AICN Has More Trek Rumors – Orci Responds |
jump to navigation

AICN Has More Trek Rumors – Orci Responds January 5, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Rumor,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

This morning Aint It Cool News posted an article containing what they claim is a review of the script for Star Trek as well as a description of some of the footage from the film. The script review part seems mostly negative, but the footage review seems mostly positive and apparently they are from different sources. However, Star Trek co-writer Roberto Orci questions whether they have actually seen the script. More below (spoilers)

AICN on the Trek script
The ‘script review’ from AICN’s source is short on details and long on recriminations. It appears to be mostly be a ‘hit piece’ against the Star Trek writers, here is an excerpt:

The problem with the script is all its blatant inconsistency with things in the TREK canon, not to be innovative… but because Kurtzman and Orci are lousy writers and have zero feel for Roddenberry’s universe, even when attempting to reboot it. The dialogue is about on par with their past works and some of the liberties they’ve taken are insanely sloppy. (Forgive me, wasn’t the Enterprise built in space and not Area 51?) It’s remarkably unintelligent writing.

Orci Responds
Links to the AICN story first went up this morning in the talkback section for the latest Nimoy story. In that talkback Star Trek co-writer Roberto Orci responded:

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.

Orci also responded at AICN…seemingly dismissing the reference to Area 51

Let’s see. Area 51 is a place where we supposedly keep aliens and spacecraft A SECRET. In Star Trek, earth KNOWS there are spaceships and aliens. You might’ve even heard of one of them. His name is Mr. SPOCK. You do the math.

UPDATE: Orci keeps on commenting has always been honored to have Mr. Orci drop by once in a while and interact with the fans. Today he has made a number of comments and and answered some questions. See the comments section below.

AICN on the Scale of the Enterprise
AICN’s second source claims to have seen footage from the film and comments on the scale of the production and how the you will get to feel the true size of the Enterprise. From the report:

If you watch the TV series and many of the movies than – if you are a Star Wars fan like me – you always have the feeling that there is a discrepancy between the size of the alien worlds / the space ship(s) of the Federation and the locations where most of the scenes have been shot. In other words, the Bridge is more like a living room and does not match the size nor style of gigantic size of the Enterprise at all. It is certainly unbelievable because it’s mostly the only place we get to see (and of course three or four other places, but all in all just 1 percent of the ship, I presume).

We’ll, this movie is gonna end all that for sure. The “stage play” and Disney like nature of the TV episodes is gone, the “we’ll only show you three locations but trust me, this really is a gigantic spaceship we’re flying around in”-feeling will also be gone.

CLICK HERE to read the full story (potentially contains spoilers)


1. I am sick - January 5, 2008

Let me be the first!

2. ZoomZoom - January 5, 2008

hasn’t this already been debunked by ‘a VERY good source’?

3. I am sick - January 5, 2008

I am first!

4. Enc - January 5, 2008

I’ll second that.

5. I am sick - January 5, 2008

look at me everybody!

6. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

Yeah, Orci himself already commented that whoever wrote that review as not read the script. He also commented on the same AICN thread about Area 51: “Let’s see. Area 51 is a place where we supposedly keep aliens and spacecraft A SECRET. In Star Trek, earth KNOWS there are spaceships and aliens. You might’ve even heard of one of them. His name is Mr. SPOCK. You do the math.”

7. Thomas - January 5, 2008

I read the story when it was linked in the previous thread, I thought it was BS then, and it seems that way now.

8. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

Maybe a red herring – the question is who’s diverting who?

9. johnny - January 5, 2008

This is very concerning. I am a strong believer that Star Trek canon must be followed. The history is there, work around it. I am worried.

10. Elrond L - January 5, 2008

For God’s sake, AICN is filled with the most hateful and snooty people I have ever seen online. Harry seems OK, but I hardly go there anymore, and I especially stay away from their foul-mouthed talkbacks. Don’t lose too much sleep . . . I’d choose Orci and Nimoy over those losers anytime.

11. scott - January 5, 2008

Hope its good.

12. SPB - January 5, 2008


And I think it bears repeating…

Source #1 CLAIMS to have read the script and that he hates it… but gives us NO real examples of WHY or ANY OTHER “spoilers” outside of the whole Kirk thing which has already been fed to the Internet masses and could have been slightly embellished by anyone with half a brain.

Source #2 CLAIMS to have seen the new Enterprise… but gives us NO real description, other than “it’s more detailed.” Yeah, right. Even I could have sent THAT one in.

And Source #3 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I have no idea WHAT the hell he’s trying to describe. Is he saying Quinto can’t do a proper Vulcan salute, so they digitally inserted Nimoy’s hand? Maddeningly vague.

So, in the end: Bull, bull and bull. Use your brains, people… there’s absolutely NOTHING here.

13. mooseday - January 5, 2008

#10 Harry seems to have turned into a large married pervert … nothing wrong with that but I know know how that helps him be an expert on movies

14. JBS - January 5, 2008

I am very proud of myself because I didn’t go to the AICN site (nor will I ever), and I didn’t even read the AICN snippet Anthony posted in his article above. Who knows, maybe I’ll be able to resist reading spoilers all together pretty soon.

I have a really good feeling about Roberto, Alex and JJ, and I can’t stand hate mongers. Since they can’t produce anything productive, they try try to make a living by tearing others down. They have no integrity.

15. mooseday - January 5, 2008

Also with AICN, there is a definate side that if they like you, you can do no wrong ( Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro, the good Paul Anderson ), otherwise you are screwed ( Orci for example ). Of course, everyone can hate Uwe Bowle(?) and the OTHER Paul Anderson

16. Crusty McCoy - January 5, 2008

For God’s sake Roberto don’t get into an exchange with that AICN crowd! At best your soul will burn away. You may even get VD. Don’t do it — that’s an order!

17. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


You’re right. First and only time. I’ll stop. Moment of weakness. Sorry.

If they wanna talk to me they can come here.

18. dav8515 - January 5, 2008


Just make a good movie, people are going to hate and say vile things no matter how bad or good the movie is. Just make a movie that feels right and lets the majority of fans feel satisfied.

19. Spock89 - January 5, 2008

Since this rumor from AICN has been debunked, does that mean that the creation of an alternate universe rumor that they had reported a few months back is also false (I personally actually liked that idea)?

20. T2 - January 5, 2008

As far as i’m concerned, their “sources” are bogus entertainment. They are in desperate need of attention, knowing this will rattle our cages. It’s so laughable, “lousy writers”…yeah that’s why Orci and Kurtzman have been entrusted with Trek XI and Nimoy backs it up 110% percent and calling it “gigantic”…please, let’s see these “sources” write a script and compare it to the one they’ve supposedly read. Too vague and too general. I’ll still be there in line 354 days from now…if anything this has only increased my excitement and interest in anticipation of the movie

21. Ryan T. Riddle - January 5, 2008

Having read the story, it can be inferred that the writer of this so-called “review” doesn’t have any respect for Trek in general, and is using this as a forum to stir the shit against the new film. Nothing seems substantial or specific in the “review” and his source in regards to the new Enterprise is obviously colored by his “Star Wars” fan mentality. Regardless, nothing is told to us in details and in generalities that you or anyone else could make up and post on the internet. Another show of misinformation by those that only want hits and to appear to have knowledge others do not.

22. Gary Seven - January 5, 2008


Glad to see you won’t go down to their level. Remember what the man said:
“There’s only one kind of man, or woman for that matter: You either believe in yourself or you don’t” (Kirk, “Mudd’s Women”).

Ignore “em.

23. raulpetersen - January 5, 2008

if old spock pretends to be his own cousin like he did in yesteryear i shall be creaming!

and if the teaser trailer as reported shows the enterprise being built then according to aicn it would be undergrond hardly epic – eh!

and wasnt there a area 51 type place in transformers too!

i think the “source” seems to think all they can write is area 51 type places!

hang on a minute wasnt there one in xena!!!!!!

just kidding!!!

24. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

Wow, people are right when they say those AICN commenters are mean. There’s something about the virtual anonymity of the Internet that makes people throw any sense of civility out the window, which is too bad. I’m all for expressing your opinion, be it positive or negative, but there’s no reason to be an arse about it.

25. raulpetersen - January 5, 2008

oh and the difference between posting here and posting on aicn is
people respect your opinions!!!!

kind of star trek like isnt it!

26. Neil Miller - January 5, 2008

You can’t always trust some of the stuff that AICN (or any site for that matter) posts that comes from an anonymous source. As a webmaster myself, I would never post something about a script without having read it myself.

To say: “An anonymous source told us that they read it and it sucks…” means nothing.

Kudos to Mr. Orci for standing up for himself. He and Kurtzman are good shit. We should be so lucky to have them — otherwise a good many of our childhood favorites would get flushed down the toilet.

Besides, if there is anyone who is going to ruin Star Trek, it will be J.J. Abrams…

27. Thomas - January 5, 2008

12. You’re totally right about a lack of specifics in describing how “bad” the script was. Thinking back, there was also a definite tone to the writing that came across as spiteful, for lack of a better word.

28. Oregon Trek Geek - January 5, 2008

I must concur with #12. SPB. Most logical.

29. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008

well done AICN you made yourself look right tibble poo there . First it sounds stupid , ………well it is stupid. But i am sure AICN great “sources ” have all had a good look at the script , its not like its the mostly tighly kepth and secert script in hollywood right now or anything XD

If the movie is half as good as fans are hoping it will easly be one of the hits of 2008 , and AICN will yet again just look like fools .

30. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008

There have been loads of rumours on various major Movie and Trek sites regarding plot, script, cast, etc. lately. Why did Mr. Orci feel like immediately reacting to just this one?

Denial sometimes speaks louder than silence.

31. Pr011 - January 5, 2008

Area 51? Right. Sure.

Out of all the places in the Federation, that’s where they build starships.

32. Bobby - January 5, 2008

AICN sucks. Their reviews are terrible, the critics/ whatever you want to call them have little to no taste and i agree with # 15, they have hard ons for same lame filmmakers.

I have faith.

33. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


Cuz it called me out personally. You see conspiracies in everything.

You’re a disgruntled Transformer’s fan, aren’t you? Did you go by any different names on the TF boards? Not attacking, just curious.

34. raulpetersen - January 5, 2008

i go out with a girl from iowa shes well sexy and she got me a kirk shirt for xmas too!!!!

35. raulpetersen - January 5, 2008

hey orci please hi five me!

36. raulpetersen - January 5, 2008

oh well off to bed now dreaming of kate, my yellow sjirt and orci hi fiving me!!


37. jonboc - January 5, 2008

..way off topic here..isn’t remastered Trek’s Day of the Dove airing this weekend?? Since it’s a 3rd season episode, we son’t be seeing it on DVD for awhile….so how come no covereage? Or am I completely bats and it’s a repeat this week?

…and staying on topic…AICN’s hear-say, from someone who knows someone who read something…is a waste of everyone’s time. All I know is the trailer is coming in 13 days. Let’s just hope it shows a bit more than a starfield and some narration.

38. spud - January 5, 2008

IMO If there was even the smallest problem with TREK canon. I would think Nimoy would and could over rule in a very big way. He didn’t come out of retirement just to make a fast few bucks after 15+ years. Nimoy is also more concerned about his own reputation then most people are in the business. His past track AKA TREK record speaks for its self.

39. Lostrod - January 5, 2008

I used to enjoy AICN and found it a great source of information. However it has lately been overrun by mean spirited, foul-mouthed people and has lost its appeal. At least for me anyway.

That’s why I prefer this site. This discussion is, mostly, civil in nature.

Dark Horizons is another site I discovered about the same time as AICN. It is not as famous as AICN, but at least has maintained a sense of dignity.

Take care, all.

40. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

It’s hard to fathom that all the advances of human civilization, not to mention many centuries of evolution of the English language, have transpired just so that something called a “disgruntled Transformers fan” could exist and be so described. But hell, pandas have thumbs.

41. VOODOO - January 5, 2008

Roberto Orci #30

“Disgruntled Transformers fan”

I just did a spit take onto my computer screen.

42. spud - January 5, 2008

Leonard Simon Nimoy

Vincent: Based on the play “Van Gogh” by Phillip Stephens (1978-1981)
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
Three Men and a Baby (1987)
The Good Mother (1988)
Funny About Love (1990)
Holy Matrimony (1994 film)
episodes of T.J. Hooker, The Powers of Matthew Star, and Deadly Games

[edit] Actor
Kid Monk Baroni (1951)
Rhubarb (1951)
Zombies of the Stratosphere (1952)
Dragnet (1953 episode “The Big Boys” as Julius Carver)
Them! (1954) (uncredited)
Satan’s Satellites (1958)
The Brain Eaters (1958)
Harbor Command (1958 episode – Contraband Diamonds)
The Twilight Zone – “A Quality of Mercy” (1961)
General Hospital (1963)
Perry Mason (1963)
The Outer Limits (1964) “I, Robot” – Judson Ellis
Combat! (1965) Two Episodes
Deathwatch (1966)
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. (1966)
Get Smart (1966)
Star Trek (1966-1969): Lieutenant Commander/Commander Spock
Mission: Impossible (1969-1971) The Indomitable Paris
The Alpha Caper (1973) (TV)
Columbo (1973) (TV)
Star Trek: The Animated Series (1973-1974)
In Search of… (1976-1982)
Equus (1977) (Broadway Play) Dr. Martin Dysart
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
Vincent: Based on the play “Van Gogh” by Phillip Stephens (1978-1981)
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)
A Woman Called Golda (1982) (TV)
Marco Polo (1982) (mini) TV Series
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)
The Sun Also Rises (1984) (mini) TV Series
Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp (Faerie Tale Theatre episode) (1986)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
The Simpsons, “Marge vs. the Monorail” (1993)
Never Forget (1991) (TV)
Star Trek: The Next Generation – “Unification” (1991) (two-part episode): Ambassador Spock
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
Star Trek: 25th Anniversary (computer game) (1992)
Star Trek: Judgment Rites (1993)
The Time Machine (1994) (audio drama) The Time Traveller
The Outer Limits (1995) I, Robot – Thurman Cutler
The Simpsons, “The Springfield Files” (1997)
Brave New World (1998)
Futurama, “Space Pilot 3000″ (1999)
Becker (2001)
Futurama, “Where No Fan Has Gone Before” (2002)
Star Trek (2008)

[edit] Voice
In Search of… (1976-1982): Narrator
The Transformers: The Movie (1986) Galvatron
Lights: The Miracle of Chanukah (1993)
The Halloween Tree (1993)
The Pagemaster (1994) Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde
Seaman (2000): Narrator
Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001): King Kashekim Nedakh
Civilization IV (2005)
What’s going on up there? (2006)

[edit] Writer
I Am Not Spock (1977)
Vincent: Based on the play “Van Gogh” by Phillip Stephens (1978)
Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) (Contributions uncredited)
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) (Contributions uncredited)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
I Am Spock (1995)
Shekhina (2002)

43. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008



44. dalek - January 5, 2008

AICN isnt all bad. I visit daily. Their TV news and reviews are usually spot on. Film scoops sometimes spot on, sometimes they fall for the rumours. Harry’s reviews are always entertaining.

However, there’s nothing in that article that suggests the person writing it hasnt been following the latest newsbites and making stuff up.

Mr Orci, whatever you post on that site, half will call you an ass the other half will accuse you of being a lying ass — reistance is not futile! However there are more pressing matters, James T Kirk as played by Mr Shatner ;) Time is running out!

45. billhardin22 - January 5, 2008

Hey, I appreciate Mr. Orci clearing up this matter.

He didn’t have to do it. That speaks volumes to me.

It seems to me that he cares about Trek, his own reputation, and the fans.

More than can be said about many others!

Mr. Orci’s participation in these forums is what is truly “Cool”. The more I hear from him, the better I feel about the movie.

We certainly don’t get riled up over false rumors and BS presented on this site as is the case with AICN and other sites. Thanks, Anthony, for all the work you do in verifying reports and sources. Obvioulsy, Orci and company respect you!

I will believe Trek is in good hands until proven otherwise!

Can’ t wait to see the movie!

46. Clinton - January 5, 2008

I’m wondering if the lack of advanced episode coverage is tied to the demise of I don’t think the official site posts the ST:Remastered trailers any longer. I’m guessing we’ll still see the usual clips and such once the episode has aired.

And yes, Mr. Orci, I am glad you are taking the advice presented in post #16.

47. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008


Mr. Orci – thanks for taking the time to answer my post.

No, I haven’t seen Transformers, nor am I planning to see it nor am I posting on any TF boards. Why are you asking – have you experienced that watching TF, seeing conspiracies and being disgruntled is somehow connected?

No, I don’t see conspiracies, but I tend to be curious myself and there have been quite a few things lately that have called me out personally, too – and some of them indeed have caused disgruntlement in me.

48. Ken Byrd - January 5, 2008

Roberto–let me just say you have got to be the coolest Mo’-Fo’ behind the scenes at Trek in a LONG time I hope the movie is a HUGE hit and you stick around a LONG time man.

49. Smike van Dyke - January 5, 2008

This is just so cool…if Bob Orci really is the one he claims to be , I guess this is the greatest day of my live. I’m actually using the same commenting system as the man himself! Come on, this sounds to good to be true. Sounds like something that has never happened before! At least not to a geek like me.

I can well remember early 2002…The Nemesis script leaked and those AICN people shred it to pieces…the rest is history. However, and this is new, this time, one of the writers seems to fight back, trying to make a difference! I really like that…

But then, aren’t you on strike, Mr Orci? Well, I truly hope the movie will make enough money so that we can all laugh at these critics at AICN in about a year…these AICN critics aren’t making history tonight…YOU are the one changing the world with that script, Mr Orci!

50. Anthony Pascale - January 5, 2008

Ok lets not get off topic….Regarding Day of the Dove Remastered. We will have our usual screenies and video up by Sunday. I am working on a way to get the trailers now that are no longer doing them. DOTD discussion will have to wait until that article goes up

you can now get back to high fiving

51. DJT - January 5, 2008

Roberto Orci,

While on the subject of TF’s for a sec.

Have you seen the following cover version of the 1986 TF movie theme? OMG it rocks. It makes the 1986 version sound like Marky Mark sang it.

52. mooseday - January 5, 2008

Didn’t AICN also start the “FIRST” thing …… if not I could always type PLANT in uppercase to get my point over …

53. Trekee - January 5, 2008

I’m afraid I’m not off to read AICN, since it’s been a long time past since I hit that sorry trail. In the early days of the web it was fine enough, but it became like a UK tabloid, always wanting the new gossip, the dirt, the spoiler to top the last spoiler.

They are called spoilers because they spoil things. I don’t want things spoiled so I don’t go there. (I am Captain Obvious tonight)

If only 1% of what they print is true, then they’ll be allowed their 99% fanboy fiction, but that’s a lot of mud to wallow in first.

One of the things about this site that is genuinely different is that we know that more than one of the crew reads this. Yet on the whole there has been a whole lot of good manners and very little of the purile personal attacks that AICN seems fit to print.

Or maybe that’s the point.

It’s easy enough to be mean to people you don’t know (oh, on the subject, may the board of Warner Brothers rot in Hell and be eaten alive by gumless tiberian bats – announcing the HD thingy mere days after I plumped for HD on the basis of TOS HD, but I digress and I’ll never meet them and they won’t read this) but AICN have enough mass to know that what they will say will be read.

Given the level of secrecy though, and the amount of pre-teaser anticipation we have, it’s not surprise that they aren’t letting the truth get in the way of a good story.

I do anticipate that they will be repeated verbatim in the News of the World tomorrow as a FACT (in caps mind you) by the Hollywood Star Reporter (who lives in a bedsit in Putney* but again, he’ll never read this so I can be snarky).

I think what debunks this (along with Roberto Orci rising to it (and we all do it)) is saying it disrespects canon. They might paint the Enterprise pink but I’m not expecting any ‘ray guns’ in the script, not Spock having a secret brother he never mentioned in 79 episodes and 4 films. Cuz that would be lame.

(* with his Mum).

54. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


Fair enough.

I just thought you sounded like someone I knew on the other boards.

Sorry for the confusion.

55. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


I am on strike, which is probably why I’m letting myself get all riled up!’

56. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, shold be allowed to work on this movie unless they have sen all 79 episodes of the original series (period.)

Am I being too hard on this issue?

57. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


Hadn’t seen that. good stuff.

58. Iowagirl - January 5, 2008


No worries. Now you know my distinctive voice.

Again, thanks for your time.

59. Trekee - January 5, 2008

#50 Anthony

good stuff – I have to say that the TOS remastered reviews brought me to this site first via a Google search a few months ago.

So, back on topic, high five to you sir…

#42 – I knew it was a large body of work, but seeing it all there is quite the thing….

60. Non-belligerancy Confirmed - January 5, 2008

hail the orcster. AICN doesn’t deserve to lick the tribbleshit from my boots.

61. trektacular - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci are you in spin control mode now that AICN has called you out.

Just curious.

62. Trekee - January 5, 2008


I’d kind of agree with you (*cough* Stuart Baird *cough*) but to say NO ONE in caps does tend to conjure up images of canteen staff sitting in the auditorium all Clockwork Orange style with matchstick in their eyelids gently moaning about Muuugatooooo….

I’d let them off….

63. billhardin22 - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci,

Just read some of the conversations you are having at AICN.

Regarding the comment that YackBacker had about fans not wanting a simplistic storyline involving Romulans killing baby Kirk and your response that you couldn’t agree more: This statement makes me feel very confident about the story.

