More Fan Q&A With Roberto Orci | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

More Fan Q&A With Roberto Orci January 28, 2008

by Charles Trotter , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

EXCLUSIVE: Last Friday director/producer J.J. Abrams and many of his cast and crew on new Star Trek film dropped by TrekMovie.com from the set of the film to take questions from the fans. However, after the dust settled, Star Trek co-writer and executive producer Roberto Orci kept the discussion going over the weekend answering more fan questions in the TrekMovie.com talkback. The writer revealed more tidbits about the script and the writing process and more. For those that don’t haunt the discussion threads we have put this bonus chat into an easy to read Q&A format.

Firstly, in case you missed it, here are key tidbits from Friday’s chat with Abrams and his cast and crew (but do read the full transcript to get much more)

And here are some of the key findings in the follow-up weekend discussions with Roberto Orci:

For more details, read the transcript below.

WEEKEND ROBERTO ORCI COMMENTS Q&A TRANSCRIPT

Dr. Image: To all Trek Purists out there, understand this: What we are getting with this movie is obviously meant to REPLACE the ‘66-’68 version of Trek, including the Cage and WNMHGB, in style and substance. In other words, IT NEVER HAPPENED THAT WAY- anymore, that is. And unlike with bumpy-headed Klingons, where there was an ATTEMPT to explain the condition in ENT, it ain’t gonna happen here. What we have seen very obviously bridges the gap from ENT to TMP in ship design, production design, etc. and NOT from the 60’s aesthetic! Why they won’t call it a re-imagining or rebooting of the show is beyond me, because the evidence shows otherwise. My guess is that this approach was decided on by the the studio. That’s FINE with me, but in the words of James Cawley, it’s not what I would have done. So, JJ, Roberto, am I not correct in this conclusion?
The approach was NOT decided by the studio. It was APPROVED by the studio when we pitched them our collective vision of Trek. We have been careful not to put too much stock in terms like re-boot or re-imagining because these terms do not sufficiently describe, in my opinion, the way in which Star Trek (Zero) will fit into the continuum.

Brian: I’m not sure if the (zero) really means anything, but I’m really hoping that this isnt going to be the title. I would be fine with not going Star Trek XI, even if it’s just called Star Trek (no bloody numbers or colon), I feel that the Zero would give it too much of the “Star Wars” feel when they did the prequels.
Roberto Orci:
Agreed. As we’ve said before, it will simply be Star Trek. We’ve used the term Star Trek Zero a few times to remind new audiences who have felt that Trek has passed them by that they can tune in and be introduced to the world anew.

Brian: You can count on me being for the first showing I can get to!
Roberto Orci: Thanks — this site proves the dedication of fan base, too. The last thing I want on my grave stone is that I helped kill Star Trek.

Red Shirt: How are you moving forward on Fringe with the strike ongoing? And where has Alex been hiding? I too went to UT, graduated in 1993 with a degree in Radio/TV and Film. I am a little younger than Rodriguez, but had film classes with Matt Mcconaughey. Refresh my memory, but did you spend any time at the communications building, or were you a student of another discipline?
Roberto Orci: Luckily, we finished the script for Fringe before the Strike hit, so FOX/WARNERS is going ahead with giving us the green light to shoot it. As for Alex — because Alex and I are the luckiest guys in the world, we are also in the middle of production on our first movie as producers under our KO shingle for our home studio, DreamWorks. The movie is called EAGLE EYE. Started shooting the same day as Trek, so he’s mostly handling that while I mostly handle Trek. And yeah, I went the RTF route, too and was there for a couple years… Hook ‘em horns!

Red Shirt: I don’t know how involved with Michael Giachinno you are gonna be, but please please PLEASE help JJ, et al to have a locked picture before he has to complete his score! For me locked would mean the beats and edits are precise and timed, even if temp FX, animatics, etc. are being used as place holders. I think the Star Wars prequels are a prime example of how a film score can be butchered when a film is poorly conceived during the shoot, i.e. trying to make a film come together in the editing suite, more so than on the printed screenplay page. I loathe how Luca$ cut and pasted Williams’ score in those movies, just like grabbing a wav file from an Avid bin, and slapping it in the timeline, even if the leitmotif didn’t fit the scene (like a sliver of Yoda’s theme in a scene bereft of Yoda!). Goldsmith’s music is pretty iconic with ST, from the features to TNG, and ST Voyager’s theme music. There is a lot of history there. Horner’s scores are great also. I do really like Giachinno, and for those of you out there who don’t know his work please check out the score to The Incredibles or the Pixar short “Lifted” to listen to his range. “Lifted” alone tells me he is gonna knock ST0’s score out of the park.
Roberto Orci: Interesting point about the score… will keep that in mind moving forward.

Rusty McCoy: Now that you have finished filming on the bridge set, what are the plans for them? Is Paramount planning on storing them for sequels or will they get tossed in file 13(the dumpster)? And again thanks for the interaction — its been great.
Roberto Orci: The bridge will be boxed or crated, but not destroyed… just in case we need it…

Red Shirt: Wow, Roberto! giving your pal Alex the first letter in your production shingle (The K before the O) Aren’t you generous! I guess it has a more powerful ring to have a knockout (KO) punch than to just be (OK) (Orci/Kurtzman) And yes, Hook ‘Em Horns! I fully expect a veiled Bevo, burnt orange, or 40 acres reference in your future works. I’ll keep an eye out for it.
Roberto Orci: Tell me about it. Sadly, I couldn’t argue that KO was a better combo than OK productions! But we still switch our names on every screenplay, so I can take some comfort there.

Charles Trotter: I am a contributor and administrator at Memory Alpha (http://www.memory-alpha.org/). Did you guys use Memory Alpha when researching for the movie? And if so, can MA expect to receive a mention in the end credits?

Roberto Orci: We absolutely used Memory Alpha during the entire process, and still reference it occasionally during production. It was great to be able to refer the less educated members of the team to your great site. THANK YOU! Will see what I can do about credits. Not a bad idea at all.

Shawn: I just got a quick screenwriting question related to Star Trek. How many pages is the final shooting draft? and how long do you think the movie will be? Do you believe in the rule of one page of script equals one page of screen time? I read somewhere that Transformers was 106 pages and it ended up being two hours and twenty some odd minutes, can you clarify this in relation to Star Trek? Keep up the good work and thanks for talking with the fans.
Roberto Orci: The script is about 128 pages. Sometimes, production changes the margins slightly for formatting reasons, giving a 1-5 page variance. We’d love it to be as close to 2 hours as possible. Too early to tell until we really get into editing. Transformers was over 130 pages long, and Bay dragged the action out even longer. … the rule of thumb is that a page = a minute of screen time… in general.

Red Shirt: Also, on a serious note, do you speak Spanish? If so, I wonder if you plan on being part of the Spanish looping for Latin American release of this film. Did you ever respond as to whether you and/or Alex have any screen time in this movie?
Roberto Orci: I do speak Spanish. As far as a cameo, i really want to try and enjoy seeing Trek as a fan, and nothing would take me out of the movie more than to see my stupid face up there (or Alex’s).

Charles Trotter: How long did it take you and Alex to write the script? Can you tell us the exact day you started up through the last day you worked on it? Also… is David Witz the film’s UPM? If so, does that mean Chernov is no longer UPM? And do you think Stratton Leopold will still receive some type of credit in the film? Why did he leave, anyway? Obviously, you’re not obligated to answer all or any of these questions and I will understand if you don’t, lol! Still, whatever you can answer will be greatly appreciated.
Roberto Orci:
Took us about 4 months to write the script. David Witz is indeed the UPM. Chernov is Exec Producer. don’t know the status is Leopold’s credit.

RoobyDoo: Which of the characters was most difficult to write?
Roberto Orci: The two characters that were the most difficult to write were the villain and Kirk himself. Kirk in particular can de deceptive because you can fall into the trap of making him 2 dimensional because you think you know him so well or because you think his behavior in any given situation is a foregone conclusion — rather than treating him as a true character who has free will and has to make decisions. Easy to get lazy when writing known characters.

SPB: If you’re still haunting these boards, I was just curious (don’t worry, I’m not looking for spoilers): Were there any particular episodes of The Original Series that helped shape your and Alex’s takes on Kirk, Spock, McCoy, et al, when writing their characters and trying to find their “voices?” And did you listen to any particular TREK soundtracks while writing, to help get you in the mood?
Roberto Orci: Many episodes — Balance of Terror stands out, as do ST2,3,4,and 6, and a couple of the Judith and Garfield Reeves Stevens novels. And the James Horner sound tracks are to this day some of my favorite scores of any movie ever. Absolutely listened to them for inspiration during the writing process

Harry Ballz: I know you were inundated with 600 queries the other day, but I’d love to hear your take on my “tingle” question….. Namely, in Yesterday’s Enterprise when Picard says, “let’s make sure history never forgets the name Enterprise”, the hair on the back of my neck stood up…..a real “tingle” moment. With that in mind, how many “tingle” moments are there like that in the new Star Trek film…..best guess?
Roberto Orci:
First, I too am on record, i believe on this very site, that the moment you mentioned choked me up as well. Every time. So I completely know what you mean. Never know what moments will work at the end of the day, but we were shooting for that exact feeling several times. Let’s see… my best guess… hopefully… between 6 and 10… I pray.

Regular Joe: I know your focus is on this movie and after it, hopefully, a couple sequels. Beyond that, do you believe Trek will be returning as a TV series at some point? If so, would you and the rest of KABLO [Kurtzman, Abrams, Burk, Lindelof, Orci] hope to be involved?
Roberto Orci:
I honestly don’t know. I can’t speak for the others, but for me, I don’t want to be involved unless we really have a genuine vision for what a series should be. If I — for one minute — feel myself going stale or jumping on something Trek based on no other reason than past success or whatever, than I will resign my commission. It may be that someone else will have a better, more passionate idea about how to do a series, and I would hope none of our egos get in their way.
Having said all that, I would [love] to see a series…

AM THX-1138: Out of all the cast members, the one that I am most curious about at this point is Simon Pegg. I think that JJ said that he was out of the country (England?) while the chat was going on at strength. I was wondering if there was something secret or hush, hush about his portrayal of Scotty and that’s why we haven’t seen him. I was skeptical at first of his casting but admit to warming up to the idea recently. I guess I was such a McGillion fan that I was blinded to other choices. Back to Pegg; it seems that he hasn’t been as publicly available as the other cast members. Any reasoning behind this? How about a photo of him with black hair? A bone tosed in this direction?
Roberto Orci: Nothing particularly more secretive about his involvement than anyone else. Many have expressed concern that his interpretation would somehow be a joke given his background, but I can assure you that his performance will be tonally in line with the film.

Caltech: Haven’t asked a question yet, so though I’d give it a shot! The two things I’ve always loved about Star Trek are: 1) it’s humanity and 2) it’s portrayal of our technological future. In terms of the second, one thing that has kept me a fan all these years is its keeping with established physics and it’s postulation for where our physics and engineering might eventually go! As a physicist, I can’t tell you how close we actually are to making a breakthrough that would lead to the kind of star travel we see in ST. So my question is, have you kept with past tradition and had academic consultants on the film from science and engineering, to make it as realistic as possible?
Roberto Orci:
The short answer is yes. The more fun answer is coming soon.

reptileboy:I would love to know how much they understand that many Star Trek fans are scared by this endeavour. At least with Rick Berman, Michael Piller, Jeri Taylor etc, they had worked under people close to Gene Roddenberry or directly under.
It’s hard not to see them as invaders of our realm. It’s easy to say that Star Trek should appeal to the broader audience, but when so many fans have lived and breathed the franchise, to see even such a talented group come in, it begs the question; Can they be trusted.
I don’t often say this, but JJ and co. if you have read my comment please understand that some fans are standing on the edge not fully sure of what to make of things. We’d love to see Star Trek renew itself and grow, but really out worst fear is that the entire franchise would be dealt a death blow should the movie fail and fans not like it.
It’s hard to describe that as a fan of pretty much the entire series so far, that until now I had never felt such discontent over the direction and abilities of the franchise that I’ve had to wonder how much Star Trek meant to me.
Roberto Orci:
We feel your fear. When you say that it’s easy to see us as invaders of your realm, we know what you mean. We prefer to think of ourselves as having been recruited into Starfleet in an emergency. We don’t particularly feel we deserve to be here over anyone else, and we know we don’t have the benefit of Gene Roddenberry or the amazing crews who have been stewards of this dream before us. It just turned out that we were ready for duty and our number came up, and we could either refuse the call or take a swing. Don’t let our enthusiasm or confidence lead you to believe that we aren’t also standing on the edge, trying not to look down.

