screenplay. If Robert and Alex add something to the ST canon, so be it. Every time a screenplay is shot in the Trek series, it adds to the canon. I mean, I don’t really like ST5, but it establishes character nuances in the Kirk/Spock/McCoy troika that are now part of the whole canon shebang. What if JJ’s film turns our preconceived notions on their sides? Why not? Doesn’t anyone here like the idea of seeing this flic, and then thinking about ST:TOS eps and the other films in a different light? Do we expect JT Kirk to be a boy scout? What if he is a cad in this film? What of it? What we get is the chance to see him become something greater, grow and mature as a member of SF.

My two cents, and more will come!

124. CanuckLou - January 5, 2008

Thanks for putting our minds at ease – Roberto!

125. I AM THX-1138 - January 5, 2008

IMO the only thing to trust from AICN are actual photographic evidence. Most of their”inside” sources prove to be bogus or are, in some cases, well known folks who are friendly with the people who critique on the site. They will use a pen name and say that some movie that is yet to come out has X,Y, Z in the plot and it is the most epletive, expletive thing they have seen in their life. You can get more “real” news from The Onion.

But sometimes AICN does get some cool advance trailers and previews. I go to that site to read the outrageous and stupid comments and because I like to geekly rumors. Just be aware that most of what you see just “‘aint reel news”.

126. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - January 5, 2008

So then Mr. Roberto:

1. the very stupid Enterprise built at Area 51 thing is bogus??

2. The Kirk as a dumb jock O.C. Abercrombie student is false??

3. The Enterprise is now gigantic??? (not neccessarily opposed to a much larger E, Kirk should after have the biggest….ship)

Thanks for bearing with us but we are very concerned!! We understand this is somewhat of a reinvention and there are bound to be changes but we don’t want a dumbed down MTV, The Hills, O.C. Abercrombie Trek either taylored for the proud to be dumb short attention span generation either. That will be 100% unacceptable to us as a fan base.

127. Closettrekker - January 5, 2008

#118- I guess I don’t take the comment as tasteless, considering it was a joke about a fictional character, beloved or not. I saw the segment, and did not feel at all as though it was anything else. Mr. Nimoy will only return to acting if he feels the project is worthy, and that makes me feel good about this film. I think his “half-joke” is actually a good point. Why should we give William Shatner a free pass to change his mind about willingly participating (and getting paid to, at that) in the killing of James T. Kirk? He must have realized that the death scene was his last as capt. of the Enterprise. Resurrection has been done, and, as Leonard pointed out, it was done immediately–not over a decade later.

128. VOODOO - January 5, 2008

I’m glad that Roberto has told us that the guy over at AICN has not read the script. I don’t wanna to see a 90210 version of S.T. Not that it really matters what some fanboy thinks anyway.

You have to take every report about such an anticipated film with a huge grain of salt. It seems that everyone wants to throw their own spin on this film.

Wasn’t it Hercules at AICN who claimed he had inside information that Shatner was secretly cast cast (which would be the best possible news)in the film? I think he said that “he knows more about this film than we ever will” or something like that. Also, not to believe the hype about Shat not being invited back. blah,blah,blah…

Herc refused to respond when questioned if he had valid info or if he was just making it up.

Another thing to keep in mind is that AICN ran a story about how great the Nemesis script was + how they had really nailed it months (maybe a year) before that disaster came out.

My advice. Believe none of what you read + half of what you see in regards to this film.. then make your own decision on 12/25/08.

ps: I’d also find a way to get Shatner as Kirk in the film.

129. VOODOO - January 5, 2008

127:

Don’t forget Mr. Nimoy was also very receptive to taking a huge check to kill his character off in ST II only to return in ST III. In no way do I fault him for that, but I just put it out there in defense of Shatner who also agreed to have his character killed off for a large paycheck.

How is it that Nimoy gets a mulligan, but Shatner doesn’t?

Besides, who cares how long it has been? It is far more plausible that Kirk is brought back through a faulty time line than Spock soft landing after being shot from deep space + having his katra (which we had never heard of at that point) put back into his now living (and perfectly healthy) body. Give me a break… Every major character in S.T. has been killed off at one point or another. These are comic book characters.

Plus, Spock owes Kirk. If things are left as is Kirk is a much better friend to Spock than Spock was to Kirk.

I want Shatner back for three reasons.