It is easy for many to speculate on the plot with the little we seem to know. You are the craftsman. I trust your opinions.

As a fan, I believe you know what would be horrendous in terms of the story. Appealing to a new fanbase and making “Star Trek 90210″ would kill the thing for sure.

I just have to believe that you will deliver a film that might not please everyone all the time, but will be the epic Trek movie we long to see.

Regarding all the naysayers, as a friend of mine once advised me, “DLTBGYD!” (DON’T LET THE BASTARDS GET YOU DOWN!).

Really, have fun before going back to work!

64. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008



Kurtzman was the first to point out to me how effective Kevin Smith was in being open and dealing with questions, be they critical or supportive. It’s less spin control and more continuing what we began on Transformers — that is, respectfully dealing with people who care about these franchises and being open and not being snobs about anything just because we happen to be lucky enough to be working on these things.

Never taken myself for a spin on AICn and I’m just taking a test drive.

65. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


I am having fun.

Thanks for kind words.

66. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

#63 – Ditto.

I must say that the AICN thread has gotten quite humorous, especially with those fun SAT questions.

By the way, Mr. Orci, I seem to recall that you wrote on here some months back about working on a cast picture or something of that nature for the new year. It’s January 5th… :-) But I suppose a teaser trailer will have to be good enough!

High five!

67. AJ - January 5, 2008

I simply do not understand why a site like AICN would go ahead and post BS unless it’s simply seeking gratuitous hits. I read the thing and I was appalled.

If you saw the Enterprise, DESCRIBE it. If you saw the script, SUMMARIZE what you saw.

Roberto, we are all frustrated. Tell us that the teaser will help!

68. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

#56:”NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, shold be allowed to work on this movie unless they have sen all 79 episodes of the original series (period.)

Am I being too hard on this issue?”

Yes. You’re being completely unreasonable.

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

Iran Contra
Clinton Sexcapades scandals


Let’s set up a Trekmovie senate subcommittee so we can grill Robert under the hot lights

Ballzio can be the chairman to bring an air of dignaty to the procedings, I of course will be on the committee flanked by my mute Andorian and Tellerite, knife wielding henchmen, Bailey is a must for button pushing and not so thinly veiled sarcasm, Adam Cohen can be the voice of reason and kindness, Iowa Girl cause we need a chick can be on it and CmndrR can do the catering.
We’ll get to the bottom of this hell or high water!!!!! Orci prepare to squirm!!!

70. miguel - January 5, 2008

I was impressed with Transformers. I didnt think that an 80s anime movie could be successfully converted into a believable sci fi action movie. I was mistaken.

Can’t wait to see what happens with Trek!!

71. trekee - January 5, 2008


Well it’s a brave thing to read your own press on what you’ve actually done but braver yet to plow headlong into the speculation.

Glad you’re having fun.

72. miguel - January 5, 2008

As for AICN, who cares what kind of Star Wars fanboy wrote it? No one has been able to see more than PART of a script at a time! This is just like the guy on who claims to have read it..

…maybe they’re the same person.

73. Rockstar - January 5, 2008

roberto Orci,

hey check it out man! I’m gonna guess that this movie isn’t about space travel and it’s more like Titanic right? Nimoy is going to remember things throughout the whole movie.

Not that this has anything to do with it but Nimoy’s lawyer is my cousin Ronny Peacock is his name. My cousin is also the lawyer for my band. You can check out my group at – Good luck with your movie! I’m excited!

74. Kreso - January 5, 2008

So… Mr. Orci, now that you are here… :)
Regarding that ridiculous “Area 51 Enterprise building” story, will we see the Enterprise beeing built in the upcomming teaser trailer, as it was previously rumored here? Any hints on that teaser, what can we expect? :)

75. trektacular - January 5, 2008

Thank you for the answer Mr. Orci, and its nice that you are on strike if only to answer or at least respond to us info greedy fans.

76. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


You want teasers for a teaser?

Two weeks!

77. Kreso - January 5, 2008

Gdamn :) Worth a try, though.
Oh, yeah, totally forgot, good luck with the movie, I really think you guys can turn Trek arround :)
God knows it needed some fresh new blood.

78. Devon - January 5, 2008

# 55 – To Mr. Orci regarding strike.

Just curious, the WGA seems to be approaching production companies independently now. The first results seemed to have come from Letterman’s Worldwide Pants striking a deal so that his and Craig Ferguson’s people could all come back to work.

If you don’t mind me asking, are you and the other writers technically writing for Paramount or Bad Robot or would it be jointly under both? Not sure exactly as that’s a little grey for me. And in that case, do you know if negotiations are being worked out or will be on that front independently so that possible you guys could go back to work as writers soon?

I know you guys (well let’s face it, ALL writers) would love to go back for work. I’m sure you’ve had some thoughts since the strike began that you’d love to add to the script, maybe even simple one liners. Seems J.J. has been bitten by this bug already.

Your thoughts/input would certainly be informative!


79. CanuckLou - January 5, 2008

Roberto – that advice to avoid AICN is very sage! Repeating my gratitude for you stepping in here and setting the record straight.

80. Stef* - January 5, 2008

I would be a very, very bad Trek Fan, if I would take gossip for real. So I won’t even consider it. Sometimes one has to believe in something – in absence of knowing, but sometimes one simply wants to believe, because the fundament of knowledge is there.
I read the Names involved and am totally stuck with Nimoy, Adams, Orci, Quinto, and the whole other I have read and get to know over the years via their work.

Now I want to believe and I’m sure I can.

Thanks for giving us Trek back, thanks for taking this really enormous weigh of history, opinions, whishes, speculations and pickering fans on your shoulders an try to make it work.

I don’t know how to survive this year coming, but it will be one of the best in anticipation of Trek.

You’re so lucky to share time with these great personalities like Nimoy, just to share one continent or to share opinions and I envy this, but also am thankful that you do exactly this. Go on.

Please Mr. Orci, in case you’re able to, tell the whole crew – “Thanks for making a dream come true and relish to be in it.”

from Germany, hoping dearly the film will start at the same time as in U.S.

81. Mr Snuffleupacus - January 5, 2008


That crowd over at AICN is the most juvenile bunch on the web — I am convinced of that.

I am not brown-nosing, but I thoroughly enjoyed Transformers. I’m not sure what’s to bash there. Admittedly, because of the material itself I was leery at first of seeing it. Traditionally, films based on games and toys have had a dubious cinematic history.

I waited for DVD, but really enjoyed it — as I have most the films/TV that you have worked on.

I am sure most the ones bashing Transformers are those who were upset that Bumblebee wasn’t a VW…or some idiocy like that…

Can’t wait to see what you do with Trek!

82. FrenchGuy - January 5, 2008

Hey Bob,

Do you know if the teaser will also be airing in French theatres in front of Cloverfield ??

BTW, it’s really nice to have you here (if it’s really you), I’m reading your posts since a few minutes here and on AICN. Thank you !! And I’m sure your script is perfect :p

83. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


I don’t know if the Trailer will be in France. Good question. I’ll find out, but if not, I’m sure it’ll be online shortly thereafter.

84. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

#69 Lord Garth “Orci-Gate…Ballzio can be the chairman…”

Ooh, ooh….I get to be chair….I get to be chair……wheeeeee!

Very well, first question…..Mr. Orci, I see you are “dancing” around giving specific responses to the crap AICN is spewing…..your comments on Area 51 for example……vague, sir……yes or no… the Enterprise constructed at Area 51? Yes or no?

As Ted Knight said in Caddyshack, “WELL??? WE’RE WAITING!!” :)

85. miguel - January 5, 2008

Yeah, the Bumblebee thing was quite controversial among young and middle aged Geeks and Nerds. (just kidding!) But not to despair, I thought BB was the best handled character besides Optimus Prime!

86. FrenchGuy - January 5, 2008


Ok thanks for the answer. I know it’ll be online but I want to see it on the big screen. If you find out just leave a comment please.

Anyway, I’m going to sleep, it’s late in France(nearly 2am), thanks again Bob and good luck for the strike and the movie !

87. Flake - January 5, 2008

Perhaps in the future Area 51 is also known as the San Francisco Fleet Yards?

88. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Flake, I don’t know what you’ve been smokin’, but I want in… :)

89. Aaron R. (Sisko would not agree with the closing of - January 5, 2008

Chill out everybody. We have known AICN to be full of crap for a while now. No need to cater to them. Remember any publicity is good publicity. Secondly Mr. Orci don’t get wrapped up in online opinions you know better no matter what site they are on. I am an independent film writer and director and I don’t even think my opinion is good enough to tell you how to make the next Trek movie. If people online are so intelligent why are they not in your shoes instead of you and your partners? I know your movie will have great parts and parts that I don’t care for, but isn’t that just part of making any movie?

Aaron R.

90. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 5, 2008

68. Dennis Bailey

What would be reasonable. 40 episodes? 20? 10? or perhaps just a few minutes. What is the bar?

91. Avindair - January 5, 2008

I hate to say it, but I did fall for the AICN post, hook, line, and sinker.

I guess it’s because I really object to whole “Kirk / Kobayashi Maru” plot point that’s been bandied about. Personal preference, sure, but there you go.

Glad to hear the Area 51 stuff is bunk. No, it didn’t make sense, but with so much crap coming out of that town on the left coast lately, it also wasn’t completely outside the realm of possibility, either.

If that’s not an indictment of the state of the film industry, nothing is.

Mr. Orci: Thanks for clearing this up. Speaking as a Technical Wtier, my thoughts are with you all of your Union members. Crossing my fingers that you guys get what you’re going after.

92. Ron - January 5, 2008

Amazing that some people actually still believe what they read on AICN. Given the number of times they’ve been fooled by antisocial thirteen year olds claiming to have read top-secret scripts, been invited to screenings, etc. it’s amazing they have even a shred of credibility amongst fans of any genre.

#23: You’ll be “creaming”? Do me a favor — let me know what theater you’ll be seeing the film in opening night so I can avoid it, okay?

93. Michelle - January 5, 2008

I think it was good that Roberto Orci debunked these rumors. If a website was spreading blatantly false information on a project I was deeply involved in and that false information could potentially damage said project, I would certainly be speaking out. Here’s to hoping this movie proves the naysayers wrong!

94. Greg2600 - January 5, 2008

The AICN article was extremely critical and spoke in near matter of fact terms. I don’t blame Orci for responding to it.

95. Kev-1 - January 5, 2008

I thought the bridge was pretty neat. The small size increases the drama over what you could do on a Super Star Destroyer. I have to admit I thought they didn’t want Shatner because he would contrast with what they may have done to Kirk. But this could be untrue. But also fans have historically been unwilling to accept negative news.

96. Michael Hall - January 5, 2008

“What would be reasonable. 40 episodes? 20? 10? or perhaps just a few minutes. What is the bar?”

What, you would really insist that a prospective Trek writer be forced to watch “And the Children Shall Lead”? Whatever on earth for?

97. Aragorn189 - January 5, 2008

I think that the best thing to do for the time being is to wait out the last two weeks and see what the teaser trailer is going to show us. Then we can start more speculation. If there is all this hype going on, it needs to star after we see the trailer. That’s the only way we’ll have any definite basis to back up any rumors that have come out thus far.

P.S. What do you think Mr. Orci?

98. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

See, here’s the thing about how I posed the question to Mr. Orci in #84…

If the Enterprise is NOT built in Area 51, then there’s no harm in Mr. Orci confirming that, as it doesn’t reveal ANYTHING other than the fact of the ship being built elsewhere e.g. Space, San Francisco, etc. which everyone is hoping for and can wait to see when the movie comes out……BUT, if the answer is yes, that the Enterprise WAS built in Area 51, then he may as well tell us now, as the entire movie is SPOILT ANYWAY WITH NO CHANCE OF REDEMPTION and any hope for this project has gone completely off the rails!

If that’s the case, then maybe a group of us fans SHOULD meet up in New York come December 2008 so we can all jump off the Brooklyn Bridge together!

It would be harmless for Mr. Orci to respond that the Area 51 idea is crap and put our fears to rest……but, it’s been a while and he’s not responding, is he? Yikes!!

99. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

#90: “What would be reasonable. 40 episodes? 20? 10? or perhaps just a few minutes. What is the bar?”

In order to work on a movie? Ideally, being very very good at what one does. So far, it seems as if everyone working on “Star Trek” qualifies.

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

Chairman Ballzio on fire and on target!!!!

The hearings now comence!!!!

101. Kirk, James T. - January 5, 2008

Mr Orci, Star Trek sounds AMAZING, people, fans, the media and AICN are needing to make up stuff because they know NOTHING about the script or anything apart from the news that has been reported true – people love to blow things out of proportion or provoke people.

Transformers and MI:III were both very good films, why? because whilst they were new and exciting they kept to their roots, I personally think Star Trek was at its best when Wrath of Khan came out so if this movie is anything like that then you’ve done it!

Loving the casting, Simon Pegg especially to me, he’s a surprising choice but a fantastic one, he’s a Sci-Fi legend and can act very very well!

102. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Lord Garth, are you as concerned as I am????

103. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008


did Roberto Orci , just high five someone and then accuse someone of being a little paranoid with conspiracies in everything………….

hmm thats two things i am sure Rick Berman never did

Roberto Orci = legend lol

104. Kenny Maths - January 5, 2008


Chill a little.

So if Mr Orci responds in the negative to your question (thereby giving you peace of mind), will you leave it at that, or do you have other questions?

Even if YOU leave it at that, well others are likely to have questions…and if he doesn’t respond…hey….they MUST be true because after all he responded to you?

Perhaps you are trying to create Mr Orci’s personal version of the Kobayashi Maru?

Give the guy a break and appreciate the fact that he is contributing here…or run the risk of having him heading for the hills. Just a thought! :-)

105. Dave - January 5, 2008


There should be NO bar, if you ask me (which you didn’t). You can quantify how many episodes of the show someone needs to see to hold a position on the film. Clearly, there are certain people who might want to do some research before starting work. That doesn’t mean seeing all 79. A costume designer has no reason to watch all 79 episodes of “Star Trek.” It’s enough that they have seen the old designs or maybe even pulled the old uniforms out of mothballs to get a look at them up close.

A set designer should obviously get a feel for the old sets and everything. Make-up, hair, gaffers, grips, PAs, etc. need to do their jobs, but do they REALLY need to sit down and watch “Spock’s Brain”, “Alternative Factor”, or “Patterns of Force” to do their job?! I truly don’t think any of that matters.

The people who I think should watch more than a few episodes are:

Orci and Kurtzman
Whomever is the DP
The actors playing the Enterprise crew

Even then, there is no bar. I think the writers and directors might want to watch more (since they are the primary creative forces), DP and composers would be less, with the actors somewhere in the middle. I don’t think any of us want the actors being TOO influenced by their predecessors and venturing into bald mimicry. I think Chris Pine doing a Shatner impression from overly studying the series would be the less desired result, rather than him interpreting the character of Kirk on his own. I think it’s similar to playing Hamlet. You want to see what Olivier or Branaugh did to take notes, but in the end, you have to bring something special to it in order to be successful.

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

You know it brother!!! See my post above #69
Before this topic was moved I asked Mr. Roberto the following

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)

As you say brother Ballzio, this can all end by denying each specific spoiler. A generial denial does nothing for me and until we get specifics I have a feeling there be some truth there.

107. RTC - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci,

If I’ve gleaned one bit of insight from all this back ‘n’ forth, it’s a deeper respect for the challenging life of a full-time writer. I do some SF writing on the side, won a few awards, penned two episodes of a direct-to-video SF series, and in my heart of hearts I’d love to be writing full-time. But as with every dream, there’s the bad to go with the good.

You and Mr. Kurtzman have poured your heart and soul into Trek XI, trying to strike that balance between respect for canon and crafting a solid, dramatic, engaging tale … and while I’m sure your reward and satisfaction is great, you have to put up with self-appointed ‘experts’ like AICN and their ilk who think they can do it better.

As for me, I’ll wait to see it on the big screen. And like it or hate it, I’ll tip my hat respectfully and gratefully to you both for the effort.

108. Reign1701A - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci I think we all just need some things cleared up. How do you know that the reviewer hasn’t read the script? Please say it’s because he has his facts wrong, such as: Kirk getting command of the Enterprise right after the academy, and the Enterprise being built on the ground (although building a starship on the ground would make little sense, I don’t believe it was ever made canon as to what the San Francisco shipyards exactly were). Thank you for your comments and it’s a wonderful honor that you even take the time to talk to us fans!

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

And brother Ballzio the level of sycophants here is rather disturbing. I support Roberto until proven otherwise but it doesn’t mean we can’t ask challanging questions and have to blindly eat everything shoveled our way just because he happens to contribute here.

110. FlyingTigress - January 5, 2008

Sorry, I just got back from having to scrub-down in the tshower, and inject a gallon of brain bleach into my skull, after reading the comments over at aicn..

Did I miss anything?

111. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

I agree, mon ami!

112. Carol Marcus is No Lady; Kirk is No Gentleman. - January 5, 2008

robert Orci,
I think it’s great you get to do this stuff for a living. At the moment, I’m at Fannie Mae trying to keep the Western economy from imploding because of MBEs and ten years of unbelievable, unmitigated greed run amok. Might even make a great movie plot one day — sort of a 21st C “Wall Street” (Call it, “Terror on Wisconsin Ave NW”).

Now to my point: I spend my life dealing with real disasters. The kinds that ruin lives, destroy families, and lose hundreds of millions of someone’s hard-won capital because of selfish greed on the part of executives hired to steward shareholder money and please customers.

Star Trek. I watch Star Trek, especially the original version, because it is the anti-reality. It is elevated and bold, noble and virtuous where real life is anything but.

Consequently, Trek is in essence my little shared vision of a world that doesn’t suck, where the good guys win and “anti-heros” don’t exist.

So please, while I won’t believe these rumors that you deny, please remember that I watch real bad guys cheat honest Americans out of hundreds of millions of dollars almost every day of my life.

I don’t want — and I certainly won’t support — a James T Kirk who cheats on tests, knocks up girls, and is otherwise a scoundrel. In fact, I rather my James T Kirk speak in complete phrases with a gentleman’s vocabulary (not a nerd’s!). In this fan’s opinion, ST II and the Bastard Mini-me was almost a heart breaker.

So… take the alarm expressed here at the possibility of “Star Trek 90210″ or “OC Trek” or the crappy, ADHD sugar-high writing of most modern “popular” movies and understand that to some of us,

Trek is not about a billion dollar “franchise” — it’s Shakespeare for our day.

So give me a movie I can watch, suspend disbelief, enjoy, and avoid the daily bad news that allows me to earn my (admittedly upper middle class) living.


113. Dave - January 5, 2008

BTW, that supposed “script review” is the most vague thing I have ever read. If he HAS read it, he hasn’t read it in a long time, because he seems to have forgotten just about everything that happened. The only details he seems to have are ones that are easily gleaned from what we know about the movie so far.

I mean *I* know Kirk is at the Academy and people picket. *I* know time travel is a part of the story. I know that just from visiting THIS site! If you were able to get your grubby hands on a copy of one of the most secretive productions in Hollywood, wouldn’t you want to at least throw ONE or even TWO details into your “review”?

I don’t need Bob Orci to tell me that is clearly a BS story.

What’s amazing to me is that I used to work for a studio and had LEGIT scoops I sent to AICN but they never even bothered to post them.

114. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

I figured Orci wouldn’t answer a list of questions, so I picked the most absurd (or is that turd?) suggestion put forward and am asking him to categorically state that it’s not true…..if he can’t flat-out shoot down the stupidest, most inane idea that AICN is accusing him of, then I KNOW we’ve got trouble!

115. Chris - January 5, 2008

Roberto, any chance you’re taken? Dating? Interested?

116. Xai - January 5, 2008

This is just more spew from the “Ain’t It Crap people looking for more site visits.

117. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Where’s Dennis Bailey in all of this? If any of US had posted such vague half-baked answers, Dennis would be on the guy like a Tribble on a piece of wheat! Where’s our resident Perry Mason to help dissect Mr. Orci’s responses so far??

118. Ty Webb - January 5, 2008

It sounds like young Kirk could end up being the Jar-Jar Binks of this film.

Kirk was a man who worked hard and played hard. He cheated on the test not because he was a cheater but because he genuinely believed it was the way to win.

119. FlyingTigress - January 5, 2008


I’m curious. Why? I think that it is great that he comes by here, but, imho, he has no obligation to dignify a some alleged story spoiler with either a denial or a confirmation.

It’s not as if he’s facing some Grand Inquisitor…

…or, maybe he is.

120. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


No, we can only write for companies that have made a deal with the WGA. No companies we work for currently fall under that status. And it’s difficult, because Alex and I always like to take a last look at a scene the days before it shoots, because improvement can always be made.

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

Brother Ballzio

Bailey’s on our subcommittee I hope they haven’t gotten to him

122. Edith Keeler - January 5, 2008

I heard that James Cawley has a quick cameo in this movie. I wonder which Kirk variant with Elvis hairdo he plays this time – Kirk’s uncle? Did Orci write him in? Did Abrams?

123. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

#109 – Lord Garth – “Sycophants”? Love the level of civility…

124. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008

i think Orci left to tell them to make up a new teaser where the enterprise is being built at area 51 , just to mess with our heads , this of course will have nothing to do with the actually movie ………

125. trektacular - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci if you care to, would you tell us how you got involved in the new Trek film?

126. Dave - January 5, 2008


Who said Cawley is in it? I haven’t heard that anywhere.

127. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


Okay, so here’s the problem. If we start denying everything that’s thrown up as a possible theory, then we get into a trap that if something finally does come along that’s right on the money and we don’t deny it, then we are, in essence, confirming it. I should’ve just let it go and not commented at all.

My bad.

128. steve adams - January 5, 2008

Area 51, wouldn’t even exsist in a bFederation timeline.
Remember peace on earth was acheived by the time Starfleet was formed. (Area 51) is a blackbudget location that works on futuristic weapons and craft. This kind of group would be working above ground in a peacefull world ..
Beware of the underground, that’s where the bad aliens live.

129. Xai - January 5, 2008

#112 Carol Marcus, etc…

If you believe this isn’t true…. why the speech as if it IS?
You really think a writer, a professed FAN of Trek would give you what you described?

And no one here cares what your standard of living is.

130. Xai - January 5, 2008

127. roberto Orci – January 5, 2008

“My bad.”

Oh…. too DAMN funny……LOL

131. chazroot - January 5, 2008

Ummmm, hello? Kirk was a bad boy… Cheated on the Kobayashi Maru test and knocked up.Carol Marcus.

It’s canon, bay-bee.

132. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

That was in mu opinion just an attempt to lock Mr Orci into a “no win” situation of his own. A challenge so he ends up confirming/and or denying something thereby earning wrath of the fans.

I have sympathy for you as a writer. Not only is this a huge project but you have to deal with nitpicky and sometimes paranoid “fans” who more often then not hold a myopic view of things.

133. Scotticus - January 5, 2008


Area 51 does exist in the Federation timeline. Remember DS9’s “Little Green Men”?

Plus, if you have seen Independance Day, you will notice that Data’s great great great great great grandfather was there….

134. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

#98 & 127 – Well, there you go, Harry. Your episode of paranoia can now cease, and you can do something else. You haven’t written a limerick yet on this thread.

135. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

#119 Flying Tigress “I’m curious. Why?”

Here’s why clarification is needed……if AICN had listed a host of reasonable plot points, then, of course, I would expect no response. Keep the intrigue going to Opening Day and all that…

However, if AICN reported that, oh, say Gary Coleman had been cast as Commodore Stone, then I would expect Orci et al to have fun with it as they shoot down such an absurd suggestion. Saying that the Enterprise was built in Area 51 is at THAT level of absurdity.

It would be NICE if TPTB “threw us a bone” and stated, “of course THAT’s not true!!”

136. Ty Webb - January 5, 2008

Kirk had his way with women. Like the early Bond films they were objects to him. I wonder if Finnegan will be in this, and will we see him playing some amusing American Pie style pranks on Kirk? I just watched Shore Leave today.

137. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008

i argee with 132 , lol wow its easy to tell Orci that you have alot of experience with paranoid fans and conspiracy theories. it must be hard.

oh 128 “area 51 wouldn’t even exsist in a bFederation timeline”

why not ? maybe section 31 are using it !

138. Xai - January 5, 2008

#135 Harry Ballz

It would be nice…. but the point is… they don’t have too. It’s like the demands of “why won’t they tell us if Shatner is in or out?”
They don’t have to.

139. ShawnP - January 5, 2008

#132 – Looks like Mr. Orci had his own little Kobayashi Maru!

140. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

#127 Roberto Orci

Roberto, thanks for responding to my posts. Sorry for #135….I wrote and posted it before I read your response.

To all others here who criticize my “nitpicking”, I make no apologies for my passion for Star Trek……..I just want them to get it right.


141. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

“It would be NICE if TPTB “threw us a bone” and stated, “of course THAT’s not true!!””

They aren’t obligated to, ever at all. I understand why Mr Orci did respond to this, it seemed all rather personal on AICN’s part.

If you start getting into trying to make them confirm or deny things it in the end becomes a setup. Plus I don’t think Paramount nor JJ Abrams would be happy if the writers started going around doing that what in a very subtle way would spoil the movie by denying/confirming things.

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

Good for you Ballzio you have no reason to apologize. We have every right to ask questions and expect the very best from our beloved franchise !!!

143. Kenny Maths - January 5, 2008


So, if a plausible spoiler (which may or may not be true) is posted, then you are entirely relaxed that no comment is made to confirm or deny it.

However, if something which seems absurd is posted, then you are going to panic that it IS true unless it is immediately refuted?

We appear to have lest Star Trek and entered The Twilight Zone.

AICN is full of crap…on a routine basis…or at least that’s how it was when I gave up reading it years ago. The ‘reviews’ posted there were generally less concerned about plot/story than about promoting its already self-inportant reviewer. AICN is to the internet era what Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons were to an earlier age.

144. Ex-Transformer - January 5, 2008

Honestly, I wasn’t sure if it was the writing or the directing that spoiled Transformers– but that movie WAS a disappointment for a Transformers fan like myself.

If Star Trek XI makes me feel the same was as Transformers did, then I have to blame the writers. Because there’s a new director. But I have faith in these writers and in the entire production crew for STXI. Just .. if you’re reading this JJ, or Roberto or Kurtzman– I’m glad the Enterprise is grand and detailed, but please make sure that she fits into the camera frame (unlike the transformers) and isn’t a sloppy mess of unnecessary details (like the transformers).


145. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Some of us fans get bent out of shape
My own face went as purple as a grape
Orci told me straight
I guess I’ll wait for fate
This egg on my face, I must scrape!

146. Ty Webb - January 5, 2008


It sounds ok to me, but the ”lousy student” angle of Kirk would be a mockery of the character if true(A mockery of Starfleet as well). Apart from being a fairly bad reading of Kirk, it’s a terrible cliche.

147. Scott Xavier - January 5, 2008

144 yippee!

148. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Lord Garth, I appreciate your support during this trying campaign!

While everyone else is out getting laid, we’re here defending the fort! :)

149. steve623 - January 5, 2008

” … but the ‘’lousy student’’ angle of Kirk would be a mockery of the character if true(A mockery of Starfleet as well). Apart from being a fairly bad reading of Kirk, it’s a terrible cliche.”

Very astute and well said.

150. cd - January 5, 2008

#146 – I agree. Kirk, according to Gary Mitchell, was a “stack of books with legs”. Doesn’t quite mesh, does it? I hope this and the Area 51 stuff are garbage.
#140 – Nitpicking is essential to being a Star Trek fan. POWER TO THE NITPICKERS!!

151. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

All the AICN fans/believers…

reread what they posted as “truth” and ask yourself… would someone be that dumb?

Engage brain, folks.

152. Tony Whitehead - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci,

I have recently been re-reading “The Making of Star Trek”, which was the behind the scenes book of the original series written by Stephen Whitfield and co-written by Gene Roddenberry.

I was wondering if you have ever read that before and if the problems and solutions they found in producing the series colored your interpretation of the script if it did?

It’s great that you are here representing the production and I hope you can convince more of your cohorts to join in the conversation here. Come on in, the water’s fine!

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

No problem brotha
And as much as I appreciate Mr. Roberto engaging us we still don’t have any denial to the key , most concerning, burning questons.

Keep fighting the good fight !!!!

154. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

let me start a NEW rumor/truth…

“Kirk picks his nose on camera.”

This HAS to be true…I saw it on the internet, just like the AICN report.
I totally cannot believe what some people will entertain as truth just because they “saw it on the internet”.

155. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

152. Tony Whitehead – January 5, 2008

THIS is a good post.

156. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

“Nitpicking is essential to being a Star Trek fan. POWER TO THE NITPICKERS!!”

No its not, it only proves how myopic one is and the lines between reality tend to be blurred by taking this stuff to seriously. Its also one of many reasons “General Audiences” laugh at this stuff.

There’s being a fan, and then there’s being obsessed with the dye used to color the fabric of the shirts.

157. Captain Dunsel - January 5, 2008

On topic–Mr. Orci, I hope you and your compatriots get everything you want in this strike–and soon. ST deserves the extra touches which the strike is preventing you all from applying.

Slightly off topic–
For Harry Ballz a big accolade
For the fun loving poems he’s made
I’d sure like to help
And give him a big yelp
But I have to leave and get laid!

158. steve623 - January 5, 2008

“All the AICN fans/believers…

reread what they posted as “truth” and ask yourself… would someone be that dumb?”

Have you been to the movies much in the last 15 years? Some appallingly dumb movies have been released by the major studios. “Pluto Nash” and “The Avengers” immediately spring to mind. So I have no reason not to believe “that dumb” or worse are possibilities.

159. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Sharr………..the dye for shirts is one thing……………where they built the friggin’ Enterprise, quite another……..I don’t care if they make big mistakes on little things, as long as they don’t make ANY mistakes on the big things!

M’yeah, so there! :)

160. steve623 - January 5, 2008

oh, and “Catwoman” :-)

161. Chris Clow - January 5, 2008

With everything we’ve heard from the Orci and Kurtzman, Abrams, and Nimoy, I have a hard time believing any of the stuff AICN posted.

Trek is still nearly a year off, and very very tight on security. How some assclowns could’ve read the script, let alone seen footage, seems highly unlikely.

Trek will be great, but there’s a movie coming sooner that I’m equally stoked about!

Bring it on!

162. steve623 - January 5, 2008

and “Wild Wild West” :)

163. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Some of you were keen enough to see that I came….this close….to having Mr. Orci take his own Kobayashi Maru test……….but, DAMMIT, the little bugger figured it out and wriggled loose………….

We’ll meet again, Mr. Orci……………….. :)

164. cd - January 5, 2008

#156 – It just a blog about a movie based on a TV show. Get a life! >;>}
I think nitpicking is essential to it, at least to fans who lived in a certain era, but different strokes for different folks. It was said (typed) with a certain amount of irony and a certain amount of truth, like many of the things I write here, so no reason to get upset about it. There are more important things in this world to get upset about. ( Believe me when I say I DO know what is real and what is not.)
And I think we have had these nitpicking discussions before. Basically, be true to Star Trek: be true to the characters, be true to what we know. Like Harry said, just get it right.
And I hardly got upset when the sleeves in the spy pictures were the wrong dye lot. >;>}

165. cd - January 5, 2008

#159 – High five! (wow, did I just type that?)

166. S. John Ross - January 5, 2008

I think the personal attack on the screenwriters was entirely unecessary, but overall I don’t agree that the AICN piece – nonsense or not – is dripping with venom and bile the way some folks here are characterizing it. The author says some positive things, too, about this script that he may or may not have seen (even though he seems determined to deflect any credit from the actual writers and leave them only with blame).

Certainly, the personal slam sets a very negative tone, but the tone isn’t maintained throughout the piece. It may well be a bitter complaint, and it may well be utter fiction, but it isn’t _entirely_ negative and it isn’t entirely mean (it just starts out that way).

AICN, embarassing as it often is and riddled with bitter fanboys as it _inevitably_ is, does have a history of sometimes providing genuine spoilers, for better or worse, and while I don’t like seeing any writer(s) attacked personally in that way, I don’t see the childish nature of the piece’s opening tone as sufficient grounds to dismiss the entire report. Time will tell.

I _hope_ the AICN piece is nonsense, and I hope Kurtzman and Orci’s work on the film provide them with a triumphant last word. But them’s just the hopes ;)

167. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

“Sharr………..the dye for shirts is one thing……………where they built the friggin’ Enterprise, quite another……..I don’t care if they make big mistakes on little things, as long as they don’t make ANY mistakes on the big things!”

Well if you seriously thought for a moment anyone would consider constructing such a thing on the surface I sure didn’t and neither does Mr Orci I think since he actually did deny this Area 51 bull but in a way that requires reading between the lines.

168. Jon C - January 5, 2008

Hi Chris 161.It’s funny how Heath seemed to be channeling Jack N. in the preview when he said “I like that”.Makes me wonder if Pine will try to mimic Shatner.I hope not.

169. Pizza - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci, I know this has been mentioned bits and pieces. Mr. Abrams I believe has said he would require the writers to be back to work in order to facilitate any changes to the script. WHY? (Dumb question?) I recall reading somewhere that a scene or two tickled his thoughts about just this.

Also, is there some drop dead date that would make adding changes to the movie not possible. Actors have been called back for reshoot of scenes for script changes, continuity issues, sound, lighting and so on. The writers strike certainly complicates the afterthought stuff. Assuming of course this strike will be over long before Dec 25 2008

170. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

I’ve been watching “Star Trek” since 1966. God, I hate nitpicking.

171. Nobody - January 5, 2008

Mr. Orci,

I’ve grown up in a small town and i have written a script (Not Trek). If I wanted it to get looked at what would I have to do??? I hope you can help me. The script is called Bernie Goes North and it’s a little rough but it has a lot of good ideas in it. I just wish my dream could have a small ray of hope. -Thanks

172. mctrekkie - January 5, 2008

Area 51?

Perhaps that’s just a metaphor for the Enterprise having been being built in secret to beat the Romulans?

Sometimes we fans are a little too literal.

I’m interested in the portion of the AICN spoliers that refers to the grand nature of the Starship- yes that would be a good thing.

A BIG ship of the line- I think Roddenberry tried some of this in ‘”The Motion Picture”

Probert designs:

173. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

158. steve623 – January 5, 2008

Have I been to the movies in the last 15 years? Yes.
Are they all good? No.

Because bad movies are made does that mean to you that all movies will bad?
And have you been to the movies in the past 45 years? I have, and guess what… they made bad movies then too and before that as well.

And now we have been given far-fetched tidbits about Trek and you are willing to believe them? Area 51? C’mon…

I don’t know what threads you read here… but Abrams, Orci and others are professed fans of Trek and have said they feel proud to work on this project. I can’t imagine them making something they care about look bad or hokey. If anything, I suspect they sweated some details with this story that might not have happened with others. And they are proud and protective of their work.
And then there’s Nimoy. He’s proven that he will stay out of Trek films he doesn’t like or doesn’t feel comfortable with (Generations)and has directed Trek before. He’s quoted several times as loving it and enjoying himself and complimenting the production team.

I will take this site’s Trek news any time. Anthony checks his sources and does it right. This isn’t TMZ or Ain’t It Crap.

174. cbspock - January 5, 2008

I guess Orci thinks he is a star trek fan because he heard the theme once. lol

If any of these story points are true, I won’t bother to go see the film.

175. cd - January 5, 2008

#170 – all right, all right. How about “appropriate attention to detail”? Is that OK? (BTW, read the notes by Probert referenced in #172: is that nitpicking or AATD?) >;>}

176. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

#167 Sharr “and neither does Mr. Orci I think since he actually did deny this Area 51 bull but in a way that requires reading between the lines”

No, that’s where we disagree. Mr. Orci suggested that it would be nonsensical for Area 51 to be the site for building the Enterprise, not that it COULDN’T happen there….

There’s enough room “between the lines” of that reply to fly a Bird Of Prey through, if one wanted to…………no definitive answer there….and thus, back to my original questions which have since been addressed, but still not answered……c’est la vie!

177. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

158. steve623 – January 5, 2008

Lord of the Rings, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Children of Men, Schindler’s List, Fargo

I am not going to compile a whole list for you. Dumb and bad films have been made… excellent films as well.
No Sale.

178. Dennis Bailey - January 5, 2008

#174 :I guess Orci thinks he is a star trek fan because he heard the theme once.”

I guess you think you’re smart or clever because you’re lippy, too. You’re neither, nor are you right. :)

179. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

” I guess Orci thinks he is a star trek fan because he heard the theme once. lol If any of these story points are true, I won’t bother to go see the film.”

I love the Trekcops, they’re so filled with Roddeberry’s utopian love for everyone… NOT! Remarks like this make me despise fandom.

“No, that’s where we disagree. Mr. Orci suggested that it would be nonsensical for Area 51 to be the site for building the Enterprise, not that it COULDN’T happen there….”

I’d take Occam’s Razor and take the more likely assumption that this was simply a creative way of dening it. Trust me – Writers like giving creative answers like that… they prefer it since it leaves room for debate among the “fans”. Ever read RDM’s responses to BSG questions? He often gives answers without actually giving a solid YES/NO.

“There’s enough room “between the lines” of that reply to fly a Bird Of Prey through, if one wanted to…………no definitive answer there….and thus, back to my original questions which have since been addressed, but still not answered……c’est la vie!”

Only if you want to live in some land of paranoia.


180. Star Trek Fan 1639 - January 5, 2008

Roberto – I have been a fan since 1966, (were you even born) and as long as you tell a good story and keep Genes vision in mind, I will be happy. I am holding off on having an opinion until I see the movie. I don’t understand why people have to speculate on something that is based on rumors and gossip. People ragged Battlestar…Starbuck a girl…that is travasty and it turned out to be a brilliant show.

Hang in there…just 11 1/2 months until it is released! I can’t wait.

181. steve623 - January 5, 2008

“Have I been to the movies in the last 15 years? Yes.
Are they all good? No.

Because bad movies are made does that mean to you that all movies will bad?
And have you been to the movies in the past 45 years? I have, and guess what… they made bad movies then too and before that as well.

And now we have been given far-fetched tidbits about Trek and you are willing to believe them? Area 51? C’mon…

I don’t know what threads you read here… but Abrams, Orci and others are professed fans of Trek and have said they feel proud to work on this project. I can’t imagine them making something they care about look bad or hokey. If anything, I suspect they sweated some details with this story that might not have happened with others. And they are proud and protective of their work.
And then there’s Nimoy. He’s proven that he will stay out of Trek films he doesn’t like or doesn’t feel comfortable with (Generations)and has directed Trek before. He’s quoted several times as loving it and enjoying himself and complimenting the production team.

I will take this site’s Trek news any time. Anthony checks his sources and does it right. This isn’t TMZ or Ain’t It Crap. ”

I don’t doubt that Mr. Orci is a swell guy, and Anthony too for that matter. I also know that good movies are made as well as bad ones. But if a writer of a movie comes to a message board that promotes that movie and says “hey, I’m a fan and I’ve written a great movie, go see it”, it does not follow that I have to take his word for it – what else is he going to say? He wants his movie to be successful, he wants to give it as much positive spin and press as he can, pre-release, so that it will have the biggest opening weekend possible, since that’s the biggest single weekend his movie is probably going to get and a big opening weekend will allow the studio to run all those “The Number One Movie in America!” ads that will help it keep its percentages up over the next couple of weekends until the next big release hits theaters. That’s how it works, and I know that. So the fact that a writer says he’s a real fan and his movie is gonna be great doesn’t mean its gospel truth. Everybody says that. Nobody sets out to make a bad movie, but it happens all the time, despite the best talent and intentions. I hope “Star Trek” is not a bad film, but I am not content to take Robert Orci or Anthony Pascale or anybody else’s word for it. Far-fetched tidbits? Area 51? I ask again, have you been to the movies in the last 15 years? Far more lunkheaded stuff than that has made it into 100 million dollar budgeted studio films. I’m not going to believe anything just because its on TMZ or AICN … but I’m also not going to disbelieve it based on the vague or general denials of somebody who has a vested interested in getting my 9 dollars that first weekend either.

182. John and Mary Jo Tenuto - January 5, 2008

Hello Mr. Orci,

As college professors who get evaluated by hundreds of students each year, we have learned one thing. We are never as good as they say we are, and we are never as bad as they we are. That applies to the AICN article.

For us, we’d like to thank you and Alex Kurztman. Thanks for the entertainment of your previous films. Thanks for writing Star Trek, knowing how serious a fan you are makes the year a great anticipation for us. Our five year old son Nicky is already excited about Christmas 2008. Mary Jo is especially pleased to hear that female characters are represented in your version. Thanks for caring about characters.

Leonard Nimoy’s confidence is about all we need. When we heard he signed to be Spock, we knew the script must have been very good.

For every student evaluation that challenges our teaching, for every AICN article that spreads gossip about you, there are those who thank us, and we thank you.

183. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

174. cbspock – January 5, 2008
“I guess Orci thinks he is a star trek fan because he heard the theme once. lol

Can you get more insulting?.. What did he do to you?

184. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Sharr, it’s fun to debate with you… least you take the time to write a reasonable answer!

185. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008


If any of these story points are true, I won’t bother to go see the film. ”

that was harsh , and its o.k. about you not going to see the film i was planning on going to see it at least twice so thats enough for both of us .

186. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

174. cbspock – January 5, 2008
“I guess Orci thinks he is a star trek fan because he heard the theme once. lol

If any of these story points are true, I won’t bother to go see the film.”

Totally without class

187. Josh - January 5, 2008

Wow… this is EASILY the most people have flown up about something in one day. I’m just passing by, but aren’t there more important things like the New Hampshire Debates? You’re all acting like the Republicans (for those of you who saw it)!

Yes, this whole ordeal seems bad, but the movie is coming out in less than a year. We’ll all just hold our breath until it comes out, then crap out pants when it finally does and it’s so fantastically good that we lose all bowel control and begin sobbing and clapping at the end because we LERVED IT!

I don’t know about you, but that’s the way I’m going to be treating it.

188. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

183. Harry

I try my best. I try to bring some common sense back to all this, regarding Star Trek I find fans often fly off of the handle and lose perspective more so then any other franchise.

Look I want answers as much as the rest. But I’ve learned sometimes chilling out it better then slamming headlong into things as well. In a few more days we’ll really be at with the “teaser trailer” which the Director of “Cloverfield” makes sound rather “big”. Scope isn’t a word I normally link to a films teaser trailer.


189. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

If any of these story points are true, I won’t bother to go see the film either!

There, now we’re even!

190. Josh - January 5, 2008

Thank you Sharr Khan for reinforcing my idea at virtually the same time. Our minds are as one.