Luckily, we’ve had a little help. Nimoy’s blessing is a beacon of light that we have tried to follow like a ship in the night. And the good wishes and blessings of the original crew members or their children has been equally valuable.We know that Star Trek, more than any other cultural treasure (with the exception, perhaps, of Star Wars), belongs to the the most savvy and forward looking fans in history. We believe many on our team came from within your ranks. That is the reason why we have asked the impossible from you — for your input or criticism even as we seek to keep the story a secret, but the process an open book.
It doesn’t mean we will make the right decisions, or that we won’t make mistakes But if we fail, let it never be said that our failure came through ignorance or disrespect of Star Trek. Let not our failure ever tarnish the name… ENTERPRISE.

… though we have no intention of failing.
 

Sign off message from "Cast and Crew of the Enterprise"

And as we close out the weekend, we are going to go radio silent for a bit. We don’t want to outstay our welcome and we need a bit of time to plan the rest of the year and we need to repay our friends at the studio for trusting us and giving us the freedom to communicate with you in such an open way. It’s their turn again.

We still read everything though, so don’t stop posting.

Talk soon.

 

TrekMovie.com would again like to thank Roberto Orci, JJ Abrams and the entire cast and crew of the new Star Trek movie for reaching out to the fan community in this way.

 

Comments

1. Q - January 28, 2008

Cool. ^___^

2. Pizza - January 28, 2008

Mr. Orci, it is so nice to have you here. Makes us feel like we are part of the process of making this movie. (I know you would tell us we are). But you have to admit that this is still a very unique thing, and most true Trek fans are so incredibly grateful.

I was wondering if you have pondered any thoughts as to a second story line.

3. toddk - January 28, 2008

Probably a good idea to store the bridge set, along side all the others.

4. Anthony Pascale - January 28, 2008

Pizza (and others)
As noted above, Bob is going ‘radio silent’ for a little while. It is really nice to have live and almost live Q&A going with the team, but these are busy men who have to make a new Star Trek movie (as well as make some other projects happen). So if you ask a question…do not be disappointed if it isn’t answered today or any time soon

It is easy to get used to having them here answering questions, but we cant expect every week to be like the last one

5. Mathias - January 28, 2008

Fantastic – yet again…. thanks Mr. Orci!! :D

6. steve-o - January 28, 2008

fantastic!

7. steve-o - January 28, 2008

OH 5. already said that

8. Ivory - January 28, 2008

It was a nice gesture on their part, but It’s too bad they only accepted softball questions.

9. Ivory - January 28, 2008

Softball = “the doors go swoosh”

10. Allister Gourlay - January 28, 2008

Fantastic article… thanks Roberto and the rest of the Trek crew!

11. Trekmatt - January 28, 2008

Thanks Mr Orci, always great to hear from you and the rest of the cast and crew, keep up the good work! :)

12. Dr. Image - January 28, 2008

After seeing posts by Roberto and The Gang that followed, my confidence in them delivering has increased considerably.
I hope they prove my theory wrong!
I’m now a “moderate purist,” so, bring it on! Eager to see how it all fits.
More pix, please, u guys!
(Hey- I was REALLY first!)

13. PatsPhan - January 28, 2008

This is awesome. It reminds me of when RDM would do his “Ask RDM” messages, “back in the day” on DS9. I look forward to more of these (whenever they may happen) to help get us all through to December 25th!

Cheers…

14. Karlore - January 28, 2008

Roberto Orci is hela cool!

15. RTC - January 28, 2008

Thanks to JJ, Roberto, et. al. And to you, Anthony! A lot of work went into this, it’s much appreciated!

16. GARY NEUMANN - January 28, 2008

Excelente!

17. SPB - January 28, 2008

BLESS YOU, WRITER’S STRIKE!

Makes me wonder if Roberto Orci would have spent as much time on these boards if there wasn’t a writer’s strike going on!

Glad he did it, regardless! He’s certainly earned his fair share of goodwill from the fans, this one included!

18. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

What I found not only interesting but very encouraging is that they had to work on Kirk’s character so that he ws not predictable. It’s easy to look at things he does in the new movie and say “Kirk wouldn’t do that,” but that’s what makes him human, and the thrill comes from seeing his humanity expressed in surprises. After all, if some of the series episodes had been lost and only new recovered and aired, many woud likely say “but Kirk wouldn’t do that!” when in fact he did. There were many points in the series where Kirk surprises us with unpredicability. (His enemies learned that as well.) Shatner himself brought a realism to the character by inbueing him with small character traits that were unexpected and probably improvised. Kirk was never predictable in the series and his younger self, just working out the man he will be, is even more like that.

19. Ensign Ro- (short for Roland) - January 28, 2008

I also would Like to thank Mr. Abrams, Mr. Orci and the rest of the crew and cast for taking the time to answer the questions. I think they all did a fine job of walking that thin line between secrecy and informing the fans. Obviously not an easy task.

And thank you, Anthony for providing such a wonderful venue for us fans. Yhis site is without a doubt the most frequented by me since its inception.

It may be premature for me to say…but this seems like it’s going to be a wonderful retelling of Mr. Rodenberry’s vision. “A wagontrain to the stars” for the young and old. I truly cannot wait for the final product. And I will enjoy every tidbit I can get here between now and December.

Again, great job, Anthony…thanks for helping this old guy feel young again.

20. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

woo!
finally, definate proof that my precious door SWOOSH will not be forgotten!
and maybe they would build a replica of the new bridge at ST: The Experiance. The TNG bridge is already awesome! But maybe having an XI themed attraction will attract wayyy more buisness to the Hilton.
:D

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

21. Quatlo - January 28, 2008

Definitely a class act of film artisans. Good luck to them.

22. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

Agree about the trademarked door “swoosh/squeek.” That sound is more than any other Trek effect is recognizable and used on other movies and shows as a nod to TOS. Even Futurama uses it!

I though it was sad through that on the shows re-creating the TOS period, “A Mirror Darkly,” and others, the swoosh was never synced right or they digitally stretched it out in a “stutter” to match the slow doors.

Hope they get it right in the new movie.

23. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

I hope the cast decides to do a chat when they have a few hours of free time. It’d be fragalastic! :p

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

24. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

lol
the “swoosh” on In a Mirror, Darkly (if you can call it that) made me frown. The fact that it was Cawley’s set made me sure they’d get it right, considering he makes STNV there.

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

25. Ensign Ro- (short for Roland) - January 28, 2008

#24

I had no idea they used Cawley’s set for that episode. Thanks for the new tidbit.

26. Gary - January 28, 2008

Interesting talk about Kirk’s predictability. I remember a similar argument between Roddenberry and Ellison about what Kirk would have done at the end of “City on the Edge of Forever”. Some would argue that Roddenbery took the predictable route. What do the rest of you think?

27. Duncan MacLeod - January 28, 2008

24. I dont think that was Cawley’s Set. IIRC they rebuilt the original set (I saw the set building pictures) from the original blue prints. Something like that may be expensive for Cawley, but on a multi-million dollar budget its just a spit in the bucket. Remember also that Cawley’s set is like 98% of the real size due to space constraints. They did use some of Cawley’s props they could not find/build.

28. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

#25… sorry to say, but that set was not Cawley’s. It was built on the Paramount lot for that episode. The ydid use Sulu’s targeting scanner and something else, I think.

29. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

Sulu’s scanner from Cawley’s set, I meant to say.

30. Duncan MacLeod - January 28, 2008

These two episodes mark the first time since the Original Series that the entire Constitution class bridge was rebuilt for a Star Trek episode. In previous episodes where it was depicted, for example the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode Relics and the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode Trials and Tribble-ations, only small sections of the bridge were rebuilt. Visual effects were used to fill in the gaps. — FROM WIKIPEDIA – I know not the most reliable, but i saw the set building pics on trekweb

31. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

I’m almost completely sure that they used Cawley’s set??
oh well. time for some research :P
Memory Alpha, i come to thee

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

32. AJ - January 28, 2008

Anthony, thank you for having this site. I am not sure if you ever thought it would act as the “window” onto STXI to the extent that it has these past months.

I often wonder what it would have been like if Stewart Baird or (heaven forbid) Berman/Braga would have had such unfettered access to the mass lunatic fringe. In the case of the former, he probably wouldn’t have cared. Berman/Braga, however, could have taken their eyes off of Nielsen ratings to understand why it all got stale.

For the near term, I hope Trekmovie.com remains as valid after STXI as it is now. After box-office, DVD and merchandise all die down, I hope there will still be stories to tell and people to meet on this site. If the franchise is alive and well in 2009, I’m sure there wíll be.

Do we know what the next shoots will be?

33. Dr. Image - January 28, 2008

#25 Ro- I don’t think that was Cawley’s set- I don’t think they were that far along or well-known when that ep was made. The only thing from NV was Sulu’s viewer, as I recall.
It bugged me that the Defiant bridge screens didn’t have the blue border.
Just something I had noticed…

34. Captain Hackett - January 28, 2008

Anthony Pascale

Are you planning to hold series of Q/A sessions between actors/actresses and fans here?

Thanks!

35. Ensign Ro- (short for Roland) - January 28, 2008

#27

Well, thanks to you also for clearing that up. I thought it was a Paramount set…but the Cawley comment cast some doubt for me. As a geeky sidenote…if I ever own my own home, I plan on constructing a home theater based on a compilation of bridge designs that were my favorites, i.e. The TOS Bridge, The TMP Bridge, and ST-VI Bridge. I think the design flows nicely. It’s a pity it will probably never become more than anything other than a dream design of mine. Oh well, guess I’ll have to settle for walking on the bridges at The Tour when it comes to my area. lol

36. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

yeppers
it was a rebuilt set, aside from the few props they borrowed from STNV and the AA Phaser Archer used.
oh well. :P

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

37. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

#31….

From http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/9438.html

That ship, we learn, is the U.S.S. Defiant NCC-1764, the Constitution-class starship which disappeared into a spatial interphase in Tholian space (almost taking Captain Kirk with it) in “The Tholian Web.” That gave the set designers, art directors and construction crew the exciting opportunity to reproduce the Original Series bridge, down to the most intricate detail — though with subtle differences to make it the Defiant, such as the gold plaque next to the turbolift. This is the third time the TOS bridge has been depicted in a post-TOS show, but this is the first time it has been reproduced this completely, with a full three-quarter-round set. In “Relics” (Star Trek: The Next Generation) only about half of the full bridge set was built and shown on screen. In “Trials and Tribble-ations” (DS9) only small segments were used as background for the contemporary characters, the rest of the Enterprise bridge seen in repurposed TOS clips (though corridors and other sets were fully reproduced). This new set starts with the science station at the far left and goes all the way around to the viewscreen, with the captain’s chair and the helm in the center.

38. Diabolik - January 28, 2008

But I think Cawley asked them if he could have the new bridge set when they were through with it… since they were just going to tear it down anyway…. ;)

39. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

I like Berman’s style for the 4 movies he made, but they just didn’t cater to the young audiance (like meh) and therefore sent Star Trek into a deep, dark slumber. Finally, a man that many people might say “Who’s that” too, yes, JJ Abrams, walks in and re-vamps our beloved Trek.
So good job, JJ. :)

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

40. Red Shirt - January 28, 2008

I’m having fun being part of this, and look forward to the next appearance of Roberto and gang! Stay tuned….

41. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

Did they let Cawley keep the set?
I havn’t watched but the first 2 episodes and the Vigginite of STNV, back when I had DSL. Then we moved….. spent a year without internet, then returned to the land of bytes and bits with a dial-up connection
:)

Crank Dat Starship Boy
My Cornyness
:D -Will.I.Am

42. NCC-73515 - January 28, 2008

24, 25:
I think they did not use Cawley’s set. Just Sulu’s tactical viewer was from NV.

43. Fansince9 - January 28, 2008

“And here are some of the key findings in the follow-up weekend discussions with Roberto Orci:

The set of the Enterprise bridge will be stored for future use; ”

Does this mean another movie? If so, then yay!!! :) :) :)

44. CanuckLou - January 28, 2008

Roberto and Anthony once again thank you.

Some great tidbits in there!

The adventure continues…

45. shuttlepod10 - January 28, 2008

it’s great the cast and crew of Trek are huge fans of Trek like all of us. I can’t wait for the movie.

46. Will.I.Am - January 28, 2008

lol
#45
imagine if they wern’t
Spock (Quinto): **robotic voice** Kirk, I beleive that the plasme has been severed from the dopinhinger.
Kirk (Pine): **Voice like Trembley from Star Track** Spock… I beleive…. That maybe the….. Plasme must….. Be reassemmmmmmbled to the…… dingle……hopp….er…… What say you…….. old spock
Spock (Nimoy): You all suck.

47. Ed - January 28, 2008

It was a fun thing this weekend. Though I didn’t get a question answered it was fun reading everything, excluding one or two things here and there. Great job to all who threw this together.

48. Batts - January 28, 2008

I am very CURIOUS to know some details about Pike or rather how is that character coming along in the movie?? This other unnamed captain, Garth or Garrovick, who knows?? It is already canon that Garth is one of kirk’s heroes. are we going to see any of his exploits. Are we going to see any of kirk’s expoits that made him captain so soon.
And of course, NImoy are all of his parts finished yet??!
I hope someone can answer this??

49. Nathan - January 28, 2008

Whether or not this movie succeeds or not, it’s clear that everyone is giving it their best shot. All of the best stewards of the Trek name (Nicholas Meyer, Harve Bennett, Michael Piller, Ira Steven Behr, etc, etc) have not just captured what had already been done before, but have brought something new to the franchise. It’s my hope that J.J. Abrams and co. will be able to do the same…

We’ll see, but the prospects certainly look good!

50. Jon C - January 28, 2008

Star Trek (zero).How about Start Trek?

51. Harry Ballz - January 28, 2008

Roberto

just to clarify…..

I don’t consider the turbolift doors going “swoosh” as a “tingle” moment! :)

52. The Vulcanista - January 28, 2008

#48
“And of course, NImoy are all of his parts finished yet??!”

I imagine Nimoy’s parts were finished, oh, about 60 years ago. ;)

Sorry. Couldn’t resist. I’ll shut up and go back to work now.

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

53. TomBot2008 - January 28, 2008

One of the main things that I hope people are doing is keeping a toe to the ground. With all the minutia, hype, rumors and such floating about, it’s not hard to see how some might get a little too much of the appetizer before the main course arrives. ;-) I avoided the new BattleStar Galactica for a loooong time because I was skeptical and all the hype seemed a little overblown. In the end, I was sorry it took so long for me to come around, and I think, I hope that by the time Star Trek comes to town, I’ll be anticipating it, not dreading it. :-)

54. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 28, 2008

Mr. Orci:

You’ll be pleased to know that your application for godhood is going well. We’ve run into a bit of a snag, as the temple on Pollux IV appears to have been destroyed by phaser fire, but I suspect the gods have merely gone fishing, and that this can all be sorted out by the end of the week.

If all goes well, you and KABOL/BALOK should ascend into the heavens sometime on December 26. I’ll keep you posted.

55. CmdrR - January 28, 2008

The turbo-lift doors go “swoosh,” since WD-40 technology was lost during the Eugenics wars of the mid-1990’s.

YES, Trek is back, baby!

56. trekee - January 28, 2008

If there is such a thing as a geek overload, we probably had it this week… amazing amount of detail which gave away… rather little actually… :-)

330 days doesn’t seem so long, I’m sure it’ll fly in…… (not!)

57. star trackie - January 28, 2008

Hey Anthony- What happened to all the coverage of TOS remastered? No more previews of upcoming episodes? (not trailers, just threads on what’s ahead). No more guest reviews? No preview image stills from CBS-D?. And then the FX reels coming in way late.

I noticed AICN has dropped the coverage as well. Did CBS-D cut you guys off? Has the project already wrapped everything up, tweaking all three seasons?

Love your site Anthony, but I’ really miss revisiting these old classics through your reamstered coverage, that”s what brought me here to begin with.

..and yeah…the chat with the cast and crew was unbelievably cool. .

58. CmdrR - January 28, 2008

57 – ^

Yeah, and it was The Enemy Within!

Where’s tha- brandyyyy?!?!?

59. LostOnNCC1701 - January 28, 2008

To 43:

“Future Use” could probably mean anything: A future movie, a TV series (doubtful), a mini-series (only slightly more likely), auctioning off the parts if the movie is a bust, using the set in a museum or traveling show… a ton of things.

Sometimes they just keep sets in storage or in the open simply because it would be just too damn hard to completely get rid of them. The War of the Worlds airplane crash set is still up at Universal Studios partly for this reason (and also because it is a awesome set that may well be one of the best ones built… ever.)

60. William - January 28, 2008

Judging by Orci’s final comments shown above, he seems to be a very skilled writer. ” That is the reason why we have asked the impossible from you — for your input or criticism even as we seek to keep the story a secret, but the process an open book. It doesn’t mean we will make the right decisions, or that we won’t make mistakes But if we fail, let it never be said that our failure came through ignorance or disrespect of Star Trek. Let not our failure ever tarnish the name… ENTERPRISE.”

Reading that, I had my own “tingle” moment. I have little doubt that the script must me very well written.

61. The Vulcanista - January 28, 2008

#58

Man, I didn’t set the timer right on the DVD-R! Stupid, stupid technology! }:-(

(At least it wasn’t “Mirror Mirror”!)

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

62. Dr. Image - January 28, 2008

V- Which one was it?? I missed it too!!

63. Chris Pike - January 28, 2008

This whole excercise in having these e conversations between us the fans and the guys driving Trek’s future especially Roberto has been totally successfull, enjoyable and fulfilling. It has for me, with many doubts and worries previously, given me much faith in them to carry the torch, and created an anticipation only equal to that in 1978 waiting for TMP. The team have spoken with heart and have said exactly the right words without ever sounding like they are trying to sell the film to us. So, like James Cawley, I have been taken aboard and look forward to what will be without doubt the best future Trek could possibly have had! And thank you for reading what we have to say.

64. ShawnP - January 28, 2008

I don’t know if anyone’s caught wind of this yet, but Yelchin’s been doing some interviews as of late on Star Trek. Like, this particular one is an interesting interview about how, like, Chekov is the “weirdest” guy, but, like, you’ll see that, like, his manner of speaking, like, gives away his age. Enjoyable nonetheless. Check it out:

http://movies.ign.com/articles/847/847936p1.html

P.S. Plugging “Star Trek” in to Google News always pulls up some fun news stories.

65. Captain_Neill - January 28, 2008

why just come up and say its a reboot?

From the pics it obvious it wont fit into canon, the bridge station on JJ Abrams iterview is wrong looking. It looks cool but looks nothing like the bridge we know and love.

I understand it has to look more updated but does it have to be totally different.

I feel JJ is making this for the non fans and tossing hard core fans to the waste side. He has stated a stronger emphasis on making it for non fans

66. toddk - January 28, 2008

did you know that in the episode”in a mirror darkly” I was very impressed by the sets, but the contemporary beeps mixed in with the original style audio FX, bothered me alot. the beeps sound like TNG, on a ship that it supposed to be in TOS timeline. also the same thing happened on the NX-01 Bridge, which annoyed me to no end. I am a huge trek fan to those who think I’m mean.
-Todd

67. Trek Nerd Central - January 28, 2008

#64 Shawn P.

Like, no, no, no, no. Like, Yeltsin didn’t really say “perfectly cheesy and B-like”?

Like, did he?

Like, he musta been watching season 3. Anton! Anton! Like go back and watch season 1! No cheese there!

Sorry. Nice fella, that Yeltsin. Excellent actor, too. I just cringe whenever anyone short-changes Star Trek by callng it cheesy or campy or “B-like,” ’cause that diminishes it. IMO.

68. sean's clone - January 28, 2008

I think it’s absolutely awesome that JJ and Co. have been so engaged with the Trek fan base in this way. It’s really a smart move as it helps ease the fears that Trek is in the wrong hands – and is going in a bad direction. Of course, it’s impossible to see a year from now what the film will finally portray, but my concerns are certainly eased. It’s clear the Orci respects the vision and that’s very encouraging.

69. barrydancer - January 28, 2008

I have the same fears that Dr. Image mentioned in the first question of the transcript up there. Notice that in answering Roberto did not refute the contention that this new film is meant to replace the look of “The Cage,” “Where No Man Has Gone Before,” and really the rest of TOS. I wonder sometimes if the whole thing isn’t going to be one giant exercise in retconning.

I don’t think everything had to be or should have been exactly the same. I’ve always thought that the interiors of the ship especially were ripe for some sort of tweaking to bring them more in line with a more futuristic feel and to fit into a more fluid design lineage between ENT and TMP. After all, I don’t think they’d be using analog gauges and that ubiquitous 1960’s font in the 2260’s and let’s not forget that Pike;s Enterprise spit out reports on paper! What happens if you get a paper jam during a Klingon attack or forgot to order new toner?! :)

It’s the exterior changes to the Enterprise that bother me most, though. They’ve said that they’re respecting canon and that there’s a canon inspired reason for any changes, but without retconning how can there be a reason for an original configuration Constitution, which has had a look and specific dimensions that have been accepted canon for over 40 years, no longer fitting that look and those dimensions? I don’t think the notion that this is pre-TOS, and so okay, fits the bill unless we’re prepared to believe, as Bernd Scneider pointed out, that the class was constructed with one look, then refitted prior to “The Cage” with a more “primitive” look, wchihc remained until the 2270’s refit bringing the ship back to a look similar to its original construction.

Anywho, I know I’m being hypocritical advocating for interior, but not necessarily exterior changes, but that’s just my two cents. I’m a big Trekkie, and apparently quite a nerd when it comes to starships :). I have no doubt that JJ et. al love Star Trek and want to be conscientious stewards and will probably make a great film. But everything I see points to reboot and I sometimes wish that someone in production would just say that this is their Star Trek and not necessarily bound by what came before?

Am I crazy? :P

70. Trek Nerd Central - January 28, 2008

On a calmer note, I am ever more reassured by Orci & Co’s commitment to the Star Trek vision. And I must say, they have all bent over backward trying to be respectful toward the fans, some of us very cranky.

71. Maniac - January 28, 2008

Nero = son of the romulan commander from “balance of terror”???

72. Timncc1701 - January 28, 2008

Balance of Terror was the best episode of all time IMHO, as was Khan the best movie ever. I hope these guys capture that spirit. The fate of the galaxy rests in their hands. One thing that bothers me a bit is that the movie appears DARK. The corridor looks like one to a Klingon ship. Star Trek was about enlightenment; the human adventure just beginning; the Federation being the light in the galaxy. I hope this basic theme does not get lost in the darkness. “Behold the marvel in the darkness.”

73. theSpockette - January 28, 2008

Mr. Orci, thank you so much, for taking the time to answer these questions! It can mean a lot to us as Trekkies to hear from you and see how you’re respecting Trek lore and canon. As someone said in one of the questions, it can be worrying to think of new people “taking over” and trying to revive the franchise. But I really don’t think it could be in better hands, and appreciate all you’re putting into this!