1/ Give Kirk a better ending.
2/ It would be fun to see the original Kirk + Spock one more time.
3/ The film will not feel complete without him.

130. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

#119 Now thats what I call interaction!

131. Spock89 - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci, if you are still out there and have the time to answer a question from a fellow Trekkie, since you are also a fan of the Trek novels, and have stated that you want to canonize certain details from the novels in this film (George Samuel Kirk Sr and Winona Kirk for example), is there the slightest possibility that there may be a reference (or possibly even a cameo by Robin Curtis) to Saavik as being Spock’s wife?

Thanks!

132. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

124

No problem. Let AICN lower expectations. It only helps us.

133. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

131.

All I can say is Saavik was discussed.

134. Dan - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci, please assure us at least that the Kirk using the bimbo to cheat aspect is bogus.

BTW, Transformers had its moments, but I thought it couldn’t decide whether it wanted to be an adolescent cartoon or a somewhat serious sci-fi adventure. I blame the director though, who always seems to stretch believability beyond the breaking point. I doubt JJ Abrams will be so over the top with Trek.

135. mooseday - January 5, 2008

#128 Actually as I remember it AICN ran early with an annotated copy of the script and panned it, and, annoyingly, most of the bad points highlited turned out to be correct. Saying that, I do take most things they report with a pinch of salt ..

136. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

#129
Exactly.

137. Shatner_Fan_2000 - January 5, 2008

#127 “Why should we give William Shatner a free pass to change his mind about willingly participating (and getting paid to, at that) in the killing of James T. Kirk? He must have realized that the death scene was his last as capt. of the Enterprise.”

Because:

A) He couldn’t truly know how things would play out. He had very good reason to believe TOS movies were over. And in the event that they weren’t … he felt his story “The Return” would’ve made a great movie and way to bring back Kirk. And it would have; an awesome Trek novel that would’ve been loads better than ANY of the TNG movies.

B) Abrams himself made comments last year strongly suggesting that both Shatner & Nimoy would be involved, then followed through only on the Nimoy part.

C) Shatner is more popular right now than anyone associated w/ Trek, except for maybe Abrams himself, and far more ticket buyers would rather see him than not.

#126 “we don’t want a dumbed down MTV, The Hills, O.C. Abercrombie Trek either taylored for the proud to be dumb short attention span generation either. That will be 100% unacceptable to us as a fan base.”

Hear, hear! Kirk was a serious badass even at the Academy. A highly intelligent, even “grim” badass. This was discussed in WNMHGB and Shore Leave.

138. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

Don’t feel pressurised into divulging too much Mr O.! Some of us want to be surpried when we see it!

139. Adam Cohen - January 5, 2008

Even if the AICN story is accurate, it is only one person’s opinion. Come on, people, this isn’t the 1995-era internet anymore. And “Star Trek” is not Episode I. Folks need to calm down. We’re all going to see this movie (save those who never agreed with its premise).

That being said, what’s this about Area 51???

140. SPB - January 5, 2008

#139 –

It’s very simple… the latest rumor-monger over at AICN simply cribbed the “Area 51″ plot device from INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL.

Just how like one of AICN’s writers was convinced that the plot of OF GODS AND MEN belonged to TREK XI.

141. Go Spock! - January 5, 2008

hopefully the trailer will clear up some of this confusion…

142. Anthony Pascale - January 5, 2008

guys discussion of the AICN has moved to its own story
http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/05/aicn-has-more-trek-rumors/#comments

143. scott - January 5, 2008

Moldering Shat!

144. scott - January 5, 2008

Resurrected Shat!

145. Closettrekker - January 5, 2008

#129- As I have said many times before, it is the characters that will keep the story going, not the actors. I am thrilled that Leonard has a part in the movie, but why should Abrams and co. foul up their film with correcting something someone else did? As bad as STV was, did anyone bother fixing THAT screwup? I do agree that a Kirk/Spock -Shatner/Nimoy movie would be better than the TNG films, but that’s not setting very high standards, and it’s a different movie. Apparently, changing the timeline to “correct” Kirk’s death is not so easily fit into this movie’s plot. Or it could be just that Abrams and friends do not care to work with Bill. They would not be the only ones, and it is their movie. Kirk is dead in the 24th century, period. Even if his death was changed, as you suggest, what are the chances that he would still be alive post-TNG? Or are you suggesting that they should risk changing the future by going back to the beginning of Generations and somehow stop Kirk from sacrificing himself and becoming lost in the Nexus? That seems to me to be alot of plot time just to give a man a better death, especially if that is not a part of the story to begin with. I think this is what Abrams, Nimoy and everyone else means when they say bringing back Shatner would be difficult and not likely to happen. Like the Shat himself, you should just let it go. It may turn out to be a good business decision.