*Nod of approval*

191. Josh - January 5, 2008

Or better yet, does anybody remember Red Hour? Beta III? No? Aye, that would be good…

192. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2008

Boy, we’ve got quite the heated discussion going for a Saturday night, don’t we? :)

p.s. sorry Sharr, my #189 post was for #185!

193. Matt - January 5, 2008

I am a big Star Trek fan. I think what’s happening is awesome. We are lucky to be here right now, and see the re-invention of the series with actual actors.

If this had waited another five or ten years, Paramount would have been in negotiations with the families of all the original cast – and every character would be animated – as in Beowulf. Except if their voices were used they’d all be pretty old. Or other voices would have to replicate them.

I haven’t ever seen a full episode of Lost, so I don’t know if JJ is magic or not. I didn’t see his MI3 either. But I did see TRANSFORMERS because i hate Michael Bay but I thought the trailers were cool. The trailers made me say: this is the movie Michael Bay was born to make. OK. And I liked it. I thought it was fun. It was really well written, and the first hour moved. The end was a little confusing and technical, and the robots were hard to differentiate. But right now, I’m cuddled up with my girlfriend and I think I’m going to try to have a bottle of wine and watch it again. Why? Because we just saw THERE WILL BE BLOOD and that was the best movie of the year. And before that, we rented AMARCORD, and before that we saw NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN. And that? That sucks. NCFOM is ALL hype. Does any of this make sense? No. But I know one thing. TRANSFORMERS was fun, well, made, always suprising, and in addition to it’s star, the entire cast was spot on.

The question about the new Star Trek will only amount to one thing. DO WE BELIEVE IT?

On the TV Dr. Phil is telling the world that Britney Spears is “In Serious Need of Psychological Help.”

And that is what the Star Trek Trailers will be competing with next Christmas.

So. I am excited. Nimoy is a humanitarian. (Shatner is too).

Transformers (which I didn’t care about before now) DELIVERED.

Star Trek will have excellent trailers, Star Trek will be unexpected because it really will be far and away the most technically complicated advanced and well shot film the series has ever seen. We know this. This is not the kind of action film where the stars are getting huge fees out of proportion with the rest of the budget.

I realized that a few years ago what I hoped for was a Star Trek with let’s say a Totally New crew – actors and ship and actually “Exploring Strange New Worlds” using the greatest actors of our time. Like Tom Cruise, Matt Damon.

I do have a fear. That by finding out “who these people are” – we will not be exploring Strange New Worlds.

And that is our Mission.

194. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

181. steve623 – January 5, 2008
“But if a writer of a movie comes to a message board that promotes that movie and says “hey, I’m a fan and I’ve written a great movie, go see it”, it does not follow that I have to take his word for it – what else is he going to say? ”

He doesn’t HAVE to say a thing, most writers don’t come on boards to talk with fans… at least none I know.
Nimoy has money, interests and accolades… He jumped on this wagon from retirement… I guess that’s unimpressive too because he’s in the film and actively looking to steal your $9.
So if you believe no one else’s opinion and believe every negative script point online… I guess you haven’t seen many movies in the past 15 years.

195. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008

@187 “Wow… this is EASILY the most people have flown up about something in one day. I’m just passing by, but aren’t there more important things like the New Hampshire Debates? You’re all acting like the Republicans (for those of you who saw it)!”

more importants things ?

new hampshire debates wtf ?

i am not an american , so even if i am interested in your new president which i am , i cant vote or anything , does that mean i can keep talking about star trek

……….i guess so

kirk and spock for white house ?

196. Green-blooded-bastard - January 5, 2008

I gotta be honest here, and I know Mr. Orci is reading these… I don’t give a crap for continuity, I don’t care if the bridge size is proportional to the rest of the ship, I could care less if they digitally make a hand for Quinto, and I could piss on canon. No crap, and I’m a Star Wars/Star Trek fan. I love sci-fi and I go see nearly every sci-fi movie that hits the theater for my sheer love of the genre and the fact that there aren’t a whole lot that come out every year. That said, what I really am looking forward to is a great sci-fi movie first, and in the tradition of Star Trek second. I understand it’s a reboot so we are getting a new interpretation of a classic icon to science fiction TV/Cinema. I expect changes, from a slight deviation to way the f**k out there, therefore I go to watch with a very open mind. I intend to judge the film on it’s own merit, and not by comparison. I will judge each individual actor on his or her own ability to draw me into their respective parts and to a small degree, portray a classic part in their own fashion, as all actors employ a different methodology to convey a character. I look forward to seeing the Enterprise as envisioned by the new artists of the film, not (with respect) Gene Roddenberry. The ship and sets of the classic TV are direct reflections of the attitudes and fashions of the 60’s, and this is a modern film being made by people of the modern age, so I expect their life experiences and tastes to be reflected in the look and feel of the film. anyone who goes into this movie expecting to see Star Trek in all it’s 60’s glory is going to be in for a bit of a disappointment to some degree. With all the crap that’s been coming out of Hollywood lately and the high expectations fans of sci-fi and comics have been putting on film interpretations only to walk out of theaters feeling sad and $9 short, I’m not going to do that to myself. When I sit down in the theater in late December, I am going to take the attitude that I am looking not at a revamp or remake of something I watched as a kid, rather, the birth of something new and exciting kids today can make a part of their lives, and remind the adults amongst us how it felt to stare wide-eyed at the small screen in awe of something that allowed our imaginations to take us away from reality, even if just for an hour a week. I’m not looking forward to a good Star Trek movie, I’m looking forward to a fantastic science fiction movie in the tradition of Star Trek.

197. Sharr Khan - January 5, 2008

“I do have a fear. That by finding out “who these people are” – we will not be exploring Strange New Worlds. And that is our Mission.”

Star Trek has really never been about the external “Mission”, at its heart when it had one before GR revamped it for TNG, it was about the people and the bond between Kirk/Spock/McCoy the external stuff was a means to an end. And remember people go to movies to learn about the *people in them* not some threat or the week kind of thing.

That’s what the “Human adventure” was all about not what particular star system the Enterprise might wander across each week.

198. sean - January 5, 2008

Guys, you could debunk a lot of this just using pervious statements by the writers & producers. Lindelof made a big deal about Kirk having to be both the hero and a brilliant ‘astronaut’. Does that really gel with this whole ‘Kirk cheats because he’s too stupid’ angle? Come on. Plus, even if Kirk does romance some ‘little blonde lab technician’ to help him reprogram the computer, does that really make him a lazy student? Hardly. It just means he used an opportunity that presented itself. Sounds pretty Kirk-like to me!

And what Roberto said in #127 makes perfect sense. Can we honestly expect a successful Hollywood writer with a project in production to log on here every day just to debunk every moronic theory someone decides to put up on the internet? Come on now.

199. steve adams - January 5, 2008

“Iittle green men” was a episode about quarks ship going back in time to Roswell NM…
Oh yeah I saw independance day and I thought it was horrible…

If you want to really see grand pa Data check out the 3 part episode that deals with that story arc. Its very very good. As were all season 4 Star Trek Enterprise episodes, (except for that crap final episode with Riker and Troi) love Riker and Troi but that one really bit!
Great movie quote Mr Ballz, WELL!!!!!!!!!WERE WAITING!!!
I sure miss Ted Knight he was a ledgend!!!

200. Irishtrekkie - January 5, 2008


it has to be a great star trek movie , i mean star trek has a proud history , we should not piss all over that , i mean no we dont have to be cannon hogs , and thats not the point i am making . but if they make a fantastic science fiction movie , it will be good but it wont be star trek . its important its a star trek movie .

star trek means alot to people , its like the work of jrr tolkien, or star wars . its a cult show for a reason .

if its just going to be a fantastic science fiction movie then why even need the name star trek , it would be a hold alot easyer to do without it , no need to worry about old fans or cannon and all the baggage ,

the people behind this movie has given themself one of the hardest tasks i can think of in taking on star trek . i really hope they did not do it to make just a fantastic science fiction movie in the tradition of Star Trek.
, but instead make a fantastic star trek movie it will be harder . But star trek more then any show or movie in my opinion lends itself to great sci fi , so with a good script and actors they can easly pull it off

yea i know i went on a rant , sorry everyone , just like to say that they people making the movie should not worry about making a fantastic science fiction movie in the tradition of Star Trek but worry about making a fanastic Star Trek movie , which of course by default will be great sci fi ,. bet this makes no sense oh well .

201. Litenbug - January 5, 2008

198. sean – January 5, 2008

well said

202. steve adams - January 5, 2008

Mr Orci, was the final battle in Transformers supposed to take place in Las Vegas?
Sorry I’m way off topic but I just had to ask?

203. Nathan - January 5, 2008

What a load of hooey…

Kudos to Mr. Orci for responding quickly, and I have to say it’s cool to have you on here…you da man!

Of course, while you’re here, you couldn’t like…send me a copy of the script or something, could you? I promise not to tell anyone…

204. steve adams - January 5, 2008

#171, don’t mean to step on Mr Orci but “nobody” if you contact the Directors Guild and the Screen Actors guild in Los Angeles (wilshire bvld) they can answer some of your questions. You basically need to register yor script for a fee and then attempt to pitch it to studios and production companies.
It helps if you have friends in the bix, obviously but that dosnt mean anything. With a little luck and timing anything is within reach. I hope you get your chance !!

205. New Horizon - January 5, 2008

I will be completely honest. I hope this does not offend you Mr. Orci. While I mostly enjoyed Transformers, there were some parts that could have been a bit more reserved. My problem with Transformers is that it tried to go in too many directions and please too many tastes. Sometimes, it really hit all the right notes and felt semi-serious in tone…but still light enough to avoid sterility. Like many titles in the present video game industry, Transformers felt like a movie trying to be a bit too user friendly…but I understand that is the purpose of the summer blockbuster movie.

My biggest complaint with Transformers was not the script though, but rather the directing. Michael Bay’s style is great if you can’t pay attention to something for more than two seconds, but to be honest…it annoys the hell out of me. Flash, cut, zoom, whiz, bang. I felt his style did nothing to support the script you wrote. The folks I saw it with had the same thoughts about the direction…and have had similar experiences with past Bay movies…The Island is a good example. What can I say, i don’t enjoy Bay’s work.

That being said…Star Trek is a different beast completely…it has more in common with Mission Impossible than Transformers…so I don’t think people should look to Transformers as an example of what this new Trek film will be like. I loved MI3 Mr. Orci…and JJ’s direction only complimented your great script for that film. :)

206. spockboy - January 5, 2008

As far as “Transformers” goes I couldn’t get past the first 20 minutes from a writing standpoint. The idea that a giant transforming robot from outer space suddenly took a passionate interest in helping some teen-aged guy
(our hero) in getting laid/impressing a girl, was asinine beyond belief.

The effects were spectacular however.

: )

207. Leonel - January 5, 2008

Just got back from AICN. I get it! The author of that post wrote his draft of a Trek XI parody for Cracked magazine. And he’s testing the reaction.

(and in a moment of weakness that’s an hour I’ll never get back)

208. Sebastian - January 5, 2008

The AICN post was obviously not true. How could he see the VFX shots of the new Enterprise when the movie hasn’t even wrapped principal photography, yet? That aside, I don’t care how closely it fits Trek ‘canon.’ The old show violated canon all the time. Who gives a damn. All I want is an entertaining, thoughtful movie set in the Trek universe, respectful of Trek’s unique heritage. Now, I’ll be honest (and if Mr. Orci reads this, I apologize); I hated Transformers. It was dull, childish cinematic junk. Lots of noise and CGI effects taking the place of honest characters (and not the by-the-numbers cardboard cut-outs that populated the film) and an interesting, sophisticated story. Now, this is my opinion (and mine alone, I guess), and since the movie made a gazillion dollars, what do I know, right? I feel the fault was not in the screenplay; but the idea itself was ill-conceived. I don’t want to pay $10 to see a mega-budget toy commercial. Please, assure me that the Trek movie is not written in the same soulless, hollow idea of commerce that created (or in my opinion, manufactured) the Transformers movie and I’ll be a happy Trekker! The cast looks very promising, and the idea sounds interesting (screw the AICN rumors!). Just make it a good one; not a Trek-themed rehash of Transformers! To quote Spock in the episode ‘Amok Time,’ “I plead with thee….I BEG!”

209. VOODOO - January 5, 2008


“I couldn’t get past the first 20 minutes from a writing standpoint. The idea that a giant transforming robot from outer space suddenly took a passionate interest in helping some teen-aged guy get laid was asinie”

Lighten up.

Did you expect Transformers to be like a Ingmar Bergman film? It was about robots disguised as Camaro’s + Mustangs crushing each other.

As someone who had zero interest in “Transformers” I enjoyed the film. Especially the first half of the film where the characters had some time to shine. Bay got carried away in the second half with the f/x.

If you took Transformers for what is was meant to be it was a fun film.

210. Jabob Slatter - January 5, 2008

I never believe rumors. I’m waiting to see the movie itself before I judge it, and I plan to go in with an open mind, prepared to have fun.

I’ve always had concerns about Abrams. I don’t think he’s a very good director so far. I’m sure hoping he’s really gonna do it with this one. I don’t think he can screw it up as badly as Berman, but you never know!

Orci hasn’t written anything great, but that doesn’t mean he can’t do it. Anybody expecting art with a Transformers movie is simply an idiot. Frankly, I enjoyed it for what it was – a movie based on a stupid children’s cartoon. I think they did a pretty good job.

211. Jabob Slatter - January 5, 2008

Oh, and AICN has become such a lame site that it only serves as wretched entertainment, and certainly not a source of anything meaningful.

212. roberto orci - January 5, 2008

208 and others

Nothing I respect more than those of you who did not like Transformers and are still coming at Trek with an open mind. Sincerely, thank you.

213. Uncanny Antman - January 5, 2008

Just on the small matter of Quinto and Nimoy’s hands, I think people are reading a little too much into it.

Sounds more like the shot just dissolves/transitions from the hand of young Spock to old Spock. (Or vice versa.) It’s a pretty standard method of showing instantly that you’re looking at the same character.

You watch, there won’t be much more to it than that. I highly doubt they’ve digitally replaced Quinto’s hand or created a CG hand. Y’gotta approach this logically, ‘natch. :)

214. Jabob Slatter - January 5, 2008

Well, if that really is Robert Orci checking in, I gotta say, you took a really scary job, mister. I respect you for that alone. So many people want to flay you without even having seen the movie. Must feel good. I’m really looking forward to it.

215. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


In early drafts, Yeah, it was Vegas. But we didn’t have the budget to really do that right or do it in Vegas, so we changed it to the fictional Mission City 50 miles out in Nevada.

216. The Vulcanista - January 5, 2008

Wow! What a thread!

Roberto Orci = Grace under fire … photon-torpedo fire.

Nicely done, sir! And the offer of chocolate-chip tidbits still stands. I got what seems like a freezerful still waiting for baking.

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

217. The Vulcanista - January 5, 2008

By the way, the other threads are lonely. :(

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

218. Diggin Up Bones - January 5, 2008

Thank you Mr. Orci for bringing back some of the most legendary characters of the 20th (23rd?) century. A re-boot 40 years later is obviously going to have some differences from the original. And no end product is going to please everyone. Even STV: The Final Frontier, which was full of ridiculous errors like travelling from Federation space to the center of the galaxy in a matter of hours, had a few redeeming qualities. If you can do better than that, you’ll do allright. Am I a syncophant?

219. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008


Thanks for nice words. And congratulations to you for your work to date. Any writing gig is worthy one. Hopefully, if this strike goes the way it should, there will be new opportunities for you and others.

220. trektacular - January 5, 2008

Wow Roberto sure seems nice even under all this scrutiny. Bravo sir.

221. steve adams - January 5, 2008

Thanks for that reply Mr. Orci…..
As I side with you during this Strike, I totally enjoy your being here on this site !
That’s very cool of you!

222. Star Trek Fan 1639 - January 5, 2008

It must be difficult for you not to be on set with the writers strike. Hopefully it will end soon and you can catch some of the filming before it ends. Maybe you can dress up as a Klingon and sneak on the set.

223. steve adams - January 5, 2008

Thanks for that reply Mr. Orci…..
As I side with you during this Strike, I totally enjoy your being here on this site !
That’s very cool of you and I hope it continues !
(I don’t think Anthony would allow anyone other than the real deal to dominate this thread)……

224. focuspuller - January 5, 2008

I will make this comment about AICN and then move on, I don’t go to the site. Simply because I don’t feel that it has anything to offer me, I don’t like the way the site is laid out, I don’t feel that the quality is frankly very high (I’m not knocking them I simply don’t get what people like about the site), and of course I don’t like the attitude. Disliking something and bieng negetive are not the same thing. Harshly commenting on a writer or director or film for the sake of being harsh Take little or no thought. It’s not expressive and frankly lazy, and not what bieng a fan of ANYTHING, in this case film, is about. Soup box over.

Moving back to this film, no one’s comments will truly mean anything until this film is seen. Given the talent, a good film is possible. We will see.

I hope you all simply do the best you can do, if you do I’m sure it will show and that’s the best anyone can hope for.

225. roberto Orci - January 5, 2008

Thanks to Anthony for letting me ramble on. I’m going to harass the rest of the gang to drop by since I’m sure I’m getting old.

Happy New Year and thanks to all who care about Star Trek. We’ll chat again in the coming months.

226. Star Trek Fan 1639 - January 5, 2008

Thanks for stopping by and chatting with the fans. :-)

227. focuspuller - January 5, 2008

I will say this, I hope Area 51 isn’t in the Star Trek film. Using it would be a cop out, you can’t say it wouldn’t.

228. Anthony Pascale - January 6, 2008

RE: 225
Bob firstly it is I who thanks you…and you never get old….well OK the flames on the Enterprise joke is getting old

i kid i kid

and harass away! Would love to see Damon show off his trek nerdiness. And it would be great to hear from the rest of the gan

229. Habs2919 - January 6, 2008

This may not be the place for my speculation but i think that the movie will have Kirk and Spock graduating together but assigned to different ships (Spock to the Enterprise and Kirk to the Farragut). Then later on Kirk is transferred to the Enterprise as a leiutenant and becomes one of the ships top officers. At some point in the movie the Enterprise is getting ready for its five year mission and Ayel attacks. Pike is injured (because canon has it that hes injured in a training mission) and Kirk assumes command. Can anybody else see this as a possiblilty?

230. Habs2919 - January 6, 2008

Just noticed that Orci himself was replying on here.. am I close to being right? : ) Keep up the good work, I’ve enjoyed it all.

231. Kirk, James T. - January 6, 2008

^ you know, even now, what 353 days before Trek opens in the states and 354 here in the UK, and already the writers have done more for it than anyone involved with Trek prior to this film – my hat is off to the new team behind Star Trek because you’ve done nothing but defend, thank and become involved in not just Star Trek but its fans too – something Berman could learn from you guys is just this! defending himself!

Now come on ppl behind Trek, get Abrams or some of the cast over to BBC TV centre in london for some chat show circuits!!! Jonathan Ross is a massive Trek fan and loves Simon Pegg! at least send a big poster to put somewhere – perhaps a blimp in the shape of the new Enterprise with the date and title of the film blazoned across its sides and bottom!

232. ZoomZoom - January 6, 2008

#220 I have to be honest, this is the first time that Mr Orci has come across as anywhere near ‘nice’. And judging #212, classy as well.

Being kicked about by AICN clearly brings the best out of him!
My opinion has well and truly changed. :)

233. steve adams - January 6, 2008

Give in to the BBC JJ, they have a great loyal fanbase…..
Doctor Who and Red Dwarf are spectacular!

234. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 6, 2008

200. Irishtrekkie


235. AJ - January 6, 2008

I could not suspend my disbelief in Transformers that these giant living supercomputers actually communicated with each other by speaking audible English. Probably needed to go to Starbucks to access WiFi so they could transmit data to one another. I suppose it’s TF canon, which I do not know.

In any case, my faith in Mr. Orci and the team continues to hold, and his candor on this thread is a godsend.

236. Kirk Thatcher - January 6, 2008

Who’s to say that part of the Enterprise, such as the phaser banks, couldn’t be constructed at the site formally known as area 51, then transported into space for final construction? Starfleet most likely would have taken over former military sites. Obviously, a difficult plot point to portray as you would need some backstory to explain it – however, not necessarily in violation of canon.

We know the approximate size of the Enterprise of the 5-year mission era- the 1701 is roughly the size of the Enterprise aircraft carrier (per Making of Star Trek). Following military tradition, the bridge was small. That was one of the appeals of Star Trek to me: how Roddenberry tried to convey the feeling of a Naval aircraft carrier or Submarine in space. I hope that in this current rendition of Star Trek the Naval and military references, such as referring to female officers as, “Sir”, remain.

237. baggy pants - January 6, 2008

i don’t think the “visual handoff” implies CG. i think its says that Nimoy holds up his hand and then Quinto holds up his, blocking it from our view — effectively replacing it. the two Spocks must meet at some point.

238. baggy pants - January 6, 2008

…two of the three, i mean.

239. Kirk Thatcher - January 6, 2008

There’s a plot point for Star Trek that I never fully understood and maybe I missed the explanation somewhere along the way: why was the center of the Star Trek universe, Starfleet -the seat of government if you will, set in San Francisco and not Washington DC? It would seem that the infrastructure would be present in Washington, unless it was destroyed in the Third World War. In the era of the Vietnam War, was that Roddenberry’s way of showing that the Hippies and Peaceniks eventually won? Was Star Trek’s idyllic future borne out of the Summer of Love?