74. NCC-73515 - January 28, 2008

The international teasers are online on the homepage…
CRISIS!!! The ones for Italy and Spain say 2009…
Does this mean we europeans will see the movie in 2009?????!!!!! while the US (and UK, Australia, NZ) will have it on X-mas / boxing day?

75. Crusty McCoy - January 28, 2008

It has been fantastic getting their insight. However, the question about keeping the sets for future use came from me, Crusty McCoy not Rusty. Rusty is the one in the family we don’t talk about.

76. Driver - January 28, 2008

A little late, maybe, but I wonder if there will be more ships than Enterprise and, presumably, Nero’s ship.

77. The Guardian of Forever - January 28, 2008

Great to have them here interacting with us, not treating us like inferior beings. I think Trek is in safe hands, considering that they’re fans themselves, not some yahoos commandeering our fandom.

78. Scott - January 28, 2008

So its “Star Trek 0″ now!
Nice!
To some it may sound better then Star Trek 11.
Great Q & A!

79. Jess Stuart - January 28, 2008

Thanks for the opportunity to have some input.

The biggest thing Star Trek seems to represent is: HOPE. I don’t know how to add to that, so I’ll just present it and let you all do what you think best.

One thing that would be awesome – an acceptance of the religion and humanism that doesn’t patronize either. That could be subtly used to make a very relevant and powerful statement.

As for effects, I’d like to see the following, if possible:

* A shot of USS Reliant, before it underwent a TMP style refit.
* Enough different ship types to actually give the impression the Federation has a fleet. Substantial fleets don’t just have one cruiser or battleship design, and the don’t just have cruisers. They have an ongoing series of developing designs. (I never really got the feeling there was a Federation fleet during TOS, since we only see one kind of ship, and no space docks – not to diminish what they achieved with 1960’s SFX technology).

I look forward to this movie with great anticipation.

80. K. M. Kirby - January 28, 2008

I hope they just gloss over the interior furnishings and emphasize some oversaturated astronomical photography. The surface trappings are far less important than the exterior scenery as it relates to matters of philosophical exposition.

81. NCC-73515 - January 28, 2008

Now I am completely shocked. Not only do the teasers say 2009 for Spain and Italy, but IMDB says that the release dates in France, the Netherlands and Norway are sceduled for FEB 2009!!!

February!! 1.5 months after the US release… Still, the German date is DEC 25. I hope that stays.
But for the other europeans… they set the phasers to kill :(

82. The Vulcanista - January 28, 2008

#62
The Enemy Within.

Damn!

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

83. barrydancer - January 28, 2008

79:
* A shot of USS Reliant, before it underwent a TMP style refit.
* Enough different ship types to actually give the impression the Federation has a fleet. Substantial fleets don’t just have one cruiser or battleship design, and the don’t just have cruisers. They have an ongoing series of developing designs. (I never really got the feeling there was a Federation fleet during TOS, since we only see one kind of ship, and no space docks – not to diminish what they achieved with 1960’s SFX technology).

There’s no evidence that the Miranda class ever went through the type of refit/upgrade that the Constitution did. For all we know the Reliant’s configuration in TWOK, as well as other Mirandas, was the original design of the ship. I tend to believe that the Miranda class was a newer design than the Constitution, which might go a little way towards explaining its exceptionally long service life through TNG and onwards.

As to second point, I completely agree. From the start I’ve been hoping we’d get a glimpse of some new ship classes. :)

84. NZorak - January 28, 2008

I personally have no problem with the set and even the look of the ship being retconned. I don’t want to go see Star Trek 2008 and feel like I’ve just spent a night in 1969. That works for Cawley’s production, but it isn’t what will sell tickets. Besides, I want to go there and be wowed by the newly invigorated vision, not feel like I’ve seen it all before. Of course for years I’ve been hoping they would digitally enhance the original series – and by digitally enhance it, I don’t just mean replace some matte paintings and make the exterior shots of the Enterprise look better, I wanted to see the ship look like it did post-refit, I wanted to see the crimson uniforms and the enterprise bridge look more like it does in Star Trek II. In short, I’m talking about a Lucasfilm style retrofit of the entire original series, just as long as i doesn’t come out looking like a video game with Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley’s heads pasted in. Maybe the technology to do this quickly and cheaply will be there in another 20 years and they can give it another try when they adapt the series for our super-crystal clear ultra-HD entertainment walls that we’ll all have by then.

So I’m cool with the changes they’re making here. Sure it won’t line up perfectly with established styles, but that’s OK. We can just look at the TV series as a great start, but the new movie designs are what things “really” looked like.

85. TOS - January 28, 2008

The J.J. Universe of star trek is going to bite.
It’s going to be non-cannon wrapped in a ball of lies.
J.J. with use “a shaken camera” look to hide how bad he is.
The Writers will use T.O.S. lines to hide how bad they are.
The actors will say “It is the character before the character you know from the T.O.S.” to hide their bad acting.
The reboot look will be called “an Updated look” to hide that it is just J.J. wanting to make Star Trek his own and not Gene’s.

Copy this, save this and watch how all of what i am saying will come true.
Do not be fooled by J.J.’s Star Trek.

86. JB - January 28, 2008

Interesting comments about writing Kirk, and I’m glad they’ve tried to avoid the trap of making him too predictable. “Balance of Terror” is definitely a good guide to follow. The Captain in that script is a CO you’d follow anywhere. The Reeves-Stevens’ novels, not so much. Roberto, if you’re reading, I’d be interested in hearing what you thought they got right, because my recollection when I first read “Prime Directive” was that they fell into the very trap you indicate you tried to avoid. And I recently took a peek at “Academy Collision Course,” and it was just awful.

87. NZorak - January 28, 2008

#85 – Yeah, that’s optimism. You know, it isn’t like Uwe Boll is making this film. You might be right if he were, but I have faith that JJ Abrams and Roberto Orci can turn out a good Trek movie. Have some faith!

88. Michael Hall - January 28, 2008

TOS–

I have no more of a clue than anyone as to whether this film will work or not. Either as Star Trek, science fiction, good drama. . .or even as a fun popcorn flick. For most of us, the movie we see onscreen December 25th will tell the tale, until which time we’re willing to suspend judgement. In the meantime, do you have any idea how childish your dire prognostications and predictions of gloom and doom and failure make you sound? No disrespect intended, but AICN is really a more appropriate venue for such stuff.

Chill out, guy. (And for the upteenth time, it’s ‘canon’, not ‘cannon’.)

89. Ian Watson - January 28, 2008

#79: * A shot of USS Reliant, before it underwent a TMP style refit.

Here’s a test shot of the USS Copernicus, which will be making an appearance in New Voyages’ next episode, Blood and Fire:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT43f2p5b0A

90. RoyTheBoy - January 28, 2008

Tingle moments? Well for my money I’m going with “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one” for starters, and I think the film would finish (OK so I want it to finish) with “Space, the final frontier, these are the voyages…………….”

Like the idea the doors go “swoosh”, wonder if we’ll see Sulus targetting scanner and Spocks scanner?

91. Greg2600 - January 28, 2008

That Copernicus ship looks terrific! Somehow the fan designed crafts have looked so much better than the ones done in the later TNG era or Trek video games, which always look way overdone and fake.

92. Mary Jane - January 28, 2008

I think RedShirt’s comment on picture lock and scoring was interesting. I’m a film composer myself, and people usually don’t talk about that, even the filmmakers themselves often don’t. But nowadays, in the digital era, there is seldomly such a thing as a “picture lock”. A film is never finished, and this also goes for the editing. Any good composer today has to deal with that, and Giachino surely can. What Giachino should do however, is not use the main “Star Trek” theme by Goldsmith, the one from the first film, the last few films and the TNG series. He should come up with something new and iconic that can stand for itself. I never really liked Goldsmith’s StarTrek-themes, which – although catchy – are composed rather poorly (although I know that people love them for some reasons)… unlike the rest of Goldsmith’s StarTrek-scores, which were always fabulously crafted — anyone remember “Ilia’s Theme” from the first film? You can’t do much better than that! In terms of themes I always preferred the original TOS and DS9. But Giachino should definitely include the suspended horn fanfare… that’s the Star Trek trademark, not Goldsmith’s theme, which is merely a later addition to the franchise. I could also envision a dramatic, more serious variation of the complete TOS main theme by Alexander Courage. That could be quite intriguing.

93. Michael Hall - January 28, 2008

Wow, Mr. Watson, you built that? Nice.

94. Gary - January 28, 2008

barrydancer said “It’s the exterior changes to the Enterprise that bother me most, though. They’ve said that they’re respecting canon and that there’s a canon inspired reason for any changes, but without retconning how can there be a reason for an original configuration Constitution, which has had a look and specific dimensions that have been accepted canon for over 40 years, no longer fitting that look and those dimensions?” The answer is simple. Somehow history is changed so that all we have seen previously is slightly different. In my mind that would be the only “canon” way that would be acceptable to me. It would also explain why there never was a Eugenics War in the 1990’s, , why there never was a Voyager VI mission etc. This type of an explanation would not negate all that happened before (since we all know that according to canon it did), it would simply imply that history has changed from how it happened before.

95. josepepper - January 28, 2008

I think it’s odd that NO ONE is focusing on how the new engineering spaces are going to look. I thought star trek the motion picture was done pretty well but i’m pretty damned tired of all the plexiglass.

I hope they really put some though into the engineering decks and don’t just have a bunch of mechanical looking devices slapped on the walls.

Also, I didn’t like how “enterprise” had 756 monitors glued all over the place. It should all be functional and authentic, engineering spaces are not supposed to be “clean room” squeaky clean and perfect, not even in the 23rd century

96. Ian Watson - January 28, 2008

#94: Wow, Mr. Watson, you built that? Nice.

No, wasn’t me. :D I was just reminded of it from Jess Stuart’s comment. Daren Dochterman contributed the nacelle bulbs and deflector; the nacelle tubes and front of the saucer were taken from DAVE School’s model of the Enterprise, and NV Visual Effects guy Joel Bellucci created the rest, put it all together, retextured, lit and animated it.

New Voyages’ eMagazine #3 (http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/emagazine.html) has more details on the ship.

97. Mary Jane - January 28, 2008

#94 (or rather: #barrydancer)

The original Constitution configuration is the way it is because they didn’t have our VFX capabilities back in the days. Something like this should never qualify for canonization. You have to watch the new “Star Trek” film and rely on your imagination when looking at TOS after that. I mean, the NX-01 was in many ways far advanced in design, dimensioning and configuration than the TOS Enterprise. How do you explain that? ENT is canon, too. And that’s the problem with canon, any canon for that matter (incl. the religious Christian Bible canon): canon by definition is dogma and arbitrariness. Where does canon end? Sure, we know. But why? Only because some ruling entity tells us so. Why should it not be allowed to expand the status quo or use allegedly non-canonical sources? The rulers defining the canon are the filmmakers, and we have to accept and respect, if the new filmmakers expand or even alter canon. That’s the nature of things.

98. Timncc1701 - January 28, 2008

85
I hope you are wrong. If you aren’t we won’t see any new Trek, and the franchise is dead. The shake worked for me in Cloverfield. I think most people want to give JJ a chance. I almost didn’t want to see Star Trek II after the mind numbing, sleep provoking TMP. Khan saved the franchise then even though it really was not the look of TOS. Even Gene Roddenberry was kicked upstairs after he dehumanized the cast in TMP. I would reserve judgment.

99. barrydancer - January 28, 2008

94: I agree that somehow changing the timeline so things are slightly different would probably be the only way to do things, but then how far back would people have to go to change things? The Eugenics Wars and WWIII were referenced as having happened in ENT. Real history and Star Trek history have never totally meshed.

Plus, to possibly change the timeline in order to tell the story of the new film, to explain why things are different, is, at least to me, potentially totally disrespectful of everything we’ve previously seen coming later. Do the events of the movies, TNG, DS9, etc. now become circumspect because the past has changed? I don’t think Roberto and the others would go that far. I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. :) I actually think they’re doing a very good job and doing their best to stay respectful to what has come before. But naturally, until we get more concrete info, we’re all gonna speculate and criticize. :P

I’ve never really liked the time travel stories. :P I actually enjoyed ENT, but that temporal cold war thing went on way too long.