146. K. M. Kirby - January 5, 2008

A mind meld with the Mirror Universe’s “Kirk” could easily bring Shatner back into the Trek milieu. With the current popularity of the remastered TOS episodes, his brief appearance in Mirror Mirror could serve as an intro to this great character.

147. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

Sorry Fellas’

These “Rumours” appear only to be the retelling of all my posts here.

You see, I understand the hollywood types. They love things that are shiny and big. They love an awe inspiring concept but there is never much substance in the final product.

“Remember,” I said it here. The Enterprise will be at least three times larger than we remember it. Just like Darth’s Star Destroyer. And it will have bulky hull detail all over, that is reminicant of the Millenium Falcon or the Galactica, or once again, like Darth’s Star Destroyer.

Why? No real reason. But mostly because Star Wars made ALOT of money. And Galactica is such a success today. Even though we never get to see the show.

Mr. Cawley, Jimm & Josh Johnson, I foresee a DEEPLY dissapointed fanbase in our near future. I am prepared to offer you any support you need to continue what you have started. But you will have to SERIOUSLY take a look at your production quality. (A bit too low for my taste).

Trust me, as someone who is very familiar with copyrights, patents and trademarks. This new “Trek” is going to be so far off track that they will lose the the brand – perhaps PEMANANTLY. Belive me, It will be LEGALLY possible for you to make real money on your (authentic) versions of STAR TREK (if you have’nt already *wink *wink). Why? Its very obvious, even at this point. Paramont abandoned it – A long ago time ago & for a galaxy far far away.

Looks like it is going to up to us little people to save Star Trek (TOS).
I for one will pay $10 for yor next effort guys (New Vayages or Exter).
In fact, I am putting ten bucks in the mail today for “In Harms Way” alone..

Not an admission, price or sale, but a faith based contribution.

148. Edith Keeler - January 5, 2008

I heard that James Cawley has a quick cameo in this one. I wonder which Kirk variant with Elvis hairdo he plays this time – Kirk’s uncle?

149. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

“Et tu, Brute (Cawley)?

150. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

#147: “Trust me, as someone who is very familiar with copyrights, patents and trademarks. This new “Trek” is going to be so far off track that they will lose the the brand – perhaps PEMANANTLY. Belive me, It will be LEGALLY possible for you to make real money on your (authentic) versions of STAR TREK (if you have’nt already *wink *wink). Why? Its very obvious, even at this point. Paramont abandoned it – A long ago time ago & for a galaxy far far away.”

You’re completely wrong about this, and the fact that you insist on it undercuts any claim you make to understanding copyright.

The only hope any of us who make Trek fan films have in ever taking in money for them – much less “profit” – would be if CBS Paramount permitted us a license to do so. So for now, save your ten dollars – or go spend it on a movie. I can suggest one. ;)

151. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

#109 Lord Garth “Blade Runner”

No, Lord Garth, I haven’t picked up my Blade Runner Final Cut yet….since getting back from Cancun I’ve been busier than a dog with two dicks!

I’m also still reeling from this AICN news…….Mr. Orci’s statements aren’t exactly flat-out denials, are they? What are your thoughts on this turn of events, if true?

152. CanuckLou - January 5, 2008

132

No problem. Let AICN lower expectations. It only helps us.

Amen Roberto, Amen!

153. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

150. Dennis Bailey

Do you have a problem with supporting the little guy, Dennis?
As I said, the ten bucks was not an admission, price or sale, but a faith based contribution.

Also, I have seen MANY, MANY examples of companies losing thier copyright but just not having a logo properly rendered. It’s always a concern.

154. TrekNerd - January 5, 2008

The biggest revelation for me from the Craig Ferguson interview is that Nimoy will be filming through March.

Do scenes of reminiscing really take four months to film?

155. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

#153: “Do you have a problem with supporting the little guy, Dennis?”

I *am* the “little guy.”

Do you have a problem with facts?