240. Chris M - January 6, 2008

Firstly thank you Roberto Orci for chatting to us fans. Have cool is it that we get to chat to one of the writers of Star Trek!

One of the great things about the internet is that anyone from around the globe can come on here and post a comment. I myself am in Melbourne, Australia.

Unfortunately this is one of the worst things about the internet. Any idiot, such as the guy that posted the review on AICN, can say that they have been given a copy of the script from a supposed “source” and then proceed to say whatever they like about.

Personally I don’t really pay attention to anything that is said about the movie unless it is posted on this site.

And Roberto I wouldn’t take too much notice of this sort of stuff. It’s one of the things that come with working on Star Trek. Just ask Rick Berman and Brannon Braga!

I’m going to reserve judgement on the movie until after I have actually seen it. I’m really hoping it’s gonna be something special.

One thing is for sure, I have never anticipated or been this excited about Star Trek!

I just had a week and a half off work over the Xmas and New Years break and as it is Summer here and I don’t like the heat much I spent most of my time in air conditioned comfort and a lot of that time watching Star Trek or on Facebook answering Star Trek trivia questions. Even now I’m watching the Sci Fi Channel which air and episode of all five Star Trek series on a Sunday night!

Simply put I can’t wait for the Star Trek to come out!!!!

241. Trekee - January 6, 2008

I meant to add this last night, but I was sleepy…

There was a book set just before the Motion Picture which talked about the assembly of the refitted Enterprise in spacedock, but which had the primary hull (maybe other parts) being worked on in San Francisco and then under it’s own power if I recall correctly, it lifted off and met with the rest of the ship for final assembly.

I always liked the idea, though I think there was something in a long lost Mr Scott’s Guide the Enterprise which said the primary hull could only be a lifeboat and not achieve orbit on its own. Again, it was a long time ago and the refit 1701 certainly had more obvious thrusters around the sides to make this feasible.

But as I said, I liked the idea and when Lost in Space The Movie (I know, I know) came out, the launch of the Jupiter did put me in mind of the orginal idea.

So it’s not pre established ‘canon’ to build the big E on Earth and assemble in space, but I’m sure it doesn’t violate it either.

Seeing the primary hull lift off in the dawn sunlight would be rather cool, don’t you think? :-)

242. STFAN - January 6, 2008

Mr. Orci!
Have you see Cloverfield? Is it good?

243. CanuckLou - January 6, 2008

Its amazing to experience the instantaneous communication available to us today. Going back to 1966 and remembering scouring magazines and tv guides and newspapers for even a scrap of Trek info its incredible how things have changed today.

Personal comments from the very people involved in the latest ST project is now possible. I sit back and think about it and am totally floored.

Anthony – and his team, Roberto, Leonard, and who knows whom else in the future, thanks for making us part of the experience of seeing a new Trek project come to fruition.

244. Trekee - January 6, 2008

#239 – I think Paris was where the President of the Federation was based in ST6 which is more akin to what you mean.

Starfleet isn’t the seat of government, it’s the head of the military, or probably more accurately, the navy – so SF is as good a place as any, though I would have preferred somewhere non-US, which would have been a bolder move but utterly un-acceptable to the US studios… ;-)

Having the president of the US in Starfleet headquarters in ST4 was just one of those happy co-incidences that makes it easier to build sets… there is a lot of blurring of Fereration and Starfleet which would certainly go against the utopian ideals of Roddenberry but I doubt it’s ever anything than writers taking shortcuts.

I think DS9 flirted the most with a dystopian, or rather, a non-utopian future when they had martial law on Earth, but they played it well.

The balance between a utopia and having Trek centre round a military has always been interesting. The enterprise was an exploration vessel, but often became the Federation police vessel, especially near the end of TOS. Roddenberry had a military background if I recall, so he wasn’t an out and out peacenik and he did seem to value the principles of standing up to outside aggression.

When I was at university a long, long time ago, people tended to think trek was a bit overly aggressive. Kirk in particular needed his anger and his pain to be ‘human’.

245. New Horizon - January 6, 2008

– Mr. Orci –

My mind is wide open to your version of Star Trek. I’m sure it will be great!

246. cugel the clever - January 6, 2008

Mr Orci,

Can you tell is whether there has been any discussion of sequel films and if so, whether they could be set in post-TOS timeframes?

247. cugel the clever - January 6, 2008

tell us *

(i hate that we can’t edit posts!)

248. J.D. Lee - January 6, 2008

I would like a new poster of young kirk and spock …

similiar to this pose.. just replace the other guy with chris pine…×15-Run_02.jpeg/view/

Thanks ;)

249. Doorchime - January 6, 2008

#42 & Mr. Orci:

“[edit] Voice
In Search of… (1976-1982): Narrator
The Transformers: The Movie (1986) Galvatron”

Could that be a clue of your next job for Michael Bay :) ?

250. Star Trek XI: Fakten, Gerchte, Infos - Seite 62 - SciFi-Forum - January 6, 2008

[…] 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. AICN Has More Trek Rumors – Orci Responds | Toll, er basht auf AICN rum. Sie mochten Transformers nicht (kann ich verstehen), also machen sie jetzt auch dieses Projekt schlecht. Klassisch Und nur von Nimoy will er sich erzhlen lassen ob sie mit dem Universum richtig umgehen? Alle anderen haben keine Ahnung? Dazu fllt mir nur ein: Arrogant. __________________ Mein Projekt: Star Trek: The Dominion War Kommentare, Fragen, Anregungen, Lob und konstruktive Kritik sind willkommen… Star Trek XI: Fakten, Gerchte und Infos – der Sammelpost ! aktueller & bunter als Memory Alpha ! Die deutsche Zusammenfassung zum neuem Star Trek Film im Scifi-Forum – Mitarbeit ist erwnscht… Gendert von Cmdr. Ch`ReI (Gestern um 23:01 Uhr). Grund: Antwort auf eigenen Beitrag innerhalb von 24 Stunden! […]

251. Loccy - January 6, 2008

Anyone who hasn’t gone onto the AICN talkback and read through Bob’s comments to the flamers should do so immediately. ROTFL-tastic.

Particularly to one flamer:

“Thanks dude. It truly is a monumental task to get hired again and again without having an ounce of talent or integrity. Thank you for noticing. I think it’s Alex Kurtzman’s cooking that does it.”

Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise, you keep fighting the good fight, Bob.

252. Craig - January 6, 2008

This is another reason just to come here for Trek news since Orci and people from the movie post here and confirm if the rumors are not true and Anthony also backs it up with his sources.

253. Ryan H. - January 6, 2008

I just went to the AICN message board to view the discussion, and I can say that there is something fundamentally wrong with the people posting there. They must hate humanity or something.

Thank you Mr. Orci for defending yourself and your work. I’m a huge fan of both. It makes me glad to see some writers have the cujones to do what you’re doing.

254. Matt - January 6, 2008

ref. 197
“the external stuff was a means to an end”

I disagree. The characters knew who they were. Sometimes they had personal trial, as in City on the Edge of Forever, and Amok Time.

But where did the thrills come from? Some external that they discovered.

If, in the new Trek, all we see are actually “cool Star Trek Things we already know” – that will be a bit of a disappointment.

I still love TOS. A new planet every week. That worked for me. The characters didn’t change that much. I always assumed Kirk and Spock were naturals – in the sense that they just gradually ascended to their posts. And in those posts – what made the Enterprise moment special – was that they were uniquely poised to be the BEST ship in the fleet. Look at all the other captains we met in TOS. Space travel was not easy, and often ended in unhappy consequences. Kirk wasn’t just a guy full of pride. He also had humility in the possibilities of his humanity. He didn’t become Gary Mitchell. And that was the start of the series. The reason why the series exists.

Constantly trying to build the main characters is called navel gazing. Although I love the new BSG (the third best SF series ever) the main problems with the show are inconsistencies developed because the show tries to do just a little too much. Although that is the point of BSG, it’s not true for TOS. We are all maleable to some extent, but how much do we really change?

I want Strange New Worlds. Not Romulans.

255. QcJoe - January 6, 2008

This is the same website that had its main hate monger Harry claim that he was able to read the script of StarWars Ep2. He goes on to say that this movie is on the same lvl as Empire. He also stated that the movie opens with a huge water battle.
I also remeber the first AvP. That screening was alo proven a lie based off of this guys review of what happens. I go to this site from time to time just for some news here and there ,but also take every thing with a grain of salt.

256. JBS - January 6, 2008

#251 Loccy, I have not visited AICN, but am tepted to just for the reason you mentioned – sounds entertaining to read Roberto’s responces. But I would hate to give them one more hit than they deserve. This kind of controversy is exactly what they want: it increases the number of hits their web site gets – so they can show it off to advertisers and get more money from them – and then they will continue posting half-baked controversial rumors because it gets them the results they want. Having Roberto respond to their posters only increases the site’s notariety, but not responding would allow the rumors to be interpreted as truth. Truly, a no win scenario.

257. Joel - January 6, 2008

Due to the awesome secrecy with Star Trek, which I totally dig (maybe for the first time in the history of major motion pictures, very few details will be released outside of production team members), sites like AICN are going to post frivolous information about the film to show off their angst with the lack of information coming out about Star Trek. We finally have a team of filmmakers, actors, writers, etc. who are keeping everything quiet and keeping all the fans on the edge of their seat in anticipation. It’s not just great marketing, it shows that these guys have morals.

How many films since the advent of the internet have been completely ruined by real insider information. We have a film where we not only are keeping ourselves guessing at what’s going to happen, but we actually have one of the key production members, Roberto Orci, talking to us here on

So rarely would this happen in so many other productions out there, and it’s a shame AICN posted that trashing of the script knowing just as much information as we do.

258. MikeG - January 6, 2008

This really is a GREAT site, and I visit every single day. Thank you, Anthony. The opportunity to actually hear directly from a Trek writer – who is under no obligation, whatsoever, to speak to any of us – is one of the coolest gifts any fan could ask for. Thank you, Roberto.
I’m not particularly interested in AICN’s (or anyone else’s) speculations, spoilers, criticisms or other negative comments about this new film. Such critics are just a load of static attempting to disrupt and distract us (fans) from being excited about the project and just simply enjoying our excitement. Historically, it has always been true that when someone achieves some level of success, there is always someone out there trying to shoot them down. I remember the Beatles “White Album” getting panned when it came out… that album went on to become one of the Beatles’ best-selling albums, and one of the best-selling albums ever. I have no doubt there will be people ripping the new ST to shreds, but I also have no doubt there will be significant numbers of people who will truly love the film. So, all you nay-sayers, consider this: from everything we have read so far (primarily from THIS site, mind you), we should have no doubt that JJ and team are serious and sincere ST fans, who love what ST USED TO BE. Their fondness for the characters and the world that Gene Roddenberry created (and not the world the previous producers of ST created), should be clear evidence to everyone that the new producers and writers are doing their damndest to give the fans what they want, while also making a film that will appeal to many people. What more could anyone ask of them??? It drives me crazy when I hear people commenting and criticizing on things they don’t really know about… I mean, the movie isn’t even finished shooting, for crissakes. How about some PATIENCE? and let’s actually SEE the movie before making rather absolutist comments, eh? I am thrilled that ST is coming back, and I am excited as hell about seeing this movie. I’m not letting anyone spoil that for me.

259. Green-blooded-bastard - January 6, 2008

200. Irishtrekkie – January 5, 2008

I respect your points, but I think you are failing to see mine. I too would like this to be a great Star Trek movie, however, this wont be a great “YOUR Star Trek” movie, and if you go into the theater expecting to simply see different actors in your favorite uniforms and TV sets mimicking the speech and behavior of the actors that PORTRAYED these parts 40 years ago and it’s going to be like home again, you will walk out of the theater very disappointed. I’m sure there will be nods to the original series and maybe a few other surprises to make the film feel a bit more familiar to us, but as I said earlier, I (as in myself) am going into the theater with a completely open mind because I know when an actor PLAYS a part, he brings with him his own acting experience and style, and it will be different than what you’re used to seeing with TOS. I’m not saying because it’s a reboot/revamp that it’s going to be something so completely different it might as well be anything with a Star Trek label on it, I’m just saying this will not be your fathers Star Trek. Heck, with few exceptions, none of the actors playing any of the familiar Star Trek roles were even born when the original series was on, no less were fans of it. Nimoy is there and that’s the tie-in they’re using. There’s your familiarity. That and hopefully the general shape of the Enterprise.

Believe me, I love Star Trek and I love the message it delivers, but I know movies, and I know directors and producers have their “vision” of how a movie should be made, even an iconic one. Can anyone here say Superman Returns was better than the first Reeves movie? I can’t. Can anyone here say Star Wars Episode I was better than Star Wars IV A New Hope? I can’t, and those two were written and directed by the same idiot! Time has that effect on people, even writers, directors, producers and the like. New technologies to use, new model-making techniques, new acting styles and huge budgets make for a different type of movie. I understand that just donning the uniform doesn’t make for a Star Trek movie, so why can’t you? If you go to see the film, go hoping to see a great movie first, then a great Star Trek movie. If it’s a great movie, it will more than likely be a great Star Trek movie. They can’t please everyone you know.

Reboot: Ang Lee’s Hulk stunk, IMHO, but some people liked it. Some. Marvel is rebooting it. New actors bring something new to the table. New director as well. New script, new sets and locations, new enemies (enemies only the Hulk could possibly fight), new story and script, NEW NEW NEW! Marvel knew the second they saw Lee’s Hulk that it wasn’t the Hulk they had created and knew it could be done different. Better, perhaps, but different for certain. There will be a lot of changes here, hopefully for the better.

Reboot: Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins is great, again, IMHO. At least when I compare it to Burton’s. Definitely different to say the least. A new actor made a hell of a difference with Christian Bale and a more thorough origin story fleshed out the Wayne/Batman character a lot better, not just going over the catalyst for Bruce Wayne ‘s transformation, but the development of Batman himself using Wayne’s fortune to build a better Batman that Burton could. I think it was a great opportunity to make a well deserved reboot. There were a lot of changes made here.

Reboot: Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns was little more than a remake of the original Superman. I’m not going to go point for point here because it would take entirely too long, but suffice it to say i wasn’t pleased with the movie. I thought the acting was ok (Spacey was great), but for the most part, this wasn’t a reboot, it was a copy and a good example of the difference between a remake and a reboot. A reboot usually involves great change.

Expect no less from this movie and you wont be disappointed. Remember, reboot means change, even of an ICONIC 40 year old TV show sometimes. They’re not looking to please the 250+ posters here, they are looking to bring in the widest demographic they can and attract new people that might not necessarily have liked Star Trek. It has to be a good movie FIRST. For all you know, they might even be thinking long-term, as in, a new TV series based off the original and using this new movie as a springboard. They certainly wont be simply copying TOS show for show. They have to make something that will be their own, but in the tradition of TOS with a little luck.

260. Greg2600 - January 6, 2008

My opinion has always been that while the script is hugely important to a film, the work of the director, in my view, is often moreso. In terms of Transformers, as a life long fan, I was very hopeful. The finished product was a well done film. However, as a life long Bot-Head, too much of it was not in the “spirit” of the original. Yet on almost every point of contention I had, I have read statements directly made by Michael Bay that they were his choices. To say the least, I am not a Michael Bay fan. However, from reading interviews and such, I’ve found that the story from DeSanto and Murphy up through Orci and Kurtzman was still a very cool one. Unfortunately, once it came time for Bay…..splat! I really enjoy what Abrams has done so far in other work, and so I am still very intrigued. Without Shatner, my level is simply intrigued and interested, not out of the ballpark fanatical, as I am with Indiana Jones. However, I am simply not going to start bad mouthing rumors on the script when Nimoy loves it. I am clearly a Shatner nut, but Nimoy is a huge person to me as well. The one place where this film would lose me is if J.J. ditches the seriousness of Trek. This might sound like bad business, but it is vital that Star Trek remain a show that makes you think, and not just chomp popcorn. Then you’ve become Star Wars (during which I fell asleep in ep. II and III)

261. No foolin - January 6, 2008

ummm….I can quarantee the movie will suck

I am an insider….B & B have had some involvement

262. Viking - January 6, 2008

#236 Kirk Thatcher – you are correct, sir. The navy routinely farms out component construction to various other agencies and contractors, and ferries them in for final construction at the shipyard. There’s no reason to think they still wouldn’t be doing the same thing two centuries from now, just as we are today, with various countries building International Space Station modules and shipping them to us for delivery and installation via our shuttles. Things such as the warp and computer cores, bridge module, nacelle components, etc. would be pre-fabricated offsite, and delivered to spacedock as each phase of construction called for them. We know Area 51 exists in our time; we’ve been developing advanced technology out there for decades. There’s no reason to think that concept couldn’t be worked into the script without violating canon. As to how much, if any, ‘canon’ is violated overall in the film, I imagine we’ll get our first glimpse in two weeks. But if Trek is a vision of our future, then you get there by grounding it in our past and present. Otherwise, it becomes Star Wars.

Regardless of whether the facility plays a part in the movie, Anthony is right – that AICN article was a blatant hit piece on Orci & Co. from the beginning, and I think most people called bullshit on it before the end of the first paragraph.

263. No foolin - January 6, 2008

just kidding

264. cw - January 6, 2008

Heh. Whatever.
Truth is, Transformers was a very lazy writing job. Orci and Kurtzman did a heck of a lot better on Mission Impossible 3… and because of that I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for Star Trek.
That said, I’d listen to Nimoy a lot sooner than I would listen to Orci. He’s established as not even taking constructive criticism well, and he is also full of the smelly stuff. This is a guy who swore up and down that mass shifting is bad, evil, stupid and that Transformers would have no stupid mass shifting- and then delivers TWO EXAMPLES of mass shidting in the movie.
I bet Orci will go down as one of those rarities who corresponds with the fans, but is it really legitimate if he is full of crap and harbors a belief of “screw the fans”?

265. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 6, 2008

I thought Trek WAS based on the actual events of our proud military operating out of Area 51. Glad to hear its all going mainstream. Is XI part of the full public disclosure I’ve been hearing about?

266. Viking - January 6, 2008

Roberto, you ought to see if the gang at ILM can work in some flames down the side of something – a construction tug, maybe, or what the hell – THE GALILEO! – just as an ‘in your face’ statement on the whole redesign debate. LOL :-)

267. Xai - January 6, 2008

264. cw – January 6, 2008
“Heh. Whatever.
Truth is, Transformers was a very lazy writing job. Orci and Kurtzman did a heck of a lot better on Mission Impossible 3… and because of that I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for Star Trek.
That said, I’d listen to Nimoy a lot sooner than I would listen to Orci. He’s established as not even taking constructive criticism well, and he is also full of the smelly stuff. This is a guy who swore up and down that mass shifting is bad, evil, stupid and that Transformers would have no stupid mass shifting- and then delivers TWO EXAMPLES of mass shidting in the movie.
I bet Orci will go down as one of those rarities who corresponds with the fans, but is it really legitimate if he is full of crap and harbors a belief of “screw the fans”?”

I think there’s a difference between criticism and insult and you’ve crossed it. The next time you see Orci on here ask him your question directly, “smelly stuff” and all.

268. sean - January 6, 2008

What I think people fail to recognize with Transformers is that it was based on a cheesy 1980’s cartoon. It wasn’t the Illiad. It was a cartoon about good transforming robots interacting with teenagers while saving the Earth from bad transforming robots. That’s it. And that’s what the movie was about.

I think the passage of time – coupled with the fact that many adults (primarily males) had Transformer toys as kids – seems to have created a false sense of meaning within that show. It was fun and entertaining for 12 year-old boys (most of whom probably loved the movie), and really that’s about it. If you approach the movie with that in mind, it’s pretty good for what it is.

Star Trek, on the other hand, has very strong source material (much like MI:III did). On that basis as well as all the positive and near fanboyish comments the producers & writers have made about Star Trek (Roberto included), I think we should have a little confidence and wait for a finished product. I doubt they’ll have Spock saying ‘My bad’. Have a little faith.

269. me - January 6, 2008

I wonder if the plot might me more a simple constructed one like Nemesis or (better made) First Contact
or at least a little bit more complex like STVI with all its analogies (Praxis – Tschernobyl e.g.).

270. cw - January 6, 2008

267=”I think there’s a difference between criticism and insult and you’ve crossed it. The next time you see Orci on here ask him your question directly, “smelly stuff” and all.”

Well, since you have no freaking clue about the frame of context I am referring, let me re-assure you about what I meant:
He can’t take constructive criticimsm, and he is also full of crap. Apparently you think they are the same; I assure you that they are not. Constructive criticism doesn’t mean kissing his ass like a lot of blind supporters do; they are quick to demonize those who might not like something.

271. Xai - January 6, 2008

too funny I posted over at Ain’t it Crap and I think they took it down

272. Xai - January 6, 2008

270. cw – January 6, 2008

Well, since you have no freaking clue about the frame of context I am referring, let me re-assure you about what I meant:
He can’t take constructive criticimsm, and he is also full of crap. Apparently you think they are the same; I assure you that they are not. Constructive criticism doesn’t mean kissing his ass like a lot of blind supporters do; they are quick to demonize those who might not like something.

I don’t need you to “re-assure” me on what you meant. I got it. You can’t give constructive criticism without being insulting. That’s obvious.

I don’t care if you have an opinion or what it is. MY point is that you were insulting. That’s a great way to get a point across.