100. Xplodin' Nacelle - January 28, 2008

I hope they take every throw away line or character from the past 6 series, & make a cohesive story out of those. ie: all of the stuff that every main character ever said that they learned at Starfleet Academy.

101. indranee - January 28, 2008

Thank you, Roberto, JJ, Alex and everybody else in the cast and crew, for opening the book a wee bit for us to have a quick peek.

And thanks most of all to Anthony…

102. Xplodin' Nacelle - January 28, 2008

The other thing I hope they do is take every throw away knowing glance, every inside joke, & every line of dialogue that didn’t make sense in the context of the story, & rework these concepts into the fabric of what made these characters who they are. ie: The first time Kirk ever was fooled himself by the corbomite manuver, or the creepy line about Kirk’s double having “interesting qualities” to Yeoman Rand in The Enemy Within. These unintentional reactions, lines, glances, smiles, nods, & comments could all be woven in tightly to the Trek timeline, & fabric. These are other ideas that would make me “get” these characters, & love them even more!

103. Michelle - January 28, 2008

It is indeed so nice of him to take time to post here. Thank you Roberto Orci for answering our questions. :)

104. Mary Jane - January 28, 2008

The best solution would be to construct a true canon and not to try to stuff everything and anything in there. Which means that only those parts of the franchise, in which Roddenberry was actively involved, qualify as canon. Everything else is nice or weird or nonsensical, but in any case apocryphal, like the new “Star Trek”. What’s wrong with that? It can still have many many ties with canon, but a failure to meet canon would be anything but tragical. Why go to such great lengths only to twist and warp anything Star Trek into a framework that’s so heterogenous and inconsistent in the first place? And the last resort is always time travel and a change of history? What history? Yeah, the “history of the future”. Come on. You have to be bold and honest here: true canon can only come from fundamentalism. And what’s the fundament? Roddenberry. Everything else: you may enjoy or ignore or dismiss it, but not take it seriously for canonization.

105. non-belligerency confirmed - January 28, 2008

well i always found the TOS doors to make more of a “swish” than a “swoosh”, therefore one has to deduce the filmmakers are deliberately ignoring canon. i will not be seeing the film unless they at least provide a “sweesh”. if they go to “shwoop” i’ll pickett, and if i hear “shworp” i’ll torch paramount.

they’re throwing my childhood into prison full of rapists on meth with the sound turned up real loud.

106. reptileboy - January 28, 2008

Crap! I had not idea that Roberto Orci had replied to any message or post I’d put up until Anthony posted this transcipt. I certainly had not hope he would recognise that as a fan I felt very nervous about the entire film. I am literaly glad that he and the movie crew are not attacking or blaming those who went before them for the percieved failings of Star Trek.

If this movie turns out to be utterly brilliant I will therefore hunt down Roberto and Co. and hug them all. One at a time.

Man, I love this site. Anthony, if you lived in a Commonwealth country I would be calling for your Knighthood.

107. Pizza - January 28, 2008

For all of you nay sayers, rather that turn this into a pissing contest how about this. Let’s say for example, and this is purely hypothetical, that JJ and Mr. Orci and everyone else “NEW” to this project have no clue what the hell they are doing. Then we can assume they are going to really screw this up and this is the end of Star Trek.

I also believe a lot of the negative perhaps is partly based on too many new people with no direct connection to Roddenberry making this movie. The resumes are not long enough yet. Well, if you have read all the posts submitted by Mr. Orci, the guy has done some serious homework. If I am to pick just one person on this planet and trust them, it is Leonard Nimoy hands down. I would like to add this, I sincerely trust Mr. Nimoy’s comments regarding the script and recents comments regarding what he can share about the movie. For all the things Mr. Nimoy has done or not done, said and not said since the very first Star Trek Movie and they been mentioned here many times over. I believe Mr. Nimoy does understand Star Trek, he gets it, he knew and worked directly with Roddenberry, his endorsment speaks volumes and this movie will be GIGANTIC! His words not mine.

108. mada101 - January 28, 2008

Whoa, whoa, whoa – did Robert Orci just confirm that this film is going to attempt to retcon TOS?

109. I AM THX-1138 - January 28, 2008

Holy cow! Is Redshirt related to Roberto Orci? Guess Roberto was taking pity on a poor soul about to die. (Y’a know, sacrificial redshirts? Ha Ha?)

Here is my mantra or comparison or simile or whatever for the next year concerning how Star Trek is going to be different:

We have all seen Shakespearean productions. Probably more than one. Or an opera. Point being that for Shakespeare’s works or the classic operas to exist today, they would inevitably have to be recast, with new technical crew and production. If not, we may not have known their beauty. Star Trek is no different. If you are content to let Trek stay at where it is right now, pay no attention to the new movie. But for those of us who wish to see Trek continue, this is our only hope. There will be no other Star Trek, at least not on the big screen and certainly nothing sanctioned by those who own the rights to it. It is not, for some of us, too much to accept the changes as long as we feel confident in the abilities of the new stewards. And I feel from the weekends fun, many, many of us do.

This is a heady time to be a Star Trek fan. I am enjoying this thoroughly.

110. steve adams - January 28, 2008

#26. I don’t think Kirk was predictable in that episode, he had to follow the timeline.

111. Gary - January 28, 2008

#110. Thats not true. He could have decided to ignore the timeline and save Edith Keeler whom he loved, thus sacrificing the future as he knew it. Thats what Harlen Ellison wanted, but Roddenberry said that Kirk would not act like that and that he would sacrifice his true love to save the future as he knew it. Had he followed Ellisons suggestion, it might have made Kirk just a little more human.

112. Petey - January 28, 2008

Just thought I’d give a hearty dose of appreciation to Anthony for being the ONLY reason why Trek fans have such a good dialogue with the director/producers/cast of this upcoming film. If not for your vision and dedication, Anthony, this could very well have devolved into “yet another Trek fan site”, yet it’s come to a point where it is currently the most official and definitive fan-made site for Star Trek.

113. Adam Leavitt - January 28, 2008

Will there be Klingons in the new Star Trek Movie ?

114. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 28, 2008

In regard to Dr. Image’s comment — “What we are getting with this movie is obviously meant to REPLACE the ‘66-’68 version of Trek, including the Cage and WNMHGB, in style and substance. In other words, IT NEVER HAPPENED THAT WAY- anymore, that is.” — this is an overstatement.

An actual reboot or reimagining could go so far as to change the gender of characters (e.g. Kirk as a woman, in the manner of Starbuck in BSG of 2003 on) or rewrite canon “history” (e.g. the established events of conflict with the Romulans). However, Orci and Abrams have stated that they are respecting canon with regard to these well established “facts”. Superficial redressing of interior and exterior details to the ships, while keeping their overall look and feel, do not count as reboot or reimagining, to say nothing of “replacement” or “it never happened that way”. As I am reading statements by KABLO, it’s more of an overlay than a replacement, more like TOS-R is to TOS than 2003 BSG is to 1978 BSG.

115. Gary - January 28, 2008

#108. Orci said “We have been careful not to put too much stock in terms like re-boot or re-imagining because these terms do not sufficiently describe, in my opinion, the way in which Star Trek (Zero) will fit into the continuum.” So perhaps it is a retcon of sorts. Perhaps like DC comics we are being presented with a Crisis on Infinite Federations.

116. Daoud - January 28, 2008

Super-Size Ice-Cold Slushos for all of the BALOK gang. :D

I know they’ve retreated to the mountain now… but thank you roberto so much for grokking everything so superbly. Clearly, you folks have quite the team effort in the production, that even if Holy Canon is slightly tweaked… I know I have no problems forgiving that.

And instead of Star Trek Zero, how about “Star Trek, Oh!” (or a more canonesque “O Star Trek”, hah.)

Here’s hoping the writers’ strike ends soon so that you and K-man can make tweaks and the like for pickup shots and such to catch any nitpicks and insert any new ideas. And even if there’s no logical way to have Nimoy ride off into the sunset with Shatner, we’ll be sure not to send the Priceline Negotiator and Nofee after you…

117. Harry Ballz - January 28, 2008

#109 THX-1138 “this is a heady time”

That remark reminds me of the time, back in high school, when I went parking with Debbie Simms………..gives new meaning to the phrase, “head over heels” for someone! Hooo haw!! :)

118. Dr. Image - January 28, 2008

#69 Barrydancer- No, you’re not crazy. It’s normal.

To put it simply, I merely pointed out a few conclusions enevitibly reached by evidence presented SO FAR. However, we cannot ignore what is NOT being said- by JJ, Roberto, et al.
This leads to drawing possibly flawed- immensely flawed- conclusions, but sometimes a “gut” feeling is all one has to go on.
I now sense, by what’s been said, that Roberto is a very aware writer, that he’s no fool, and that he’s figured a way to make all these discrepancies, ultimately, work- by having them make sense within the given contexts of, yes, canon.
By my estimation, the givens of canon could be worked around, IF one has the skill, creativity, and willingness to do so.
I mean, look at DS9’s brilliant, “Trials and Tribbelations.” There are an infinite number of holes waiting to be filled in Trek future history.
Now though, all we can do is wait, and hope to not be disappointed YET AGAIN.

119. Freddie Wise - January 28, 2008

What wonderful answers to such great questions! I have tremendous faith in Robert Orci/ Alex Kurtzman, J.J. and crew. This is going to be a tremendous success.

120. I AM THX-1138 - January 28, 2008

Harry, you are incorrigible. Completely Irreverent. And a funny dude.

121. Captain Dunsel - January 28, 2008

With all of their dilligent work at keeping canon, I have to ask Mr. Orci about Spock’s line in Balance of Terror: “No human, Romulan or ally has ever seen the other.” How can this movie have a clash between Kirk and Nero and still be faithful to the very first Romulan concept introduced in TOS? And won’t such a lack of face to face be even more disappointing than the Kirk/Khan viewscreen faceoff in TWOK?

Or can that answer not be revealed to protect a major plot point?

122. Jabob Slatter - January 28, 2008

Darn! Just when I thought of the question I wanted to ask most:

How soon after the DVD release will Paramount double-dip with an even better edition?

Oh well, thanks Mr. Orci.

123. shuttlepod10 - January 28, 2008

Will anyone be eating any Chili Dogs in the movie?

124. Chirs M - January 28, 2008

Once again these Q&A’s are awesome.

Also I went to see Cloverfield on the weekend which I thought was pretty good.

Better than that though was that I got to see the Star Trek teaser on the big screen for the first time which was absolutely amazing!!!!!!

125. steve adams - January 28, 2008

#111 Gary, I totally disagree..

Sure Kirk could have gone for a cheesy relationship but there’s more to being human than satisfying your mojo bro…

Don’t forget Gary that the Enterprise vanished due to the error in the timeline.

The Enterprise, Gary is Kirk’s true love.
^
Predictable or true to Starfleet,IMO true to Starfleet.
^

126. subatoi - January 28, 2008

That was cool, thanks :)
BTW, Orci also answered “all signs show yes” when asked about a cameo, maybe ENT’s.

127. steve adams - January 28, 2008

One comment on JJ’s
extra dialog that can’t be written in due to the strike.
^
JJ could allways feed the actors dialog off script, film it as additional slush and then later when the strike is resolved take the best footage and re-write the final draft with that footage.
^
No prob

128. Maz NZ - January 29, 2008

I have never seen such a great connection between creative & the critical audience.

Coming from a related industry I can only endorse the openess of the modern Star Trek team. I can also (in a very small way) understand the pressure and expectation they place upon themselves for this movie. That is especially so, as they carry the weight of our combined 40 years of experience and expectation … but especially, it is clear, their own.

We expect a great deal.

I hope for a continuation and enhancement of the great vision of Star Trek. We do not seek perfection … we seek adventure, knowledge, courage and humour … love and connection – the true and central ideals of Star Trek and humanity!