Everything you’ve said on this subject, both tonight and in a posting you made a week or two ago, indicates that you don’t know the difference between a trademark and copyright. *No one* loses a copyright on a property because of “not having a logo properly rendered.”

At least that’s true under U.S. law, I have no idea about Stanistanistan or someplace like that. Jeez…

Here, try starting with this:

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

156. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Jeez, Dennis, you’d kill them at “open mike” night at the Comedy Barn…let me know which night you’re goin’ :)

157. Xplodin' Nacelle - January 5, 2008

As long as the ship’s hull is white I can deal w/ the additional detail. If it ends up battleship grey like ENT, it will take me right out of the movie.

C’mon Eaves take a design cue from the past, please!

158. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

76. Iowagirl – January 5, 2008

Let it die and moulder and rot and decay…

159. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

147. TrekMadeMeWonder – January 5, 2008

You are kidding…right?

160. Michael McMahon - Detroit, Mi. (AKA Robert April) - January 5, 2008

#54. roberto Orci – January 5, 2008

“12 Totally. I cry at Star Trek 2 every time. I get teary eyed just listening to James Horner’s soundtrack on my IPod!”

LOL, You are SUCH a GEEK! ;-)

P.S. I say Bring Back James T. AND James R!

161. Robert April - January 5, 2008

[Robert April heads to his piano with a box of tissues to play through excerpts of Star Trek II.]

162. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Harry Ballz heads to his T.V. with a box of tissues to play through excerpts of Romancing The Bone: Director’s Cut :)

163. Robert April - January 5, 2008

Only one box?

164. mctrekkie - January 5, 2008

Nimoy Refers to his pet Sehlat

(also from the Animated sreies…)

It occurs to me that Nimoy really does know quite a bit more about the Trek universe than does the Shat.

Re: new Movie-

I’m coming around to the idea that Nimoy deserves this time in the sun…

I’m still bothered bothered by both the poor execution of the Kobayashi Maru idea- and any potential filming in Iceland (home of Legal Whaling!),
;-(

165. LP1967 - January 5, 2008

OK…we’ve read on TrekMovie that Mr. Nimoy began shooting as Spock on or around 12/12/2007. Excellent.
Now we see 2 video clips of him giving a good-time interview to a local Los Angeles TV station, supposedly filmed just before his December 2007 ST:XI start date. Crew cut replaced by nice looking Spock haircut, half-shaved eyebrows and pointed sideburns once again.
But now here he is giving a game-face interview on 1/4/2008 to jackass (IMHO) talk-meister Craig Ferguson, saying he’ll be filming until March.

Only problem is that his Spock haircut is now gone, replaced by a fresh crew cut, six months of hair growth down the drain!!!

But yet he says he is filming as Spock for atleast another 2 months???

WHAT GIVES??? Why did he chop off his Spock haircut if he still only half-way through his role in the film???

166. Daoud - January 5, 2008

^ It’s called a hairpiece, methinks.

His eyebrows are still “short” though…

167. The Vulcanista - January 5, 2008

#165: If you go back to the older articles (late Nov./early Dec.), look for the one where LN is auctioning off some of his memorabilia. He’s actually sporting a *Romulan* ‘do, which to me looks like what he’s currently growing out. There were better pictures at Startrek.com.

Regarding the filming schedule, maybe it was just a slip of the tongue. IIRC, he’s got two separate shoots in December and March, unless that’s changed since I first heard it last summer.

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

168. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

155. Dennis Bailey
159. Litenbug

My confession.

O.K. You guys are right. My copyright “abandonment” posts were in jest.
I deeply apologize if I raised any eyebrowse here.

But, just what is a true Star Trek (TOS) fan to do?
My God man!

I REALLY LOVE THAT OLD SHOW!!!! if you read my previous posts then you’ll know that I have been a great fan of Star Trek all of my life. I’ve seen ALL of the episodes at least three times and TOS many, many more.

Yeah, Next Gen tried. But they never had the formula of the originals. And here is where things started to go “off the track” with the franchise (for me anyhow.) For example, take a look at how they have depicted hand phasers. In TOS they could (given the opportunity) kill thousands or “phase out solid stone. If set on stun a phaser could easily knock out a room of people. The creators of TOS realized that technology would be so far advanced in 200 years that a hand held weapon would make a man (in our time,) as powerful as a 1,000 solidiers. Then Next Gen (and DS9, Voyager and even Enterprise) came along and the tech was dumbed down. If you compare a Phaser-Rifle from Voyager and Phase Pistol from Enterprise (what a 100 year difference in the timeline) They have the same abilities. I little spakle gun that would barely leave a mark on a corridor wall if they missed thier target. SHEESH!!!