273. me - January 6, 2008

God, no reason to become personal. It’s just a movie.
You can’t satisfy everybody anyway, but would be interesting to see wich audience it will be made for and so Paramount thinks as most important.

274. roberto orci - January 6, 2008


Ah, the old mass shifting debate.

The Transformers DID NOT mass shift. When I said no mass shifting I was referring to THE CHARACTERS. Many like you then saw it as a cheat to have their macguffin (THE ALLSPAK) mass shift. The analogy I always use to justify the difference is this: Inidiana Jones and the Nazi in the first movie are the CHARACTERS, and such have no magical properties. However, their macguffin, THE ARK, does. So the ark has the power of God coming out of it and the characters don’t. The Allspark is the Transformer’s Ark. Pretty straight forward in my mind.

It’s weird to have become so much a part of the establishment in some minds that they believe I would spend hours here corresponding with people out of some cynical passive aggressive desire to “screw the fans” as you say.

275. Harry Ballz - January 6, 2008

Hey, Mr. Orci….

congrats on passing your OWN version of the Kobayashi Maru test I…almost…got you to take yesterday!

Hope you enjoyed it half as much as I did… :)

276. mr.x - January 6, 2008

Which description of STXI would be the best you could imagine from critics

277. Thomas - January 6, 2008

I have a theory regarding the Area 51 rumor: Sometime about mid-summer of ’07, there were the first small rumors that Indiana Jones 4 might involve a scene in Area 51. Of course, there has now been a subsequent rumor that Indy will deal with aliens in the new movie. Perhaps some aspect of that rumor became attached to Trek. They are both Paramount properties, after all. Besides, people have been known to create stories with the flimiest evidence or sources to back it up. Perhaps because they are both Paramount movies, that’s enough to make the story “true”.

278. Xai - January 6, 2008

roberto orci
some days are better than others..yes?



279. AJ - January 6, 2008

#257: “Great marketing?” There has been no marketing except for two posters. Ask anyone not on this board what they have heard about STXI, and most will say “Star Track? Is it still around?”

There have been targeted bursts of potentially covert photos and leaks of info which may or not be there to allow JJ/Mr. Orci et al to get some feedback as the project moves through production. That is not marketing, but free research.

Paramount will pay Nielsen a gazillion quatloos to screen the near-finished product to Joe and Jane Sixpack, and then dumb the film down or sex it up as the panels require. TWOK’s ending came out of a panel. It was the compromise to the test audience.

The real “marketing” starts with the teaser. Hopefully, JJ won’t disappoint in the run-up to 25 December.

280. - January 6, 2008

While I am cautiously optimistic regarding this film I have to say that I absolutely HATED Transformers. In particular the idiot parent, T-formers that talked like 15 year olds from The Valley and the whole masturbation talk scene.

I really hope Trek is different.


281. Trekee - January 6, 2008

#279 – the ‘marketing’ has already started. You are right though, many people will have forgotten about Trek these last few years, but that isn’t to say that they’ll not want to go see a movie about Dr Spock (sic) played by that Sylar actor once they hear about it.

The press with Shatner was mainstream reporting and all worked (intentional or not) to start the build up in the minds of the public so that by the time the proper trailers, posters and TV spots hit, they’ll be all soft, pulpy and receptive to wanting to see the movie. I’d expect they’ll hit on the 12 year olds with the SFX and the old timers with the nostalgia.

We’re already all soft, pulpy and receptive here (well, not ALL of us to be fair)…

As for the ending being decided by committee, that happens with what, 100% of Hollywood films? I’m not expecting some cliffhanging, challenging ending that leaves the audience flat. They aren’t allowed to make those sort of films with a budget over £1.59. It’ll have the ending that makes the audience leave feeling good, so they go and tell everyone what a good movie it was. It’s the way of it. It’s the formula.

I think the film is being hyped nice and gently already. Look at the outbursts from the AICN “scoop” (sic 2).

282. Anthony - January 6, 2008

A LITTLE OVERSIMPLIFICATION: Star Wars vs. Star Trek; I prefer the geeks of Star Trek lore over those of Star Wars any day…sorry George. They are, by nature, very polarizing franchises. Similarly most people I know who like Led Zeppelin and/or Eric Clapton aren’t particularly fond of Springsteen and/or The Who. If you watch 60 Minutes, you may skip 20/20. If you voted for Bush….well, you’re an idiot. You get my point, no? So, my money is on the probability that writers from AICN not only prefer Star Wars (a much simpler-easy to follow tale…een less thoughtful then Bambi) but also listen to Led Zeppelin (an over-rated band who’s music only sounds good when you’re high), probably don’t watch any news programs and likely voted for our current president. Yes, I like Star Trek geeks much more. (PS: I do like Star Wars…for what it is)

283. Trekboi - January 6, 2008

it had to be a Star Wars fan to start all of this didnt it! will the rivalry never end?
Between Star Trek Vs Star Wars- Blueray Vs HD DVD and the War on Terror im afraid to go outside! good thing i have 28 years of Star Trek on DVD to explore/escape too.

As far as the script- a few bad lines of dialogue (Transformers literaly only had a couple of cringe-worthy ones- “She’s a Criminal- Criminals r hot!” & “Im never giving u this allspark”) doesnt make it a bad script/story/idea.
I loved Transformers- i saw it 5 times in the cinema- 6 since getting it on DVD (dont want to wear it out) but i can admit i wish i had been a part of production, im very Jealous of the main contributors and would have done a few things differently- (mostly minor and superficial) so i think a lot of the insulting rudeness justified as criticism comes from jealosy.
Id consider doing many imoral things to be in mr Orci’s place right now- but im not so im going to be happy for his career success, wish him well- appoligise for the bitchy/jealous “critics”, prey they dont make any big mistakes with the movie and enjoy what is to come with an open mind/spirit!

if showing some respect to other people on the message boards fan or filmmaker makes me a kiss ass then let me pucker up…

284. Craig - January 6, 2008

Mr. Orci have you read some fan comments about they should have gone foward instead of backward? I am excited about the new movie seeing how the new TOS era will look. Is their nothing left in the post Nemesis movie or TV series?

285. bmar - January 6, 2008

Funny, I like Zeppelin, Clapton, Springsteen and The Who. Worlds don’t have to be divided into “my camp” and “your camp” there are plenty of people who can appreciate facets of everything…Trek, SW, hell, even Battlestar Galactica. None of it’s perfect by a long shot, but they all tip the scales towards good, rather than bad, and they all have had moments of greatness.

Zealots are dangerous people – whether it’s in a religious context, polititcal context, musical context or movie/tv context. ANYONE who says “THIS is fantastic, everything else sucks, and if YOU don’t believe what I believe, then there is something wrong with YOU” is someone to be ignored, or watched VERY carefully.

The folks at AICN are opinionated fanboys and zealots for their own personal faves. They’re not alone. There’s plenty out there in fandom, and some even around here. It’s just that AICN’s talkbacks tend to be less mature and more mean spirited than they are here. As for Harry Knowles, Moriarty and the gang over there – I’ve had moments when I’ve agreed with them, and moments when I’ve thought they’ve had their heads up their a$$es – but they are entitled to their opinions, nonetheless.

It’s like they said when I was in COM Law 401 (ah, the heady days of college) – I may not like what you say, but I’ll defend your right to say it. If you don’t like what they say at AICN, then don’t go there. It’ll keep your blood pressure down.

286. Decius is Stonn, Stonn is Decius - January 6, 2008


wouldn’t you admit that time-travel to change history is a bit of a tired twist? i assume you regarded it as a challenge at least, to make it an original one.

because, of course, making do with iconic characters, dealing with relationships and subtexts, etc., is MUCH harder when left alone with them. ;)

287. Craig - January 6, 2008

#286 How do we that their really is time-travel involved? It could just be a real time story.

288. Bronto Dan - January 6, 2008

Dear Mr. Orci

I can hardly wait to see the movie. I trust you and everyone on the production team his giving their 100% and more to make this one of the best Trek ever. Can’t wait for the trailer two!!

I had a little question for you. I just finisht TWoK and TSfS. I just loved the soundtrack by James Horner. Do you think the movie will go with the same type of soundtrack.

Sure their will always be people with complaint but we are talking trek here, nobody even agree on wich movie and/or serie is the best or even the worst!!

Anyway just wanted to take a few secondes here to say good luck with everything and I’m sure it will turn out all good!!!

Oh and good luck with the strike. Hope those &/*!&£ gives the writers what they truly deserves.

A Montreal Star Trek fan.

289. ObiWanCon - January 6, 2008

I’ll keep it simple



I LOVE both it’s that simple.

290. Bono Luthor - January 6, 2008

Hi Roberto

I missed seeing Transformers last year due to arranging a marriage (I know, where is my dedication) and only got to grips with it on DVD as a Christmas present.

Just want to let you know that I am in love with this movie right now, and can’t wait to see it again.

The film swept me up in it like movies used to do when I was a kid and probably the last film to do that was the LOTR trilogy, so thanks and congrats on the movie.

On top of that me and Mrs Bono watched MI3 again tonight, a film we both love.

My Shatner issues put to one side, after Transformers I am very excited about what you guys will bring to this new movie.

As a ‘wannabe’ writer myself, I just want to say thanks for those two and thanks for stopping by here. I have a lot of faith in you after watching Transformers and will be going out to by the two disc edition to further the geekgasm that it has given me.

Cheers and Happy New Year from the UK

291. Absoroka - January 6, 2008

#282. Anthony

What happened to leaving politics out of this website? This is about Trek, not a commentary on comparing apples to oranges. You insult Republicans, Conservatives, and you insult Led Zeppelin Fans. I don’t get high and I still think that Zeppelin is in the top 3 of all time best. I have a lot of comments to make regarding or past Liberal President but this is not the time or the place. Keep the subject matter at hand and don’t alienate people with your irrelevant opinions. I have wathched Sart Trek for the whole 37 years of my life and not once has anyone called me a geek.

292. sean - January 6, 2008

What if I hate Zeppelin, love Clapton, hate Springsteen, and love The Who? Does that mean I have a split-personality?

293. Edith Keeler - January 6, 2008

But really, Mr. Orci – why put James Cawley in yet another ST movie – even if he is in a cameo role where he doesn’t have a chance to over act?

Doesn’t he know that those sideburns and pompadour are centuries out of style in the 23rd century?

294. Thomas - January 6, 2008

Nimoy in ’08!

295. cd - January 6, 2008

#274 – I am encouraged by the fact that Mr. Orci is even thinking about stuff like mass shifting: his reasoning on it makes perfect sense. If they put the same kind of thought into Star Trek: I am somewhat slightly cautiously optimistic again. >;>}

296. Anthony Pascale - January 6, 2008

282 – Anthony – no politics

297. Jaz Hayre - January 6, 2008

Well done Mr. Orci!

Transformers was a good film, I watched it with no expectations and it turned out to be one of the best films of the years. What happened to the transformers song?

As for AICN, admittedly, their seal of approval is indeed important. However, that said, I don’t remember them attacking Braga/Berman all that much and praised some of the most ridiculous episodes in the past.

I have great respect, previous Trek directors/writers/producers have never dared face the wrath of Trekkies in the past. Your comments give me hope!

298. Xai - January 6, 2008

297. Jaz Hayre – January 6, 2008

“As for AICN, admittedly, their seal of approval is indeed important. ”

–I hope you are joking.

299. Mr Snuffleupacus - January 6, 2008

What’s unfortunate is that Orci invited those dweebs and losers from AICN to come HERE to debate…I winced when I read that….

I guess there will be an upsurge in F-bombs and profanity here at Trekmovie after this invitation.

Roberto, what were you thinking dude?

LOL *looks concerned*

300. Lostrod - January 6, 2008

Wow. Had to brace myself and wade through the Talkback thread at AICN and Mr. Orci has been a busy poster. Seems like a hundred posts so far and I’m still not through.

BTW – he did post an interesting comment about how the rumor that Kirk is picketed by other cadets:

I think I just figured out where that whole picketer thing came from. The WGA did indeed picket the Star Trek set one day, and some did indeed write “KIRK CHEATED” on their WGA strike signs as a joke! So witness reports of seeing that near set are probably true. However, it was an actual strike!

301. Lord Garth Formerly of Izar - January 6, 2008

300 bottles of beer on the wall…. 300 bottles of beer….. take one down pass it around 300

302. MikeG - January 6, 2008

I don’t understand how anyone can rag on the movie Transformers. It’s a cartoon, isn’t it? Even if it’s done with live actors and awesome cgi, it’s still a cartoon, or comic book, isn’t it? Did you expect a cerebral film, like 2001? Did you expect more adult content, like Die Hard?
I never got into Transformers, cos they weren’t around when I was a kid. I saw the movie at a friend’s house when it came out on dvd, and I had absolutely no preconceptions at all. I watched it, I really loved watching Megan Fox, and otherwise enjoyed the movie. I took it in, for what it was. Some of you groovy cats out there have got to learn to lighten up… If you apply the same kind of attitude towards everything else in life, poor you…

SPOCK: You must learn to govern your passion…. It will be your undoing…

303. Andy Patterson - January 6, 2008

I said this in another place but I still feel it so I’ll say it here…

I realize this is all rumor and it’s dangerous to get too caught up in conjecture…

but….if it’s true that Kirk is such a dissapointing dummy of a character, as the rumor states, then they should reboot the whole thing. Kirk wasn’t a slacker. Gary Mitchell and Finnegan both speak about how stiff he was. The perfect student/cadet. Career driven and sure of who he was from the get-go. Basically a goodie, brown nosing straight A student who liked to get it on with the chicks also. But, I never figured Kirk for a braggart. He’s who he was and had a strong libido. Not a dude. I’m really scared about what dumbed down sensibilities JJ and the team will have for our young Kirk. I’m not calling JJ the genius everyone else is until I see this thing.

I think it’s a mistake, mistake if they’re skewing this to a youth market just to try and be hip.

My thoughts on the matter.

304. Xai, - January 6, 2008

303. Andy Patterson – January 6, 2008

go sample #154 and don’t believe everything you read on the internet.

305. Andy Patterson - January 6, 2008

Hmm,…we’ll see.

306. Xai, - January 6, 2008

305 Andy Patterson

Here’s a quote from Roberto Orci, describing Pine and Kirk. This doesn’t sound like a dumbed down Kirk to me…

“Chris Pine has two things which are very difficult to find simultaneously. He has the maverick nature of an extremely motivated, cocky guy who doesn’t play by the rules, who is intelligent enough and can command sufficient respect to be an astronaut.”

“But Pine also conveys the intelligence of a starship captain. It’s difficult to find a good-looking guy who you would believe can fill the old Kirk shoes of getting into a fist fight while also having a Ph.D. in astrophysics. That’s a tough one, because you need that as he has to face the intelligence of Mr. Spock [played in his younger years by Zachary Quinto]. Chris has a great sense of humor but is also able to get serious on a dime to step in and out of leadership while being fun.”

307. I AM THX-1138 - January 6, 2008

OK, did I miss anything?

I see Garth and Harry have tried to stir the pot. Xai is starting fights at AICN. Roberto Orci is talking to everyone again and I’m off playing a gig. Great.

Since I’m an expert, I’ll be glad to answer any Trek related questions. Just understand that I will lie and/or provide bad information.

One question for Mr. Orci:

What about Timmy?

308. Harry Ballz - January 6, 2008

THX……you should have been there yesterday……it was GLORIOUS!! :)

309. I AM THX-1138 - January 6, 2008

It looked like fun, Harry. Orci is a tough fish. He didn’t take the bait.

But area 51 is ridiculous. Only an idiot who had never seen Trek would write something so moronic. I just KNOW that you didn’t believe that. Anyone who did needs to get the hook out of their mouth.

AICN is good for getting advance video and watching previews. And to read the talk-back and discover that you aren’t the lowest rung on the internet food chain. Actually over here, we are quite high up. Just remember, “it ‘aint reel news”.

310. roberto orci - January 6, 2008


Sorry. Trying to pump up my favorite Trek site. Plus, now Anthony can ban them all!

311. Non-belligerency Confirmed - January 6, 2008

#293 (edith keel them all)
why do you think cawley is in the film? i’ve heard nothing about it here or elsewhere.

and based on your posts, why do you attack him (or NV) so much? does he owe you money?

and on that subject, why are you such a miserable, critical, vindictive and frankly boring poster? prozac lapsed?

“i’m not running for president and i don’t have to respect anyones stupid opinions” -william s. burroughs

312. Harry Ballz - January 6, 2008

Of course I didn’t believe the Area 51 hoopla, but here’s where it got interesting…

The news had just broke about all the crap posted on AICN and we were all chatting about it. Up pops Orci in the middle of the chatter so we start throwing comments out to him. Looking back at the posts now, it seems pretty straightforward…..BUT…at the time, it was a dialogue of responses happening between a few of us and Orci which was transpiring in an extemporaneous fashion, back and forth.

That’s when I threw out the suggestion that he at least denounce the Area 51 garbage….to at least assure us that some rumours should be “shot down” as absurd……and then…..NOTHING….no response! Anyone who was posting and reading at that moment was going, “whoa! c’mon, Orci, say something!” When he finally wrote back it was, of course, with the safe response that they couldn’t take any position…………but, I’ll tell ya, as each minute passed with no response, a few of us were going “uh, oh….don’t tell me there’s MERIT to this crap!”

Interesting interaction and fun at the time but, hey, I guess you had to be there! :)

313. I AM THX-1138 - January 6, 2008

I see. It does read a bit differently the day after. I can also see where Orci must feel like he’s in a catch 22. If I knew the answers to all of the questions he get’s [pounded with, I would be busting to tell. But then the writer’s strike wouldn’t be the most pressing employment problem.
Also, if I were in you’re shoes and the area 51 stuff had started to sound plausible, the distinct feel of nausea would be overwhelming.

I wish I were there. Like Trelane, I never get to have any fun!

314. J.D. Lee - January 6, 2008

I love you Roberto…

*runs and hide*

315. roberto orci - January 6, 2008


Look forward to you next trap. Ciao.

316. Harry Ballz - January 6, 2008


Don’t think of it as a trap…..but more as an invitation to reach conclusions.

“Welcome to Japan, Mr. Orci” :)

317. Tj Trek - January 7, 2008

I am one of those fans that some things can fall through. I may be irked, a little, but if the movie is great, then.. so be it. Big things would concern me. For instance. If the older spock in the movie obviously played it like he had never died, or if Kirk showed up like he had never died. Or something like that, but something smaller like…I don’t know. However if the script and following movie is horrible then I would balk at any and all changed to continuity. I don’t think this will be the case

318. Tj Trek - January 7, 2008

also…. thanks for the list of Nimoys credits. I hadn’t realized he had done so much (other then star trek… I mean THREE MEN AND A BABY???). I am glad. He is a good guy, and a good “creator” weather it be in the acting chair creating a charactor, or in the director chair creating a movie, or in the writing chair creating a book.

By the way… has any one else heard his ALIEN VOICE Spock VS Q. I think it’s great?

319. trektacular - January 7, 2008

People sure are angry about what Orci did with Transformers over AICN, it doesn’t seem very unjustified either. It will be very interesting to see what people around here think about the new Trek movie after it comes out. Very interesting indeed.

320. Sam Belil - January 7, 2008

#303 — PERFECTLY STATED – even the least knowledgeable ST fans know that Kirk was closet to Geek than Stud in his academy days — this is serious oversight by Abrams and Crew. I can only assume that this WILL IN FACT be an alternate universe story, since how in the H-LL can BOTH Gary Mitchell and Finnengan NOT be in this movie. Makes NO SENSE AT ALL!!!!! Mr. Orci, would you please care to comment on this huge oversight????????

321. Anthony - January 7, 2008

Dear Anthony P. and other fans of SW/Zep:
I apologize for mentioning politics as I was intentionally being provacative using a wide and inapproprite generalization. I enjoy Houses of the Holy, Slow Hand and Han Solo as much as the next person. I even Like a guy named McCain.
Wait…I’m not sorry. See, someone should have told Roddenberry to keep politics out of his show in the 60’s and then I would not have brought it up. It’s the reason I prefer Star Trek over Star Wars in the first place. It’s not about who is wrong or right; the best Trek has been about questioning beliefs…like Private Little War or countless other episodes throughout the Trek verse. Even Star Wars, which began as a nice little bedtime story, turned morality play the last three installments.
I promise never to bring up the “P” word again…so long as JJ stays away from it too. We shall see.

322. J.D. Lee - January 7, 2008

Ok…IF the acin rumors are indeed true

I wonder who’s been ratting you out???

If the rumors are true….

323. Chris Doohan - January 7, 2008


It’s nice to see you here on the boards. It’s a great way for you to reach your fans, for which I’m sure there are many. I have all the confidence in the world that this Star Trek film (and it’s script) will be great .

It was nice meeting you on the picket lines the other day.


324. Edith Keeler - January 7, 2008

#311 – I have heard this from industry sources. As for Cawley’s “acting” the only reason people pay any attention to him is because he is in Star Trek fan films. His acting seems to consist of doing a bad impression of William Shatner ‘s bad acting. That said, he is to be commended for all of his production work and elevating the production of fan films to a whole new level into works that stand on their own. That said, there has to be someone who can do a better Shatner impression out there.