Do not let the weight of expectation drag you down. Like any new baby, do not expect too much in its first year … but enjoy every moment as it will never be the same again!

Given my “reading” of comments on this page, I can see we are of reasonable “like and open-mindedness”. …I like that, alot … feels like Star Trek.

129. TOS - January 29, 2008

I Love NZorak, Michael Hall, Timncc1701 and Pizza
You guys have to look at how Star Trek is and not think about how it could be.
If J.J.’s Star Trek Bombs, Star Trek itself will not die. Star Trek can never die because someone will pick it up and do somethings good with it. I faith in Star Trek and it is sad to see how many fans do not. Many think that they have to like this J.J.’s version Star Trek or Star Trek itself will die. Look at Hulk (2004), It Sucked and was not like the comics or old 70’s show. The studio which made Hulk (2004) did not said Hulk is dead and now they have made a recon Hulk movie (2008) which is more true to the comics and old 70’s show. The same can be true about Star Trek in the future if Star Trek Fans do not like J.J.’s version Star Trek. Star Trek makes way to much money and the fan-base is too strong for “the True Star Trek” to die. Star Trek: TMP Sucked and was not like the TOS. Than the recon Star Trek movie (The Wrath of Khan) which is more true to the TOS. Star Trek did not die in 1979 and If Fans hate J.J.’s version Star Trek, “the True Star Trek” will not die now.
In 2002, Star Trek: Nemesis did not become the Final TNG movie because it bombed. Nemesis “was made to be the Final TNG movie”.
In 2005, The Studio canceled Star Trek: Enterprise and said Star Trek is dead.
Then In 2006, The Studio started work on J.J.’s version Star Trek and said Star Trek lives.
Now, people think Nemesis and Enterprise killed Star Trek and J.J. is saving old dead Star Trek with his new vision.
Nemesis and Enterprise did not killed Star Trek and J.J. is not saving Star Trek with his new vision.
J.J. and The Studio made this “Star Trek is Dead Hype” to force fans into seeing “The Hollywood version of Star Trek” by making fans think Star Trek will die if you do not see J.J.’s version Star Trek.
I am Here to say:
“THE TRUE CANNON VERSION STAR TREK IS NEVER GOING TO DIE”
The J.J. Universe of star trek is going to bite.
It’s going to be non-cannon wrapped in a ball of lies.
J.J. will use “a shaken camera” look to hide how bad he is.
The Writers will use T.O.S. lines to hide how bad they are.
The actors will say “It is the character before the character you know from the T.O.S.” to hide their bad acting.
The reboot look will be called “an Updated look” to hide that it is just J.J. wanting to make Star Trek his own and not Gene’s.

Copy this, save this and watch how all of what i am saying will come true.
Do not be fooled by J.J.’s Star Trek.

130. MAT - January 29, 2008

All these great questions and it still has me scratching my head why they have censored answering any question pertaining to Shatner and why he will not be in the film.

131. TOS - January 29, 2008

J.J. more likey did not want Shatner Because Some People see Shatner as a joke. Shatner is not Joke and I hate that J.J. is rebooting Kirk .
Chris Pine does not look like Shatner.

132. Ivo - January 29, 2008

Very excited about this movie…very!!!

133. steve adams - January 29, 2008

I think JJ is going to pull off a great Spock/Pike centric Star Trek story that at the end launches the
Enterprise under Kirk. It could be worse #129.
Yet it could be better,? Will never know.

134. Decillia - January 29, 2008

I don’t know, because more information i get from the producer, screenwriters e.c.c. i am not sure that Star Trek is in a right hand.
This movie seems very fan-boyish and some comments from f.e. (Orci— Balance of Terror stands out, as do ST2,3,4,and 6, and a couple of the Judith and Garfield Reeves Stevens novels.)
WTF Why isn’t Star Trek 1 in this too, don’t forget it is most successful Star Trek film ever so that formula wasn’t that catastrophic as many think..
Also Orci said they want this film to be as close to 2 hours. I ask ,,why,, because if they are giving us a brand new Star Trek vision you need time to introduce that new vision. You will not get this within 2 hours movie.
I was very opened minded about this movie but know i am not sure. I wil make my final judgment(on what direction this movie is going) when i see the new Enterprise.

135. SD - January 29, 2008

#129 “THE TRUE CANNON VERSION STAR TREK IS NEVER GOING TO DIE”

Could you please write CANON correctly? Otherwise, people might not take you serious…

136. TOS - January 29, 2008

“I don’t know, because more information i get from the producer, screenwriters e.c.c. i am not sure that Star Trek is in a right hand.
This movie seems very fan-boyish and some comments from f.e. (Orci— Balance of Terror stands out, as do ST2,3,4,and 6, and a couple of the Judith and Garfield Reeves Stevens novels.)”
134.Decillia – January 29, 2008
Decillia Is right!!!
This is movie is showing fan-boy signs like the Rick Berman’s Enterprise did. Fans hated Berman, but if J.J. and his crew say things and act the same way as Berman did, the fans put up with J.J. So Why was Star Trek: Enterprise hated by Star Trek fans.
The NX-01 turned off alot of fans, but the Reboot NCC-1701 does not?

137. TOS - January 29, 2008

Corrected Version:

NZorak, Michael Hall, Timncc1701 and Pizza
You guys have to look at how Star Trek is and not think about how it could be.
If J.J.’s Star Trek Bombs, Star Trek itself will not die. Star Trek can never die because someone will pick it up and do somethings good with it. I faith in Star Trek and it is sad to see how many fans do not. Many think that they have to like this J.J.’s version Star Trek or Star Trek itself will die. Look at Hulk (2004), It Sucked and was not like the comics or old 70’s show. The studio which made Hulk (2004) did not said Hulk is dead and now they have made a recon Hulk movie (2008) which is more true to the comics and old 70’s show. The same can be true about Star Trek in the future if Star Trek Fans do not like J.J.’s version Star Trek. Star Trek makes way to much money and the fan-base is too strong for “the True Star Trek” to die. Star Trek: TMP Sucked and was not like the TOS. Than the recon Star Trek movie (The Wrath of Khan) which is more true to the TOS. Star Trek did not die in 1979 and If Fans hate J.J.’s version Star Trek, “the True Star Trek” will not die now.
In 2002, Star Trek: Nemesis did not become the Final TNG movie because it bombed. Nemesis “was made to be the Final TNG movie”.
In 2005, The Studio canceled Star Trek: Enterprise and said Star Trek is dead.
Then In 2006, The Studio started work on J.J.’s version Star Trek and said Star Trek lives.
Now, people think Nemesis and Enterprise killed Star Trek and J.J. is saving old dead Star Trek with his new vision.
Nemesis and Enterprise did not killed Star Trek and J.J. is not saving Star Trek with his new vision.
J.J. and The Studio made this “Star Trek is Dead Hype” to force fans into seeing “The Hollywood version of Star Trek” by making fans think Star Trek will die if you do not see J.J.’s version Star Trek.
I am Here to say:
“THE TRUE CANON VERSION STAR TREK IS NEVER GOING TO DIE”
The J.J. Universe of star trek is going to bite.
It’s going to be non-canon wrapped in a ball of lies.
J.J. will use “a shaken camera” look to hide how bad he is.
The Writers will use T.O.S. lines to hide how bad they are.
The actors will say “It is the character before the character you know from the T.O.S.” to hide their bad acting.
The reboot look will be called “an Updated look” to hide that it is just J.J. wanting to make Star Trek his own and not Gene’s.

Copy this, save this and watch how all of what i am saying will come true.
Do not be fooled by J.J.’s Star Trek.

138. TOS - January 29, 2008

Corrected Version:

NZorak, Michael Hall, Timncc1701 and Pizza
You guys have to look at how Star Trek is and not think about how it could be.
If J.J.’s Star Trek Bombs, Star Trek itself will not die. Star Trek can never die because someone will pick it up and do somethings good with it. I faith in Star Trek and it is sad to see how many fans do not. Many think that they have to like this J.J.’s version Star Trek or Star Trek itself will die. Look at Hulk (2004), It Sucked and was not like the comics or old 70’s show. The studio which made Hulk (2004) did not said Hulk is dead and now they have made a recon Hulk movie (2008) which is more true to the comics and old 70’s show. The same can be true about Star Trek in the future if Star Trek Fans do not like J.J.’s version Star Trek. Star Trek makes way to much money and the fan-base is too strong for “the True Star Trek” to die. Star Trek: TMP Sucked and was not like the TOS. Than the recon Star Trek movie (The Wrath of Khan) which is more true to the TOS. Star Trek did not die in 1979 and If Fans hate J.J.’s version Star Trek, “the True Star Trek” will not die now.
In 2002, Star Trek: Nemesis did not become the Final TNG movie because it bombed. Nemesis “was made to be the Final TNG movie”.
In 2005, The Studio canceled Star Trek: Enterprise and said Star Trek is dead.
Then In 2006, The Studio started work on J.J.’s version Star Trek and said Star Trek lives.
Now, people think Nemesis and Enterprise killed Star Trek and J.J. is saving old dead Star Trek with his new vision.
Nemesis and Enterprise did not killed Star Trek and J.J. is not saving Star Trek with his new vision.
J.J. and The Studio made this “Star Trek is Dead Hype” to force fans into seeing “The Hollywood version of Star Trek” by making fans think Star Trek will die if you do not see J.J.’s version Star Trek.
I am Here to say:
“THE TRUE CANON VERSION STAR TREK IS NEVER GOING TO DIE”
The J.J. Universe of star trek is going to bite.
It’s going to be non-canon wrapped in a ball of lies.
J.J. will use “a shaken camera” look to hide how bad he is.
The Writers will use T.O.S. lines to hide how bad they are.
The actors will say “It is the character before the character you know from the T.O.S.” to hide their bad acting.
The reboot look will be called “an Updated look” to hide that it is just J.J. wanting to make Star Trek his own and not Gene’s.

Copy this, save this and watch how all of what i am saying will come true.
Do not be fooled by J.J.’s Star Trek.

139. Timncc1701 - January 29, 2008

129 138 TOS you bring up some valid points. Star Trek was pronounced dead in 1969. Nevertheless, I hope you are wrong about JJ’s version. There are some things I take exception to, like the darkness of the sets seen thus far. I say at least give him enough rope to hang himself and let’s see what is produced by Christmas. Everyone who has come into contact with JJ seems to have been absorbed–Nimoy and Cawley to name a couple. To me the biggest question is will Pine be credible as Kirk??? We will see, or I should say I will see because I don’t think you will give it a chance.

140. Chris M - January 29, 2008

#128 Very well put!

I believe this movie will be awesome and we will look back in years to come as this movie being a remarkable part of Star Trek history!

It’s about the journey as much as it is about the destination. While I am lookng forward to the movie and can’t wait to walk into he theatre, I can’t help but think of how I will feel when the end credits roll and this faboulous journey will comes to an end.

It’s been a wild ride since September of 2006 (the 40th anniversary of Star Trek) when we first saw the teaser poster for this movie and we learnt that Star Trek would live on in a new feature film. A fantastic gift for all Star Trek fans on the 40th anniversary!

What we are in the middle of right now is something that I will look back on with fondness in the coming years. So as much as I am counting down the days, I am going to enjoy every moment that comes with this faboulous journey!

When I first saw the teaser poster I couldn’t contain my excitement and had it as my desktop on my work computer for almost a year. And then I saw the teaser trailer on the big screen the the hairs on the back of my neck stood up!

Let’s all try and enjoy the journey we’re on!

141. Gary - January 29, 2008

I have a feeling this film will be heavily influenced by TNG’s “Yesterdays Enterprise”. For some reason history is changed (perhaps due to Romulan interference) which would explain all he differences between Star Trek 0 and TOS. And like Guinan, only Spock will be aware of the changes, but unlike “Yesterdays Enterprise”, history will not revert back to the way things were, because if that were to happen it would mean the end of the Federation (similar to what happened during TOS’s “City on the Edge of Forever”.