But in TOS its a whole different weapon. What gives here?
Is it the writers (yes,) or the Director, or the art department?
Or, is it just a poor understanding of what Star Trek was? That is why I have been advocating a STRONG adherence to Star Trek the original series and in every detail.

Its funny that we are being told that this is a “re-boot” or a movie with gigantic scope after putting up with a gigantic contraction of what Trek once was.

But my point does not only concern the technology. The original Trek delivered classic wonderous stories and characters, and always with the inclusion and use of classic literary themes. Take a look at your average Next Gen episode title. Out of the blue I’ll pick, say, episode 25 of TOS and compare it to episode 25 of Next Gen, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise.

TOS – The Devil in the Dark – Great title, and mysterious too!
Next Gen – Conspiracy – Ehh.
DS9 – Cardassians – Ehh.
Voyager – Tattoo – Ehh.
Enterprise – Two Days and Two Nights – a bit better, but ehh.

That’s one example, but I hope I am not losing you on my point.

Star Trek was once so much more. And I believe it can be again. I still see ST-TOS on TV alot still, even today. Its on two different stations in my hometown (thank God.) How many of you think Next Gen, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise will be on TV 45 years from now. Seriously – 45 years!

But, if Paramont, or Orci, or Abrams, does not get thier act together this time with Trek XI then I promise I will try recreate TOS myself or “donate” a little cash everytime I see a New Voyages or Exeter production.

But it does not seem like they are going for the classic gold this time. Seriously, some of these rumors concerning Trek XI are ridiculous.
Are they still mistaking the plotline of this new Trek for “Of Gods and Men,” or what? I don’t think so. They are still talking time travel and Romulans. Bad. So bad.

If you think I am mad, sorry, no. Just sad. I weep that so many have missed (and may miss yet again) a great opportunity (with XI) to recreate the brilliance depicted the original show – A quality Star Trek that is wonderous and fun.

And again, sorry for the copyright posts guys. I really did have good intentions too. Call my Charley X if you like.

To Shatner, Nimoy, Deforest and the rest of the TOS cast and crew. You were awesome!!!! Stellar!!!!! Many thanks!

Now I gotta go scrape some cash together to buy the TOS DVDs.

Kirk out.

169. trektacular - January 5, 2008

TNG had a magical quality like TOS during its 1st season, after the 5th it just seemed to be passing time.

170. trektacular - January 5, 2008

164, Nimoy mentions the sehlat because its in the new movie, trust me on this.

171. Shatner_Fan_2000 - January 6, 2008

#169 “TNG had a magical quality like TOS during its 1st season…”

I think not.

172. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 6, 2008

171. Shatner_Fan_2000

I thought the same thing. But, I did’nt want to post it.
Some of my posts have been a bit negative lately.

Thanks! : )

173. trektacular - January 6, 2008

Just testing you guys ha ha.

174. trektacular - January 6, 2008

By the by, when have you guys last seen any first season TNG shows? To me they have the same early funkiness that TOS had in its early first season.

175. monger - January 6, 2008

Out of all the incarnations of Trek, my favorite character has always been Spock. In many ways, I identify with the cold logic and stoicism of the Vulcans. There’ve been many who’ve played Vulcans, but the true standard bearer was Nimoy. No one compares to his characterization, not the least of which because he did essentially create what Vulcans are understood to be (sure Roddenberry drew the outline, but Nimoy gave it form and structure). Alright, I’ll give Jolene Blalock props, but that’s only because I want her sexually. I also believe that Nimoy was hands down the best actor of the bunch. OK, Shatner’s Kirk was an important character, but he’s dead and resurrecting him would serve only as a cop out. I’m absolutely fine with Shatner not being in the new film. All you Shatner dicksuckers should get a life- THIS FILM DOES NOT NEED HIM! As far as I’m concerned, Nimoy is Spock once again, and that’s enough for me!

176. monger - January 6, 2008

Also, I totally agree with Mr Orci and others about Spock’s death. I honestly can’t think of another death scene in movies or television that is as touching or poignant. Not even Kirk’s death can match it!