325. ensign joe - January 7, 2008

Well you’re gonna have to expect we’re going to get some of our (trek) toes stepped on a little bit with this movie.. has to.. What will be interesting to me is if the liberties taken will be enough to break the trek umbilicus.. lets take this recent activity with Kirk for example: Many picture young Kirk as #303, as do I. Kirk is not a hack. Queue laugh track. Ok now seriously.. I always pictured it like Kirk somehow gaining access to a lower level function of the kobayashi maru program, something that seems insignificant to most but Kirk spots it as the weak spot, the one thing that if he could change would enable him to beat the “no win senerio.” Maybe he has to sweet talk a lady to get access.. think along the lines of Sneakers Carl Arbegast but with a little more Harrison Ford. Point is: he figures it out himself and the lady hawking is secondary. If the relation was simply Kirk sleeps with girl, girl fixes test. Well.. you’d probably lose me as a fan pretty quick. Its this kindof gimick mentality that I fear. Now, Trek VI, when they “doctor up” that torpedo… gimick. Trek speak. Now while the twok “Sir! Our shields are dropping!!!” bit was part gimick it was believable because we all know that Kirk knows his stuff. You watch that scene and you see BOOM, instantly Kirk and Spock both know: use the prefix code.

Hey Orci I just thought of this but you’ve probably already covered it (maybe not though ;)).. you know that scene in TWOK when Spock asks Saavik “Have you ever piloted a starship out of space dock?” and Kirk gets all worried.. maybe he gets that look in his eye about what happened to HIM when HE tried to pilot a starship out of spacedock.. you know, or something like that…

anyways I think its going to have to be this kindof attention and faithfulness from the academy years that only reaffirms the trek we all know and love and not dissolve it that will keep fans like me involved in trek to come…

326. FlyingTigress - January 7, 2008


always pictured it like Kirk somehow gaining access to a lower level function of the kobayashi maru program, something that seems insignificant to most but Kirk spots it as the weak spot, the one thing that if he could change would enable him to beat the “no win senerio.”

You mean the “Corbomite Maneuver scenario” in the simulator? ;)

327. Paul Paz - January 7, 2008

Worried? I am too:

Worried the script has bigger problems than just bad writing, but on par with other Abrams projects like Alias and Lost and features non-Trek ethics like condoning torture.

328. Dennis Bailey - January 7, 2008

Of course, you have no evidence whatever that anything in the next Star Trek movie “condones torture.”

You simply have anxiety based on some TV shows Abrams produced.

The script is written and the movie is being filmed. One may be worried as much as one likes, I suppose.

329. sean - January 7, 2008


Wow. You guys actually made a website dedicated to stopping something that you have absolutely no indication will take place. Kudos! This is clearly what the internet was made for.

330. ensign joe - January 7, 2008

#326 Exactly. I’m definitly looking for a similar brash of genius for kobayashi maru..

331. doubleofive - January 7, 2008

I’m bummed that I missed all of this witty banter! As for the E being built on the ground and shipped to space, I found this picture on Memory Alpha the other day and it threw me off:

There’s most of a Galaxy-class ship on the surface of Mars. So it looks like its not unprecedented to have a ship being built on the surface, however, being built at a secret base in Nevada does not equal the obviously canon “San Fransisco Fleet Yards.”

332. Iowagirl - January 7, 2008

– That said, there has to be someone who can do a better Shatner impression out there. –

The only one who can do a really good Shatner impression of Shatner’s good acting is Shatner himself.

And it’s from Shatner’s conclusive and character consistent portrayal of Kirk that we know about all his distinctive traits, a lore that consequentially made us so mad at the AICN rumors which luckily turned out to be wrong.

333. Dom - January 7, 2008

Mr Abrams, in collaboration with Messrs Orci and Kurtzman has turned out some amazing movie standard shows on a TV budget. No wonder Hollywood wants to make use of their talents in the cinema!!

As for this ‘condoning torture’ garbage, Alias was a show about a bunch of spies who had to do whatever possible to save lives and were, at times, utterly ruthless about it. No one said they were role models. Jack Bristow, in Alias, for example, has precious little to show for his life beyond his job and looking out for his daughter and was a a tragic figure. We love him because he’s a ruthless badass, but would we want this man hanging out around our house for dinner? (Would we dare to ask him to leave? ;))

What a lot of this boils down to is jealousy: ‘Kurtzman and Orci get to write a Star Trek movie. Wah!’ ‘Kurtzman and Orci get to play with Transformers. Boo hoo!’

People get overly precious about Trek. You only have to witness the bitchiness directed at some of the episode reviewers last year. Dennis Bailey writes a review with flair and humour and gets pilloried in the biggest witchhunt since the Inquisition warmed up its pokers. Mark Altman writes a review and get abuse, because a noisy minority of people take offence at a couple of remarks that are supposedly political, yet milder than the average joke on a kids’ show!

AICN is overloaded with sickos, because no one, pretty much ever, gets banned, no matter what they write about themselves, other posters, other races or the people who run the site. There are also people out there who claim to like Trek, but want this film to fail, because ‘How dare someone take a risk with Star Trek?’

I suppose it’s heartening to see just how much controversy this film has already stirred up. TOS was successful because it took risks. Now a new team is going to give their best shot to fling Star Trek out of the ghetto and back into mainstream consciousness. The fact that certain people are willing to make up stories itself demonstrates a healthy strength of feeling after the apathy surrounding Trek in recent times.

Sure this film will take liberties. Sure it’ll challenge our long-held assumptions about characters and their histories. Good!

Whatever happens, as fans, we owe these guys our support and, when the film comes out, we should see it and then opine to our hearts’ content.

Star Trek is about the search for knowledge and broadening of our horizons. Right now we’re seeing a blinkered fear of the unknown, based on whispers and paparazzi shots rather than the thrill of new adventure!

334. 7th - January 7, 2008

Hey Roberto,

7th here from the Don Murphy board. You ever gonna get that signed poster to my kid in the mail?

(By the way, he loved the film, as did I, and watches it incessantly. Not that that means anything from a quality standpoint, he does the same thing with Disney’s Underdog. :) )

I only had small issues that most everyone else already brought up… Devastator’s name not being fixed, Barricade disappearing from the film once he gets on the freeway, Prime being off camera when making his famous “One shall stand” line, otherwise I thought it was a fine “origin” film.

My review, in case you missed it on Don’s board:

As for Trek, you shot down a lot of rumors and clarified some in regards to Transformers and things turned out okay. I see no problem with you shooting down these or verifying them.

I agree that everything mentioned in AICN’s “spoilers” are really stupid ideas that don’t seem to pay homage to canon at all. It almost reads like a “The Scary Movie crew do Start Trek” script. I can’t believe that your script would have such tripe in it. In fact, the plot actually reads more like Shatner’s Kirk Academy Days book… perhaps that’s where all this bullshit actually came from, that and perhaps a few torn snibits of that old Berman Academy reboot script that was never made thrown into the mix.

At any rate, if I have any issues in my TF review that you can answer/address, drop me a line and let me know. Otherwise, I’m looking forward to 12/25.

…and don’t forget my son’s poster.

335. Trek Nerd Central - January 7, 2008

Well, I tried to keep away from this site but couldn’t. . .

I’m among the crowd of Trek fanatics who happen to trust Abrams to do something energetic & even sly with this reboot. Look, LOST is one of the best shows on television ever, of all time, period. It does things with character and narrative that no other series dares to do.

And yeah, there are scenes & storylines involving torture, but they are *absolutely* morally grounded. They question the ethics of torture rather than condone it.

336. Lou - January 7, 2008

AICN is quite often full of it. I do my best to avoid that site altogether.

337. AJ - January 7, 2008

If I recall, a certain Iraqi character in LOST tortured, and then was tortured himself. The message was “this is bad.”

Also, don’t forget, the Federation always had their “truth drug” in case a baddy was not ready to squeal. I am sure it felt like kittens and puppies, but it was a tool to extract information forcefully from a captured enemy.

Also, don’t forget when Spock mind-raped Valeris in ST6. That’s practically Jack Bauer territory.

338. Trek Nerd Central - January 7, 2008

Re: #337. AJ, you and I had the same thought at the same time (see #335).

339. Michael Hall - January 7, 2008


Excellent post. Even though I came down pretty hard on Altman myself.

340. CW - January 7, 2008

274- “Ah, the old mass shifting debate.

The Transformers DID NOT mass shift. When I said no mass shifting I was referring to THE CHARACTERS. Many like you then saw it as a cheat to have their macguffin (THE ALLSPAK) mass shift”

However, Frenzy- being a character- DID mass shift.
It’s not as if mass shifting is really important, but just be consistant, that’s all. If you don’t want mass shifting to the point of ridiculing fans who did want it, then don’t make Frenzy mass shift. Ot at least own up to it, saying something like “yeah, we hate it but we ended up having to do it” or something. THAT’s the kind of stuff that bugs me.
That, and spending hours arguing over how the old G1 characters were written for the film, when it turns out that the TF Movie characters weren’t even the G1 characters at all! Just another show with teh same names like any new show.
Just me more forthcoming, and trolls like myself won’t get our panties in a wad like we do.
That said, it may shock you that I am indeed looking forward to this film, and even tho I still consider the TF film lazily written, and if MI3 is any indication, then Star Trek will be a welcome film- even from an old TOS die-hard like myself.

341. Dave - January 7, 2008

According to WNMHGB Kirk was a nerd at the Academy Gary Mitchell described him as a “stack of books with Legs” and “Watch out for LT. Kirk, in hhis class, you either think…or sink”

342. Ron - January 7, 2008

#333: As one of the so-called “noisy minority” who took issue with that controversial Altman review last year, I need to correct some of the facts in your post.

First of all, my main objection was not as much with Altman’s political commentary as it was with his use of swearing in the review itself — something that startled and disappointed me because had, to that point, been rather family friendly. (Things have since degenerated to the point where folks here are “creaming,” so I’ve basically given up on that front.)

Second, yes, I took issue with the political commentary (a comparison of “neocons” a.k.a. conservatives to Nazis, if I remember correctly) because of the particularly offensive nature of the comparison and the intrusiveness of Altman’s unnecessary injection of his personal politics into the review. You can agree with Altman or disagree with him, but was the insulting remark really necessary in the first place? (And before you tell me to get a sense of humor, it was an offhand remark, milder than a children’s show, etc, please remember that the comparison was with *Nazis*.)

Finally, the number of people who objected to Altman’s remarks were, in the final tally, less of a “minority” than you imply.

Agreed with most of the rest of your post, however. The more red-faced the “canon police” gets about this movie, the more I find myself looking forward to it.

343. Photoshopper - January 7, 2008

Coupla things:

1. Does anyone know if a street date for the teaser trailer has been announced? (i.e. when will it show up on the interwebs? officially, of course, not interested in some bonehead taking their video camera into Clovefield and posting it) Quite frankly, while I’m interested in seeing Cloverfield on it’s own merits (not just for the ST Trailer) – the wimp in me worries that the handheld camera is going to make me ill. Blair Witch Project had me green at the gills.

2. Looked into this “mass shifting” thing that Roberto has taken so much heat over. Oh my god, what a bunch of crap about nothing. For those (like me) that didn’t know what mass shifting is, it’s a reference to the paradox that Transformers can become something very big (a big robot) out of something fairly small (like a boombox or small car).

It kills me when fans of anything – be it Trek or Transformers or whatever – get hung up on details like this. Is it any less believeable that a big robot came from a boombox than the mere fact that THERE ARE GIANT ROBOTS THAT TAKE THE SHAPE OF CARS COMING TO EARTH?

Science Fiction (and practially any fiction) takes a leap of faith. You have to put aside your doubts or questions of “reality” and go along for ride. Transformers was a fun movie, and I am not even a fan. Star Trek is a fun and entertaining show. Let it go at that. If we are to get hung up on every detail and expect an explanation for every detail, then two things will happen. First, there will be so much explaining that there will be no room for any story, and second, you’ll get so bogged down in technobabble that you’ll bore your audience to death (SEE: ST: Voyager, among many other Trek series sins).

I hope Roberto doesn’t take the folks that are harping on him about this (and the folks that inevitably harp on him for some problem with ST) to seriously. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:

Give us a great story that treats the characters and universe that we love with respect (not slavish devotion, mind you) and breathe new life into this franchise, and we’ll all be happy. (Well, not all of us. But most of us…)

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go mass shift my left sneaker into a million dollar mansion.

344. bmar - January 7, 2008

oops..that’s me above in 343. Used the wrong name by mistake. Must have shifted my mass into the Heisebberg Compensator incorrectly…

345. Ron - January 7, 2008

#296: Too bad you didn’t say that to Altman…

346. Greg2600 - January 7, 2008

CW this mass shifting debate about the Transformers is idiotic. Who cares if they mass shifted? My beef was that the TF’s hardly ever got to talk in the movie, and that they looked IMO totally aweful in robot mode. Both were decisions Michael Bay made and later blasted Tom DeSanto and Don Murphy for in a blog. I loved the Witwicky’s and Shia was great, as was the great Jon Voight and John Turturro. However, decision to have 90% of the dialogue and character stories based on the humans was not to my liking. Sorry, but I’m just too darn loyal to G1 to like a movie where Optimus Prime and Megatron and the other bots are afterthoughts (prior to the end fight which was very cool). I also loved the idea of the allspark. Bay says the next movie will have more Transformers in it, and I guess more screen time and dialogue I hope. Those are legit critiques, not mass shifting. I thought the plot elements (other than the TF’s arriving via comets) and dialogue were well written (nothing lazy), but some of the director’s decisions were bad. It’s not the first time Bay has been criticized for taking over a previous concept and doo-dooing on it (Remember The Island?). I wanted to see the transformers as the stars, along with Spike, just as I want to see Shatner in this movie.

347. bmar - January 7, 2008

Greg2600 – coming from a non-fan (and by non-fan I don’t mean I don’t like it – I just mean, I had never seen a TF episode before the movie) I think people fall into the same trap when they are “too darn loyal.” They won’t let themselves enjoy something for it’s own sake.

Having never seen TF before, I enjoyed it purely for its own merits, and what’s more, my 12 and 8 year-olds loved it, which is more important anyway.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that sometimes we have to release our death-grips on the things we love and be open to new interpretations. That’s the only way they stay fresh and open to new audiences and fans.

Just a friendly discussion…

348. ensign joe - January 7, 2008

# 347 And sometimes someone elses interpretation just plain sucks…

“I guess what I’m trying to say is that sometimes we have to release our death-grips on the things we love and be open to new interpretations. That’s the only way they stay fresh and open to new audiences and fans.”

This is what the execs need to be saying not the fans yo.. if you’re not going to make a *insert favorite show here* then make something completely new… but don’t try to package stuff that isn’t what you make it out to be..

I’ve seen alot of crap come out under familiar names lately so you have to understand the frustration that comes with people asking us to lower our standards.. I would say that most of us want a good movie.. a good Trek movie.. so we put in our two cents and hope they do it well.. and I’m all for being open to new intrepretations.. but crap is crap however you spin it..

That being said, none of these talkbacks will deter me from seeing this movie on opening day.. but I tell you this: I will NEVER watch another Aliens vs Predator movie again. Ever…

349. J. Parker - January 7, 2008

# 341 – Gary Mitchell on Kirk — I agree; it would be too bad if Kirk in the movie is undignified, or simply a Orlando Bloom-type character or simply a dumb jock, pardon the expression.

Again, I would have thought the producers may have considered input from veterans such as Fontana, Gerrold, Meyer — even Harlan Ellison! ;)

Mr. Orci doesn’t comment on Kirk, or maybe I missed it.

At any rate, this will be the test. I like what Charlie Reese wrote here. The test of this film, any film, should be this:

Movies, being a collaborative form of art, are especially difficult. The contributions of so many people have to mesh perfectly. It doesn’t occur all that often, despite the best efforts. To see the magic created when everything does mesh, check out the old Elia Kazan film On the Waterfront.

A good test of any art is, do you feel better after experiencing it? If not, why bother? It’s quicker to hit your thumb with a hammer than to spend good money and an hour and a half of your life watching a message picture that tells you the world is ugly and hopeless.

The world is not ugly and hopeless. It is beautiful, and life is a grand experience. There is so much beauty to enjoy, and hope never dies if nourished by courage. Happiness is often more of a choice than a circumstance. The world is as it is, but it is our reaction to that world that determines whether we are sad or happy.

350. JodarTrekFan - January 7, 2008

Okay, something is amiss here. Has Orci seen the first Star Trek movie? How can he stake the claim that we’ve never seen size and scope with the Enterprise? There is no other Trek movie that showcased the size of the interior of any Enterprise since then.

The Rec Deck scene and its 300 extras. Remember how huge that was and with the matte painting and extras in front of that, it stretches even beyond the scope of the screen.

The cargo area where Kirk and Scotty first arrives. That also was a humongous staging area that was abuzz with work bees, anti-grav platforms and also complemented by a large matte painting that stretched waaay back. And in the original soundtrack, the computer voice that announces the shuttle arrival and its availability just reverberates on and on(in a large theater) as if to go on forever. The place was huuuuge!

The original engine room also deserves mention since it was multi-story as a live piece set. Remember the elevator that took one up and down at least two levels? Then the Kirk POV shot showed the matter-anti-matter reaction chamber extending many, many decks below and above and laterally. Again, forced perspective and matte paintings complemented that scene. And, yet, another example of the widescreen aspect of the huge sets on the first movie.

To be honest, based on what we’ve seen and heard so far, I doubt this movie will surpass the scope and size of the first movie’s set pieces. They can’t. You’re also talking an earlier era ship as well. The TMP movie Enterprise was a redesign and more modern vessel. They even had holodecks! (according to the novelization)

351. cw - January 7, 2008

There’s a couple idiots here who apparently cannot read;
I clearly stated that mass shifting wasn’t one of my big issues. My main issue over Orci was his lack of honesty with the fans he takes the time to correspond with.

352. JodarTrekFan - January 7, 2008

One important item I forgot to mention is that in the new movie, they’d better set up the Enterprise as a “character” herself.

When we saw the refitted Enterprise on the widescreen (in 1979) in all its cinematic and state-of-the-art fx glory, what came to my mind was when Kirk (in that Mudd episode) referred to the ship as “her” and “we love her.” The attention to detail on the ship, from its lighting and strobing light fx (like today’s modern aircraft) right down to the square looking brick things made it so real. The ‘beauty’ of the ship made its attack in Wrath of Khan so visceral, especially in 70mm 6-track if you had the opportunity to experience it that way.

353. roberto orci - January 7, 2008


Wrong quote attribution. Wasn’t me talking about Enterprise. That was AICN source.

354. roberto orci - January 7, 2008


Did you read my “Raider’s” analogy?

355. sean - January 7, 2008


I admire what Reese is saying, but I can’t agree with him. Film IS art, and as such it has to be free to reflect all aspects of the world and the people in it, not just the positive ones. Sometimes a movie with a dire depiction of the world can speak more loudly and generate more positive action than one that simply tells us everything will be okay. Art does not exist solely to uplift, but also to challenge us individually and as a society.

The fact is, the world is both ugly and beautiful. As such, film should be free to showcase both sides of that coin.

356. Michael Hall - January 7, 2008

Mr. Parker,

With all due respect, Mr. Reese’s assertions are, at base, political. They may be more or less true (depending upon where you stand, of course–choosing to see life as “beautiful” might pose more of a challenge to a resident of Auschwitz than Malibu), but they have nothing whatsoever to do with what constitutes art.

357. Anthony Pascale - January 7, 2008

350 (and Bob)
Sorry if it wasn’t clear. But the above article notes above the second quote “AICN on the Scale of the Enterprise
AICN’s second source claims….”

Another website that linked to this article, attributed the second quote to Orci…I cannot control what other websites do, but I hope it was clear to you all.

And yes ST: TMP did a good job of showing that the Enterprise was a very large ship…much better than the TV series. I imagine the new film will be the first to give you that epic feeling since TMP.

358. rangerone314 - January 7, 2008

Having seen Transformers, I actually have hope for Star Trek… I rented it this past weekend, and I wasn’t expecting like “Kagemushi” or “The Godfather” or something, and I didn’t get it, but it was better than I thought it would be based on the root material…

Recent Star Trek has had a better starting place and root material to work with and other writers managed to mess it up… even one who wrote one of my favorite movies, “Gladiator”.

Although a little uneven/jerky in tone and pace, I found Transformers to be nonetheless well-balanced between humor and action, and it actually was an improvement upon the material Orci had to work with… and the writing actually dovetailed nicely with good direction on top of that, so I have high hopes for Star Trek Dec 25…

359. bmar - January 7, 2008

# 351 cw – thanks for calling us idiots. Now I know to look up to you as someone who can clearly determnine the idiots among us.

and re 347: Agreed, sometimes new interpretations do suck. I think I was referring more to the death grip that some fans put on the smallest details. I agree, if someone is throwing out the baby with the bathwater, undeservedly, there is a problem. We should never lower our standards – we should only accept something that represents great story telling in the best of the Trek legacy, and if Roberto and the gang don’t deliver a great story that is respectful (as I said above) of the Trek characters and universe, lots of people will be pissed off. I, for one, have faith that they will.

However, I don’t think we should hold Roberto’s (et al) feet to the fire over evry creative decision they’ve made – ESPECIALLY before we’ve seen the final product.

Like I said, it’s all about being open to new interpretation.

360. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008

#359 bmar “feet to the fire over every creative decision they’ve made”

Nicely said….I’d just like to add one note of distinction as to our intentions when we post on this site. For many years now Hollywood has employed the use of focus groups to view a film prior to it’s release. Based on that feedback the producers will sometimes modify the final version of a movie, even going as far as to reshoot certain segments or scenes of said film before it’s final release.