142. Elrond L. - January 29, 2008

Thanks for catching us up with the weekend Q&A, Anthony. I was glad to see Roberto respond to the question about the score. John Williams’ beautiful music was butchered beyond belief in SW Episodes 1 and 2 (although episode 3 was MUCH better – Williams must have slapped Lucas around beforehand). Attack of the Clones’ hacked up music was an abomination, and actually pulled me out of the movie several times. I’m sure Michael Giacchino is going to do an awesome job with Trek.

143. Lee - January 29, 2008

It is curious, but characters, all we know so well today, are the result of a progressive evolution that we could see in TOS. Every episode gave us new details on the personal life or personality of some character (but it was a constructive work). Even so every week story was enough audacious and complete to keep the audience alive. The story, the missions, the discovery of an unexplored universe also was important. And maybe now we have so much restrictions on the story ,due to the acumulation of details along years, that we can have freedom to imagine …(star trek used to be an open door to show very diverse ideas).

144. Scotty - January 29, 2008

Thank you for having these chats with JJ Abrams, Roberto Orci and the Enterprise cast. I’m definitely going to see this movie. Also I’m glad to see the comments about not making Kirk a 2 dimensional character.

145. Dr. Image - January 29, 2008

#138 TOS- Hmmm…
Even though I’m a jaded cynic, I tend to disagree.
Though I guess I’m the diabolical architect of the TOS-RW (TOS-ReWritten) theory, I’m now giving The Gang some slack, and I’m HOPING they are not, in fact, re-writing history in their own image.
If they are, oh well… but if they’re not, great!
(See my posts at #12 and #118 for related ruminations.)

146. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#108–No, he did not.

#111–Not to mention, in direlection of his duty.

#138–Gene’s Star Trek hasn’t been made in a long time. He never approved of David Marcus’ referral of Star Fleet as the military, he hated STVI’s militarism and the very notion that there could ever be corruption in Star Fleet at that level (his vision was of a utopian future for humanity manifested in the Federation and the exploration arm of Star Fleet). Do you think he would have approved of the later series’ (DS9/ENT) use of Section 31, or more specifically, the civilian leadership of his benevolent Federation’s complacency about its actions? Would Gene have stood by and allowed the writers to depict that complacency to such a degree that they would stand by and allow the perpetuation of genocide, even against an enemy? Mr. Roddenberry’s Star Trek died a long time ago. Who knows? Maybe JJ is here to ressurrect it. Forget the printers on the bridge, the cheap props, the 1960’s color schemes, the go-go boots and miniskirts (although it would not disappoint me to see those–and it appears we will), the communicators that appear less sophisticated than my phone, and even the bland exterior of the TOS Enterprise. That wasn’t Star Trek. That was the result of NBC’s allotted budget to Star Trek TOS. Star Trek was the manifestation of one man’s post- war vision of humanity’s future. Gene saw, firsthand, the horrors which mankind was capable of, and wanted to imagine and present to us a time when man had moved beyond it. There is nothing to suggest that JJ’s film will not capture that, and if it doesn’t, it will simply fall into the category of the Star Trek we have all been watching for 25 years. Perhaps there is another reason (beyond marketing alone) that JJ and co. wish to “revisit” (not reboot) the TOS era. Doing so will have little to do with replicating (or not) the sets built in the 1960’s, but doing justice to what made Star Trek great in the first place.
You have every right to your pessimism, but my opinion is that it is unjustified at every turn.

147. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#145–I am glad to hear that another fan is warming up to the new team, even if just a little bit. I have often pointed out that that this film (or hopefully, series of films) could very well leave evry voyage depicted in TOS intact. They could tell stories of voyages prior to TOS, and even pick up where the show left off (as there is no clear indication that the 79 TOS episodes represent the entire 5 year mission), in the time period between TOS and TMP, TMP and TWOK, STVI and Generations, etc. there is absolutely no reason to believe that JJ and co. will obliterate ST canon as we know it. There is no reason for them to do so. There is plenty of unexplored ST history to show us, and I hope they do so well.

148. Dr. Image - January 29, 2008

#147- Then again there is the alternate-timeline scenario, but would they risk confusing a commercial audience with this type of thing?
So far: Insufficient data to draw conclusion.

149. TJ Trek - January 29, 2008

This is phenomanle. I am glad that there has been so much interaction with the fans. This says to me that JJ and the group at least believe that they have the best product they could produce, and the right product to jump start the franchize. I think this movie will be fantastic. It may take me twenty minutes or so into the film to get use to the new look. but once I have done that, I think that it will be a good show. JJ hasn’t let anyone down yet with anything he has produced.

Opinion. I was looking at one of the official pictures from the Teaser trailer today, the one that shows the saucer and the engines…. what do you guys think? Are those engines the finishes produced, or still being worked on. Because if what I’m looking at is the finished product, then they are going to be vastly diffrent from the old engines were are use to…What do you guys think?

150. SPB - January 29, 2008

#134 – DECILLIA –

“i don’t know, because more information i get from the producer, screenwriters e.c.c. i am not sure that Star Trek is in a right hand.
This movie seems very fan-boyish and some comments from f.e. (Orci— Balance of Terror stands out, as do ST2,3,4,and 6, and a couple of the Judith and Garfield Reeves Stevens novels.)
WTF Why isn’t Star Trek 1 in this too, don’t forget it is most successful Star Trek film ever so that formula wasn’t that catastrophic as many think.”

I suggest you go back and re-read the original question that I posed to Roberto Orci. All I was asking was, in particular, where there any episodes (or movies) that helped him and Kurtzman get a better, solid handle on the characters of Kirk, Spock & Co. I’m assuming he mentioned “Balance of Terror” and those other films as some of the best examples of WRITTEN CHARACTERIZATION. Nowhere does he state that STAR TREK XI will be filled with references to those examples. So where exactly does this “fanboy-ishness” come in, pray tell? Jumping the gun a little bit, are we?

151. JL - January 29, 2008

149 – I think they are in the midst of being worked on… no?

152. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#134–I believe that TMP plays a huge role in the evolution of the spock character, but remember that Orci and co. said that the aforementioned episode and films “stand out”. That, in no way, suggests that the others were ignored (although I admit hoping that they ignore STV altogether).

#148–Agreed. But I do not think that they would. If part of the story does take place in an altered timeline, then I am inclined (by gut feeling) to believe that Mr. Nimoy’s Spock will be there to correct it (the timeline)as part of that story. Who knows what will make the best story at this point? I just hope that it is a good one.

#150–Exactly. If anything, they have indicated that they are trying NOT to make a “fanboy” movie and instead, attempting to appeal to new fans, yet giving US just enough to satisfy our nostalgic cravings.

153. FlyingTigress - January 29, 2008

#150

BOT — Relationships coming to fruition. The tragedy of losing loved ones. Discovering new truths. Overcoming personal prejudices. Honor and personal respect/admiration even between long-term enemies. Taking unpleasant actions to try to prevent a larger catastrophic war. Self-sacrifice — and risk of the loss of one’s own life to save “the needs of the many”…

154. TOS - January 29, 2008

-146. Closettrekker
1. The communicators that appear in TOS are beyond your Phone. The TOS communicators did not need millions of Satellites or phonelines. The TOS communicators range is far wider (Planet to Planet) than Cellphones or landlines of today. The TOS communicators had open bands, but Cellphones and landline have an close band. Also The TOS communicators did more than work as a communicator. The TOS communicators are still years ahead from us today.
2. Star Trek TOS is Gene’s true Vision and that is what J.J. is walking on. TNG,DS9,VOY, ENT and All the movies are The Spin-offs. If J.J. was working on a New Spin-Off of Star Trek, I could support that (Like an Captain Robert April Movie!!!). But He is Mess-up with TOS (Gene’s true Vision).
3. Offices and Government departments still use Dot-Matrix printers 40 years later. Dot-Matrix printers are used by The US Government and laser printers are used by you and me.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-matrix_printers: Some companies, such as WeP Peripherals, Epson, Okidata, Olivetti, Lexmark, and TallyGenicom, still produce serial and line printers. Today, a new dot matrix printer actually costs more than most inkjet printers and some entry level laser printers. The main use of Dot-Matrix Printers are in areas of intensive transaction-processing systems that churn out quite a lot of printing. Many companies who might have started off with dot-matrix printers are not so easily convinced to go for printers based on other technologies because of the speed advantage that they have with dot-matrix printers.
4. The TOS Props and Sets are cheap, but the designs are true to Gene’s true Vision. The Props and Sets build better is good, but Re-Designs (like J.J.’s ncc-1701) which are more Industrial looking (like Star wars) are Bad.
5. A revisit should not be a Re-Designs (like J.J.’s ncc-1701). A revisit should be true to Gene’s true Vision. The Truth is J.J.’s Film is a Reboot. JJ and co.Talking a “revisit” TOS era to hide the Truth becuase They know that Most Star Trek Fans do not want a Reboot of TOS. J.J. and the Studio want to make “The Hollywood version of Star Trek” and not what some call “a Star Trek Nerd Movie or a Trekkie movie”. The truth is most of the world are Closet-Trekkies (TOS-FANS) or Closet-Trekkers (TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT-FANS).
6. In a post 9/11 world, J.J. will sadly be the most militarism Version of star trek to date.
Here is proof: http://showmescifi.com/2008/01/24/new-star-trek-xi-starfleet-uniform/

155. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#154–I said “…appear less sophisticated…”. Not quite the same thing.
You seemed to have confused Gene’s vision with the appearance of set design and 1960’s Trek-tech. That has nothing to do with it. That was simply the tools Gene had in the 60’s at his disposal with which to show us his vision. Again, his vision was a post-war driven hope for mankind’s future. Revisiting TOS has nothing to do with props, effects, or even uniforms (which Mr. Cawley has confirmed for us are fantastic) and the Enterprise exterior. It has to do with the wonderful characters, stories, and themes we expect from TOS-era Star Trek. As for your 9/11 reference, this makes waking up Gene’s vision even more relevant. But again, do not confuse that vision with what Sulu’s helm looks like. One has nothing to do with the other. Your “closet” comments baffle me, as if you completely miss the meaning. As for your contention that JJ’s movie will be the most militaristic, I don’t see any evidence of that. The site you referred me to is apparently wrong, if Mr. Cawley’s word is to be taken. He claims to have seen the uniforms and they are true. I love TOS above all, and feel I think, as you do, that it is the only Star Trek true to Gene’s vision. Yet why you feel as though that vision is being trampelled on, without even knowing what the story is or how well the new actors will portray the characters which we know and love, is a mystery to me. I guess your idea of Gene’s vision differs from what he said it was.

156. LostOnNCC1701 - January 29, 2008

To 154:

On your 6th point of “military trek”:
No.1: Now this could just be me, but how do we know that that is the standard uni and not, say, a specialized uniform (cadet or instructor, perhaps?).

No. 2: Maybe Abrams is doing what I said would be cool and homaging Forbidden Planet with that look: http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1297/Mptv/1297/5089_0053.jpg?path=gallery&path_key=0049223
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1362/Mptv/1362/5089_0059.jpg?path=gallery&path_key=0049223

157. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#154–One more thing. Go back and watch “The Cage” again on your DVD’s, and tell me that you would accept that printer as 23rd Century technology! I can rewatch TOS and “imagine” that the technology is as advanced looking as it should be in the 23rd Century (as I grew up with the show), but only because I accept that it was made in the 1960’s. If that show had been made in this Century, it would look as ridiculous to me as it does to my kids! You and I have very different priorities as far as what we expect from this film if it is to be a successful “revisiting” of the TOS-era. If I just want nostalgic sets, I’ll watch “Trials And Tribblations”, “In A Mirror, Darkly”, or even New Voyages. But I want a return to the magic of the TOS characters, the storytelling, and above all, Mr. Roddenberry’s vision of mankind’s future.