177. ZoomZoom - January 6, 2008

#175 so you’ve seen the film then, to know that it doesn’t need Shatner?
You have made quite a large assumption there i think.
Assuming is not logical.

178. Iowagirl - January 6, 2008

#176
– Not even Kirk’s death can match it! –

You obviously consider the deaths of characters a competition. Let me tell you, you’re dead wrong about that.

179. Go Spock! - January 6, 2008

61 –

}:)

180. Miss PeeWee - January 6, 2008

#32 Will Doe 68 said:

I just love Leonard.(sigh)

Me, too. :)

Miss P.

181. Go Spock! - January 6, 2008

:)

182. monger - January 6, 2008

#177
I don’t need to see the new film in order to postulate that if there is a talented team who have a keen insight into Trek, respect for canon, and are visionary enough to pull it off, then even having Kirk as a character in the film is a minor consideration. Plus, this film has one thing that the last several movies didn’t- the enthusiastic, ringing endorsement of Nimoy himself! I admit, I was skeptical about Abrams taking control of the franchise. When you consider what he wanted to do with Superman Returns, the way he had a hand in raping and pillaging the Superman mythos, it was enough to make you wanna run home and hide in the cellar! But the thing that turned me around was that Nimoy read the script, gave it a glowing appraisal, and signed on. Also, reading Mr Orci’s posts and other interviews about feeling genuine affection for TOS and its characters, I think the franchise is in good hands- at least Abrams has several writers who can steer him to the righteous path if he tries to stray too far. I feel MUCH better now! So, I’m making no assumptions- call it a LOGICAL DEDUCTION!

#178
It has nothing to do with the death of Trek characters. I was only referring to the scene itself- compared with other death scenes in other movies- not necessarily Trek movies. I can’t think of any other death scene from any other movie, whatever movie that may be- Godfather, Citizen Kane, etc- that has a more poignant scene in which a main character dies. It’s deeply touching, and carries such weight- it gives you the sucker punched feeling that there’s been a shattering disruption to the Trek continuum. Of course, it’s tempered by the knowledge that Spock returns in the next film, but it’s still powerful.

183. Dyson Sphere - January 7, 2008

If TOS-R can use some TAS information on Spock’s roots then the new movie can do so also. It’s quite a detailed episode when SPock goes to see younger Spock.

184. Dangerous : ConversationalBall.com - January 7, 2008

[…] – Leonard Nimoy says that there will be THREE Spocks in the upcoming “Star Trek” movie – him, Zachary Quinto and someone else. […]

185. Greg2600 - January 7, 2008

As I was watching that video, I’m saying to myself, okay, eventually we’re going to see the USS Vulcan Coast Guard hat! But no!

I thought also that Shatner took the Hirschfeld drawing during Mind Meld. LOL

186. Rob Z - January 7, 2008

175: First we see: “In many ways, I identify with the cold logic and stoicism of the Vulcans”

then we see “All you Shatner dicksuckers should get a life- THIS FILM DOES NOT NEED HIM!

Wow, you are so consistent!

Shatner will be in the film.

187. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008

ANTHONY….why no warning for flaming to the person who wrote “Shatner dicksuckers”?????

If I had written THAT you would have tap-danced all over my head!!

188. Anthony Pascale - January 7, 2008

Monger warning for trolling/flaming/being annoying/etc

187.
Do not assume I read every post the second it goes up…i scan through a couple times a day and dont get them all…so give the ‘poor me’ thing a rest

189. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008

The phrase “poor me” has never been part of my vocabulary…..all I ask is an even playing field.

190. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 8, 2008

My formal apolgy went by and without comment.

See… 168. TrekMadeMeWonder

At least I was honest about it.

191. Cary Groneveldt - January 10, 2008

Lenny looks absolutely *wonderful* !

Vigorous ….
Healthy ….

I know “Star Trek” is quote/unquote “… just a TV show ….” but I think it’s something more — a *lot* more ….
I think it wasn’t made spontaneously — that somehow/someway it’ll end up being a self-fuflilling prohecy.
Case in point — the first true spacecraft’s [it takes of/flands/takes off] name ?
“Enterprise” ….

CaryMG
8^ ]

192. TAS - yes, it's canon!! - December 4, 2008

Don’t forget the Sehlat in TAS episode where Spock goes back in time and helps his young self learn to reconcile his Vulcan and human halves!!

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.