I guess what some of us are hoping is that as long as we keep our comments respectful and intelligent in tone, there is maybe a slight chance that TPTB may benefit from our collective feedback, much like a focus group, and if warranted, it could possibly influence the “polish” of the final product.

Sure, we joke and throw jibes around, but ultimately I’d like to think that our observations might just temper the producer’s judgement into creating a better product. That way everyone involved benefits accordingly…. :)

361. Redjac - January 7, 2008

I’d like to commend Roberto myself for braving AICN — and coming here regularly. I think that speaks volumes about his level of care about this film.

So, I hope the negative ones out there don’t drag ya down, Roberto. I may not 100% like every creative decision, but I am sure this next film will be ten times the film it would be if the previous powers were still in charge.

362. Xai - January 7, 2008

361. Redjac – January 7, 2008


Roberto, many of us do appreciate your comments and presence here. While it may not always seem like it, I find it very cool that you do read our posts,even if you cannot answer them with complete information.

Put yourself in for a raise.;-)

363. Blarneyman - January 7, 2008

I have a question, not regarding the debacle with AICN. Do they ever fact check? How come it’s Orci & Kurtzman and not Kurtzman & Orci? Did ye flip a coin? I’m looking forward to Star Trek. Cheers, mate.

364. Redjac - January 7, 2008

I have yet to determine if there is any kind of “system” in place at AICN for how they gather “facts”. It’s not like they aren’t wrong about 50% (at least) of the time anyway.

Personally, I have a hard time finding any value in anything they report since it’s so laced with profanity.

I am no prude…nor do I have “virgin ears”…but damn…

Really makes me appreciate what Anthony has built here. Sometimes I think he’s a bit too strict but I’ll take this site over AICN any day.

365. Seynomour - January 7, 2008

Yeah. I just spent the last two hours reading through these posts just to see what Harry Ballz and Lord Garth Formerly of Izar would come up with next.

You guys! I think I will be laughing for the rest of the day.

Thank you.

I grew up on Raiders of the Lost Ark, Pinnochio, Star Wars, Star Trek, and G.I. Joes (I threw Pinnochio in there because it was my little bro’s fave, and we taped Raiders right on the tale end, when that cricket starts to sing…again…which meant I always had to watch Pinnochio before I got to watch Raiders…I don’t know, it’s just how the nap-thing worked out).

I believe James T. Kirk was my first crush, and I was convinced Darth Vador was also my father (hey, he was turning out to be everyone else’s).

When the first Pirates came out, I wanted to change spirits with Johnny Depp because he looked like he was having so much fun. I think it would be great to be able to be a part of such a thing–making a movie based off a series or story already created, and still trying to give it a newness to keep it memorable (‘cuz let’s face it, who wants to be talking over the dinner table about that one movie you once saw, but you can’t remember the title and everyone’s staring with blank faces ‘cuz they never saw it…).

Anyhoo, this has been a fun read, and I believe I wil be catching this film (probably with my real father–I know, the disappointment was hard to bear–as he is an avid Kirk/ Bones/ Spock fan) and will take it as it comes.

Ah, and, quick question: It seems that some who have seen films directed or involved with the same dudes on this crew are upset because they didn’t like previous movies by the same crew? Do you compare books to their movies also?

Just wondering :3

366. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008


Thank you so very much for the kind words……it’s appreciated! :)

367. The Vulcanista - January 7, 2008

#365 Welcome!

Yep, Harry & Lord Garth keep things interesting around here. I like to bring the marshmellons and Hershey bars when they pour the gasoline on the ol’ bonfire. Xai brings graham crackers from time to time. :)

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

368. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008


when I think of your marshmellons……..the mind reels!! :)

369. The Vulcanista - January 7, 2008

#193: “I do have a fear. That by finding out “who these people are” – we will not be exploring Strange New Worlds.

And that is our Mission.”

Oh, but I think that exploring the history of these characters that we’ve followed for over 40 years is an exploration of a strange new world. I’m well aware that others disagree, but it’s a story that’s needed telling for a long time.

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

370. The Vulcanista - January 7, 2008

#368: Damn. I used that “M” word again. Unfortunate slip of the keyboard, Harry. };-P

You’re gonna get either you or me banned forever, ya know! :)

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

371. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008


I appreciate your compliment in # 367……….don’t underestimate your own valuable contribution to these proceedings.

Sheesh, I sound like a Vulcan!! :)

372. roberto orci - January 7, 2008


Alex and I switch the order of our names on every project like true partners should.

373. cd - January 7, 2008

#372 – So, is ST going to be OK or a KO? >;>}

374. The Vulcanista - January 7, 2008

#371 Harry

Thanks! And, hey, Vulcans ROCK!

Or whatever it is them young’uns is sayin’ now.

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

375. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2008


I know everything is guarded, but can you give us some idea of the flavour to the film from what has been shot so far?

p.s. where did you live in Canada?

376. J.D. Lee - January 8, 2008

10 more days till we get see the trailer!! Whoohoo!

377. J.D. Lee - January 8, 2008

someone from the don murphy board emailed acin about roberto orci’s statements and Moriarty of AICN sent him this:

“It’s funny, though…

I remember when the TRANSFORMERS script leaked, and Orci did the exact same thing. “Ludicrous! Ridiculous! Not our script at all!”

And then… it was. Pretty much word for word.”

so who should I believe orci or acin??

*sigh* my head hurts….

378. Rocky - January 8, 2008

I just want to say I’ve been a fan of yours since Hercules.
Keep up the good work!

379. Fortunate Son - January 8, 2008

Must say that in several years of reading AICN, I can’t remember too many of their spoilers being wrong and their reviews – even of scripts – seem pretty much spot on. I’d genuinely like them to be wrong here but…

380. bmar - January 8, 2008

#372 – Roberto – If only Paul had had the same deal with John…

381. ensign joe - January 8, 2008

# 359 Surely. And I’ve posted similarly in the past. I think its important that we as fans give good and honest opionions and back them up. The powers that be have at least shown interest in the fan base. Some may speculate as to the reasons but that point is moot. Besides getting out there and creating our own version (kudos to Cawley and company) we have a forum here to give our 2 cents. What they decide to use or not use, interpret this way or that, is for them to decide: its their time (ugh I hate to point it out but.. goonies reference just popped into my head).. So you’re gonna have your obtuse fans that are fired up about (what they’ve come to know as) their property. To each their own.. they can’t please everybody.. but they better please me :P

382. raulpetersen - January 8, 2008

youre a legend!


383. I AM THX-1138 - January 8, 2008

I preface this by saying I am a spoiler addict. I scour the web looking for spy photos, leaked info, sneak peaks, what have you. The kind of person that secretive film-makers hate because I feed the spies and script stealers and sneak peak providers. But I also shell out my $$$ at the box office.

Does anybody remember when you didn’t have much of a clue what a movie was about till you saw it? I mean, you might know who was in it, or the general premise, but you didn’t know all the plot specifics. You didn’t have a chance to bust the writers balls in (virtual) person till after it was screened, if ever. I do tip my cap to any person in charge of the production of a movie who comes online to speak to fans and those who have their sense of bravery and self-importance inflated be the anonymity of the interweb to fuel their lather. Please be remembering that every single solitary person who is complaining about a rumored plot point has not witnessed as much as a frame of what they are talking about. The scenes in question may not have been filmed yet. If we think that Orci or anyone else is going to come online and refute or confirm anything, then by the same token the people revealing the script points should reveal their identities. But that won’t happen because in all likelyhood they haven’t actually seen anything. Or they are afraid of repercussions like getting fired from the production and banned by every respectable fil-maker currently working. Which would be just.

But we can ask. That’s what we are doing here after all. I just don’t expect anyone to actually tell.

I mean, why should Orci come on here and deny the fact that the real reason that the Guardian of Forever is being used is that Spock is using it travel back in time to father James T. Kirk. He periodically comes back through the portal to pay visits to the Kirk clan and young Jimmy grows up calling Spock “Uncle Timmy.”

I now let the real debate continue about this film. I have to go scour the interweb looking for spy photos, leaked info, sneak peaks, and what have me.

384. I AM THX-1138 - January 8, 2008

BTW, I am directing my second paragraph at the AICN folks, not the people (in general) on this good site.

385. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

#383 THX “But we can ask. That’s what we are doing here after all.”

Attaboy, THX…….

ASK! ASK IS OUR BUSINESS!! (or something to that effect)

Bwahahahha…….. :)

386. Doug L. - January 8, 2008

Can I trade my day job for a writing career in Hollywood please…

Doug L.

387. trektacular - January 8, 2008

If this movie isn’t any good people can just forget it exists, much like I do when I think of Nemesis.

388. Xai - January 8, 2008

I heard my cue..

Is this where I bring in the graham crackers or the gasoline?

389. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

Just the Graham crackers…..the reports posted here these days give me enough gas!

390. CW - January 8, 2008

377-“I remember when the TRANSFORMERS script leaked, and Orci did the exact same thing. “Ludicrous! Ridiculous! Not our script at all!”

And then… it was. Pretty much word for word.”

so who should I believe orci or acin??”

Which is another example of why I have said some of the things I have.

391. CW - January 8, 2008

354- “Did you read my “Raider’s” analogy?”

Admittedly, I glossed over it. Admittedly, I locked on to the part where you said that characters didn’t mass shift… when in fact one did.

392. CW - January 8, 2008

354- “Did you read my “Raider’s” analogy?”

O.k., yeah, I did read it after all.

While both the Allspark and the Ark had the power of God, Frenzy still mass shifted.

Again, not the biggest issue in the world but I never really enjoyed the royal subjects admiring the Emperors fine clothing when in fact he was buck naked.

393. Ed - January 8, 2008

If I want to know something on the script I’ll just look here because if the writers wanted to tell us something, I’m thinking we’d see it here first. AICN is a rag and their ‘reviews’ have never held much for me.

394. Dennis Bailey - January 8, 2008

#392: “Again, not the biggest issue in the world…”

That’s an understatement.

I’m still trying to wrap my mind around the notion of a “disgruntled Transformers fan…”

Roberto Orci always strikes me as earnest, easygoing and as direct as it’s possible for him to be.

The people who complain about these kinds of online interactions – and this is triply true for the mental defectives who dominate AICN Talkbacks – simply have really deluded senses of entitlement.

395. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

I, personally, feel entitled to my sense of entitlement! :)

396. Minerva - January 8, 2008

392- “frenzy still mass shifted.”

If i recall correctly frenzy (the radio) was cut into pieces by mikeala and then tried to flee as head Sam kicked him then away like a soccer kicker
afterwoths Frenzy scanned mikeala’s mobile and transforming into it…. wasnt that really mass shifting? Or just a bot that is creative and really empty/light headed….

When thats said…

Ok, i just found this site and i love it… i love the news about the new movie and as a real fan, with a TF fan as a boyfriend, i think this will be a good movie…

Sure when i heared the same team of TF would write ST i had my doubts. A lot of the TF fans where not happy with their movie. Well i had to see it cause otherwise my bf will not see ST and i completly love it! So ST will be great aswell…

I dont care whats true or not or what “sources” say. Its all rumors and if the rumours are true so be it… They only make the waiting shorter so that there is something to talk about. (This doesn’t mean i dont like spoilers… but those are some what different then rumours i believe….)

And mr Orci, thanks for bringing the transformers back to life…
Now it’s ST’s turn:)

397. roberto orci - January 8, 2008

377 and 390

If you read the hundreds if pages of posts that went back and forth over the course of more than a year during the making of Transformers, you will see that I never confirmed or denied the leaked script. In fact, I said, again and again:

“complaining about an unfinished leaked script is like sneaking into a chef’s kitchen and complaining that the dishes are undercooked…”

Not at all what 377 purports.

As for mass shifting, you’re really going to stake your claim that I’m an absolute liar based on the claim that a paper thin four foot robot’s head can’t turn into a phone?

398. I AM THX-1138 - January 8, 2008

So you’re not denying the Uncle Timmy rumor then?

I knew it!

(And you told the AICN slugs that THIS was the place for intelligent conversation about Trek. BWAHAHAHA!)

399. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

THX……glad to see you took your “smart-ass” pill today……. :)

400. star trek fan 1639 - January 8, 2008

Mr Orci – You are my hero; I love it when you take your smart ass pill. You will never ever be able to please everyone so don’t even try. I hope these few negative people don’t chase you away.

So in the spirit of Star Trek, what is your favorite episode and/or character and why?.

401. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

“negative people”?? I HATE THAT EXPRESSION!!! :)

402. I AM THX-1138 - January 8, 2008

So, Harry, you like me better when I’m being a smart ass? Sometimes I don’t get enough fiber.

And Mr. Orci- you keep your hands off my smart ass pills.

403. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2008

In your response to Orci, I’m glad the words “smart” and “pills” appear in the sentence!

404. The Vulcanista - January 8, 2008

#398 THX

I believe that’s spelled T’Meh. };-)

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

405. The Vulcanista - January 8, 2008

Come on, y’all, only 96 (or however there really are once this comes up)posts to 500!

Rabble rousing-ly yours,

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

406. I AM THX-1138 - January 8, 2008

That’s the spirit, ‘nista! Attica! Attica!

BTW, that’s how Anthony said Timmy should be spelled in the Vulcan tongue. Very clever, you two are.

Anyways, I’m looking to Harry, Vulcanista, Xai, and Garth to see what clever and fiendish way we can get this to 500 posts. Or maybe to just tell me to let it go.

407. Doug Haffner - January 8, 2008

I can’t believe I spent 20 minutes reading through most of this. But I think I have the highlights.
1. Characters using the transporter in the new Star Trek may be said to have undergone a “mass shift”. We can expect flaming on the forums over this from disgruntled Transformer fans.
2. Area 51 is not where the Enterprise is being built…but out of a natural tendency to want to politicize whatever they touch, the writers have cleverly worked in “Halliburton” as the primary contractor. Which should explain why the transporter breaks down so often.
3. The writer’s strike has stopped Orci and Kurtzman (Kurtzman and Orci for those keeping track of fair billing) from being able to talk J.J. Abrams out of the “2spocks1cup” scene they wrote while tired and drunk.


408. Wannabes « In Transit - January 8, 2008

[…] Wannabes Published January 9, 2008 Uncategorized  Star Trek co-writer Roberto Orci had to spend the day running around repairing the damage done by Aint it Cool News, who posted some bullshit rumors about the new Trek script. Apparently the kids at AICN have a longstanding thing against Orci: “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” […]

409. The Vulcanista - January 8, 2008


I read through the Ain’t It Crap News site a few days ago when Anthony first posted the article. I think I’ve finally had enough showers to remove the stench of that site from my person.

Frankly, though I saw some familiar “faces” there, for the most part, it seems to be mostly bottom-feeding cellar-dwellers there.

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

410. roberto orci - January 8, 2008



411. roberto orci - January 8, 2008


One last thing:

I deeply regret my use of the word “wannabe.” I meant it as WANNABE JOURNALIST, and even in that context I regret it. A wannabe to me is not someone who wants to write or do anything else – to me, a wannabe is someone who attacks others unfairly instead if doing what they should be doing to better themselves. Honest and fair criticism is different, and always welcome. Again, my apologies.

412. The Vulcanista - January 8, 2008


Okay. No fair! Now you’re just making stuff up!

BTW, *loved* the Halliburton reference.

And Mr. O., WTF is all this “mass shifting” talk? Netflix delivered “Transformers” today. Do I need to know what that is before I watch? (was too old for the original cartoon) It sounds more like a euphemism for getting high. Not that there’s anything wrong with that….

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

413. The Vulcanista - January 8, 2008


Well, I understood that you were referring to “wannabe journalists,” which is the impression that I got from my visit to AICN. Seems like your usage of the word was entirely appropriate.

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

414. Anthony Pascale - January 8, 2008

for the record…when I grow up I wannabe an astronaut

415. roberto Orci - January 8, 2008

414 – Never give up!

412 – Mass shifting refers to the fact that in the cartoon, the bad guy (MEGATRON) and another beloved character (Soundwave) were accustomed to transforming from a a hand gun and a boom box into GIANT ROBOTS (thereby “mass shifting”). We decided this was a cheat in the cartoon and decided not to allow any of the Transformers to have that ability. If you are a giant robot, than you have to Transform into something of equivalent mass.

416. Harry Ballz - January 9, 2008

Roberto…..your “never give up!” quip……a thinly disguised nod to Galaxy Quest? :)

417. Absoroka - January 9, 2008

Transformers is a little after my time, and I have yet to see the movie. Talk about Giant Robots, is there a Transformer Aircraft Carreir or Battle Ship? That would be cool.

418. Absoroka - January 9, 2008

I have become addicted to this website, I am on this computer 2-3 more times then ever before. I only have 1 Trek friend and we have exhausted all conversation.

It is very entertaining reading most of the comments and responses, thanks Anthony, and you too Robert.

And special thanks to thanks Harry, my wife saw your posting just now and called me Perry Nutz. I guess I am a boring person these days. I never thought to be commenting on Robots that change into vehicles.

As for the bad thing the AICN said, who cares if your good you know it and so do others, they are just windbags.

419. ensign joe - January 9, 2008

#417 Tidal Wave
from wiki:

If you have a playstation 2 you can battle him in the transformers game made by atari.. its a great game and a great boss battle..

If you havn’t seen the movie yet its a good popcorn flick with great special effects.. i’d get it on netflix if you have it.. they have the HD version.. not sure about blu-ray..

The new animated transformers cartoon is surprisingly good and can be seen on the cartoon network or you can watch the episodes in parts on youtube…

hth and welcome to the site!!

420. Locutus of Alberni - January 9, 2008

CW- I might be completely out to lunch here, but I don’t remember Frenzy mass shifting at all. When he shrunk to the size of a cell phone, it was after the Mikaela chopped off his head, and he became half the size he was to that point in the movie. He didn’t get the rest of his body back, he just sampled the cell phone and slipped into her purse. When he returned to full size, it was after he’d been “fixed” by the AllSpark. To me, the bigger question was when did Mikaela get her purse back?! :P

Roberto, thank you so much for being involved in this thread. Although I’m primarily a lurker, it really is neat that some of the creative team is here, and willing to talk to us!

421. The Vulcanista - January 9, 2008



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

422. John B. - January 10, 2008

Here’s a rumor that might appease everyone who wants Shatner in the movie–have him do a new recording of “Space–the Final Frontier” intro for the movie. I still think they should pretend like GENERATIONS never happened & somehow squeeze him into the big chair one final time. Hell, it worked for a DIRECTV commercial. In any event, no one has ever split an infinitive as well as Shatner. I fear if he’s not involved in some way the negative publicity will hurt the movie. There are only fourteen confirmed instances of where someone will admit to seeing GENERATIONS, anyway…

423. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 10, 2008

422. John B.

That’s GREAT!

And we would’nt even need a writer for that!
Just may a residual payment.
But then, that may be a problem.

424. TrekMadeMeWonder - January 10, 2008

422. John B.


What did I just write??!!
We’re talking Shatner here.

That’s BIG bucks. HA!

425. Harry Ballz - January 11, 2008

Knowing Shatner he probably wants a cool million for every word uttered in the introduction……..not worth it, thank you!

426. allyn - January 11, 2008

If we’re dispensing with Canon in ST 11, just declare that Kirk’s death in “Star Trek Generations” is not canon, and have Shatner in the movie…

I think Gene Roddenberry did not consider “Star Trek V: The Final Frontier” to be canon.

427. Zacho - January 12, 2008

Mr. Orci, I think your body of work speaks for itself. Don’t listen to those losers at AICN. I truly feel that you’re the right man for Star Trek XI. Personally, I think you guys are gonna knock this one out of the ballpark.

428. startrekfan - January 13, 2008

I hope “Star Trek” is nothing like “Transformers”. The characters in that adaptation were totally uninspiring and stereotypical. The attempts to expand their depth were formulaic and ineffective – “look, its the wife with a baby on an intermittent connection. Now its time to care!”

It was like a spoof of “Transformers” without an actual movie to spoof other than 20 year gone cartoons, which were in large part more “epic” than the movie adaptation, even with some of the childish dramatization they employed.

Every Star Trek movie to date has had years of television episodes backing it – plenty of time to develop characters, maybe get a feel for workable stories with a group of actors who work well together. All of that is now lost and they are jumping into a new movie and assuming a hit.

It’s just arrogance.

If you really think about it, taking a cultural icon and creating a “success” by standing on the long history of something well known like “Star Trek” or “Transformers” does not take any talent whatsoever. Its like standing outside some large beautiful house and pretending its a recent real-estate deal you closed. Putting a label on a product that rhymes with a big-name manufacturer of a similar product.

Talent might be construed as, created a new, successful TV series that took off in a new direction. Why do certain franchises have longevity? People like the existing story and theme. Changing the Star Trek world – 40 years of it – into something more hip and fresh etc – would seem to be more of an ending than a beginning.

Star Trek was never about sci-fi. It was about storytelling – a distinction that seasoned writers learned to make with many past mistakes that had time to self-correct due to the nature of television series. Can the same be said for this so-called reboot?

429. iphone skydd - April 11, 2011

Really excellent visual appeal on this internet site , I’d value it 10 10.

430. Michal Mennig - October 2, 2011

I do enjoy the way you have framed this specific matter plus it really does provide me a lot of fodder for thought. However, coming from what precisely I have observed, I simply hope as other remarks stack on that folks remain on point and not get started upon a tirade of some other news du jour. All the same, thank you for this superb point and although I do not go along with it in totality, I value the point of view.

431. Kate - October 19, 2011

Star Trek is my favorite movie. hanks is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.