158. TOS - January 29, 2008

-155. Closettrekker
The Appearance and Feel of TOS are Gene’s vision. Gene pick and worked on all the Designs. Gene’s Vision was a post-war driven hope for mankind’s future (Like you said), It was also a post-Industrial age in which mankind had moved to in a cleaner age (Cleaner air, Cleaner Earth and Cleaner ships). J.J.’s teaser trailer mirror Footage of Steelworkers building war-machines in WWII.
Also J.J.’s Star Trek is so much like Rick Berman’s Star Trek. One thing which stands out is both are villain-based Plots. Gene did not like Star Trek moving into villain-based Plots. Gene saw Star Trek as a world in which humankind worked for peace and not just kill to shoot like villain-based Plots. J.J.’s villain Nero is a sign of J.J.’s Star Trek not being like Gene’s Vision.
As for my 9/11 reference, You have to watch Star Trek: Captain’s Logs DVD set and see what Scott Bakula said about the post 9/11 effect on star trek.
The site I referred you to (http://showmescifi.com/2008/01/24/new-star-trek-xi-starfleet-uniform/ ) is right, This is One of the Uniforms from J.J.’s Star Trek. TrekMovie.com has pics of Chris Pine (the new kirk) in the same suit, but his is colored red.

159. star trackie - January 29, 2008

I love that TOS flip top communicator. Doesn’t look dated at all to me, especially that funky spinning moire thing. Like some back engineered Roswell ailen technology or something. It doesn’t have to “tie into” anything of today, I-phones or otherwise. It just needs to look different and look cool onscreen.

And it does both.

160. TOS - January 29, 2008

157. Closettrekker –
Technology and Design are two Different things. Just because it looks old does not mean it is. A printer is a printer, But a TOS communicator is not like a cellphone.

161. TOS - January 29, 2008

-159. star trackie
I like the “back engineered Roswell ailen technology” idea.

162. Closettrekker - January 29, 2008

#158–What difference does it make if he worked on the designs, considering he only had 1960’s technology at his disposal to present a futuristic look? Are you suggesting that he would not have taken advantage of more sophisticated sets and props if they were there for him? Would he knowingly handicap himself? Of course not. He approved of using what was there in TMP. Is it continuity you are concerned about?Have a bit more imagination. You must possess it, as I do, if you are okay with keeping the 1960’s set design/tech.
having worked in a civilian shipyard immediately following my service in the Marine Corps, I did not get that impression at all from the trailer. It looked to me as though they were constructing a ship–one that happens to be built for exploration, I might add.
Your reference to Bakula’s comments are noted, but they are, themselves, in reference to its effect on what Bakula knew as current Star Trek (a pre-Roddenberry utopia). ENT was a look at a portion of mankind’s journey from what we know now to the vision that Gene had of the 23rd Century. You are casting a pretty wide net to throw JJ’s story in with that, especially when that DVD was made long before any of this was announced. If anything, 9/11 makes Gene’s vision even more relevant.
Have you forgotten the villains of TOS? The Romulan Commander in “Balance Of Terror”, who destroyed inhabited “Earth Outposts” in violation of treaty on his way to testing the Federation’s war preparedness on behalf of his Empire (“following orders” did not prevent Goering, Eichmann, Speer, etc. from being seen as villains to the World). What about Kor in “Errand Of Mercy”? His intention was to murder portions of the Organian population in order to enforce Klingon occupation. Or Khan in “Space Seed”? Shall I go on? Are you certain that Gene was opposed to villains? His vision was for mankind in the 23rd Century. I don’t think that he, in any way, meant to suggest that the entire Universe would be free of villainy. How is Nero, who we know nothing about, a sign of JJ being untrue to Gene’s vision? Wow, you are really stretching your argument thin…

#159–I love the flip top communicator too–for what it was. I don’t even care if they leave it alone. Our friend, TOS, is making a mountain out of a molehill with a nitpicking approach to a casual example (one of many)used to prove a bigger point.

#160–Again, I was commenting on its appearance. I did not compare its function to that of a cellphone. You are missing the point. And a printer is not a printer. Once again, go back and watch it. It was more reminiscent of a early Cold War era codereader than any printer we know today–much less something to be used in the 23rd Century. The credit card printers in my stores are more advanced…

You really should let go of the notion that the 1960’s set design was in any way crucial to Gene’s vision of a utopian future for mankind…If anything, it was a handicap compared to what can be done now. The characters and storytelling with a purpose will make this Star Trek or not. And, aside from the casting, you don’t know any more about that than the rest of us.

163. jonboc - January 29, 2008

All of TOS tech looks someone “alien” in that it resembles nothing we’ve seen or are aware of. I love the futuristic unfamiliar look of the bridge “buttons”. You can call them candy, ice cubes, etc…but the point is they did NOT pull buttons off the shelf at the closest electronics store. The created a unique look and that is why it holds up. The displays were not plasma screens from Best Buy..cough*Enterprise*cough. They were displays created for specifically for the show. They don’t look the least bit “dated” because, quite frankly, we have no modern frame of reference to date them by. That is the genius of the design. That is why the phasers, communicators and bridge remain interesting. Now, foam rocks on the planet set…well…that’s is a whole different can of worms.

Having said that, from the picture Bob Orci took, it’s clear that JJ is following the tradition of TOS and creating his own look for the bridge, while borrowing a few things like the black panel inlays and the big cubed buttons from TOS…and that’s a good thing. It looks like it will not look like Star Wars or BSG or Firefly or Alien etc etc. It looks like it will look very unique while retaining the signature sleek and simple lines of TOS, including some elements that are very familiar. I’m liking it, myself.

164. TOS - January 29, 2008

162. Closettrekker –
Did Kirk see them as villains.? Did Kirk kill Khan? No. DId Kirk hate The Romulan Commander in “Balance Of Terror”? No. Gene’s Star Trek is about peace and love. Gene’s Star Trek also shown that sometimes we are the greatest villains. Gene never had a really villain. in “Balance Of Terror”: To Star fleet , The Romulans was the villain and To The Romulans, Star fleet was the villain. In “Balance Of Terror”: Kirk and The Romulan Commander are one in “Balance Of Terror” and if the universe was changed they may have became Friends.

”following orders” did not prevent Goering, Eichmann, Speer, etc. from being seen as villains to the World. But In TOS Universe The Romulan Commander or Khan fighting Star Fleet did not stop Kirk from seeing the Person inside the so-called TOS villains.

Gene never call them villains because his vision of Star Trek TOS was the same as Kirk.

The more I read about J.J.’s Star Trek, The more I see that is not going to be like Gene’s utopian future for mankind.

165. andy - January 29, 2008

Any word on if Majel Barrett Roddenberry will be the voice of the Enterprise computer?

166. AJ - January 29, 2008

TOS: Kirk’s legacy as a dead man is as someone who hated the Klingons with almost racist fervor after they killed David. He despised them after being dissed by Krug on Genesis and kicking his ass into the fiery abyss. By STVI, he was actually talking about it., and it was the main point of the story.

Kirk was a bigot and a racist in the last film, perhaps because of age and sorrow. And as “only Nixon could go to China,” so was he sent to reluctantly lead our folks into danger. And supposedly, GR hated this screenplay, but it actually grounds Kirk and all of us into a more real universe. Don’t forget: “You Klingon BASTARD.”

Indeed the “villain” of Farpoint who destroys innocent civilians in order to free his mate had done a terrible thing, killing innocents so he can free his girlfriend. Hardly advanced. He never tried to reason with humanoids, and it was Picard who had to extricate his girlfriend without wondering how these lifeforms would repay the families of those who had lost their lives during the encounter.

Gene’s universe refers to the one on Earth. The Romulan in BOT deserved to be utterly destroyed for prowling our outposts and destroying them. The only reason they had a dialog was because Kirk had not destroyed him, which he spent most of the ep trying to do. Otherwise, he would have invited him to a picnic instead of spending the ep trying to blow him away.

167. steve adams - January 29, 2008

#136 dude I totally agree with you. I felt the same way 8 months ago, but I’ve let it go. I like you would much rather see a new spinoff tv show with a TNG “type” film.
But its not gonna happen.
^
I’m going to get back to you on the uniforms,(my bb won’t show the image for some reason)…
But I’m hopefull with more coming out that this film won’t totally suck.
Changing the Enterprise is hardly noticable at last from the outside. Ok yea its not pearl white and the numbers look like a different font was used. Big deal, it dosnt bother me.
I respect canon where respecting it is due. They have allready respected canon enough IMO.
^
The NX-01 angered alot of people because the ship was more futuristic then the Original Enterprise. That’s alot more to gripe about then little changes to the asthetics of the design IMO. (Not to mention that Star Trek ship geeks all recognised the NX-01 for what it was , an upside down Akira class ship from First Contact). Yes I would be that geek.
^
TOS, look at this another way…
If JJ steps all over Star Trek were all going to tell him. (This site).
Its going to be fasinating to see this pop cultural event unfold on the screen and in Cyberspace.
^
#139. The sets are dark because there not shooting. Its obvioulsy a non-lit set.
^
Hey TOS, too bad Kirk didn’t fall for Edith Keeler and alter the timeline. We would be talking about getting Joan Collins in the picture somehow.
^
Mary Jane also loved your posts. I think I’m falling for you. You are female right?

168. TOS - January 29, 2008

Kirk was never bigot or a racist in T.O.S. and that is what I am writing about.
Shatner himself hated the movies’ “hate filled kirk” because He thought kirk was not that type, Shatner loved being Kirk so much he did them.
Nimoy maybe the same with J.J.’s Star Trek.
Nimoy and Shatner both really wanted to be in J.J.’s Star Trek.

But, Remember what spock said in Amok Time About Wanting.

169. NTH - January 29, 2008

As a fan of the TOS who watched the series in the 1960’s and the animated series in the 70’s I like many others couldn’t wait for TMP to be released.At the time the media carried the story that the Enterprise was to be updated and the resulting effort was a radically different ship and a movie that was top heavy in special effects and very light in the storyline and character development departments.I left the movie amazed by the special effects but feeling rather cheated that the main characters,my on screen heroes, were almost two dimensional in appearance playing second fiddle to the onslaught of special effects.However along came Star Trek 2,3and 4 which ran like a trilogy and recaptured for me the true spirit of Star Trek and helped to reinforce my sense of personal connection to the main characters.Robert Orci has clearly indicated the areas of Trek that have helped shape his take on Kirk.Spock,Mccoy et al
in his earlier response to SPB posted earlier here and it sounds promising.We have a new movie coming out this year and I think the very least we can do is keep an open mind on this project and make our minds up when we see the movie next december.J.J.Abrams willingness to answer questions in this forum last friday indicates to me his awareness of the depth of interest and passion out here amongst Star Trek fans and his willingness to dip into it to and as it were to drip feed us information on his new production.His use of the final days shoot on the bridge of the Enterprise in this context was a masterful stroke in PR ,in effect we recieved direct communications from the command crew on the bridge.In nautical terms the course has been charted, in that the script is written ,and our destination is a cinema next december with some course alterations possible, if the writers strike finishes soon.I am looking forward to it.

170. norm - January 29, 2008

if you look at S.T. Enterprise now their flat screen monitors look dated when compared to those new Sony Oleds. Thats why they shouldn’t base anything on current tech they need to make everything look fresh & not based off of todays tech. TOS works very well in this reguard. I’m a firm believer the flip cell phone idea was stolen by a cell phone designer from TOS.

171. Ky-Malairn - January 29, 2008

Re: #168

TOS, I think you’re painting Shatner as a shade too benevolent. He despised the “hate filled Kirk” of the movies but played it anyway out of sheer love for the character? Kirk’s prejudice was only a touched upon in VI. As Shatner has stated in many interviews Star Trek was a job first. I’ll admit, once he realized the pop culture phenomenon it became he took it a little more seriously but playing the character was always about a payday for him.

172. TOS - January 29, 2008

171. Ky-Malairn
As Shatner has stated in many interviews Star Trek was a job first. I’ll admit, once he realized the pop culture phenomenon it became he took it a little more seriously but playing the character was always about a payday for him.
Re: 171. Ky-Malairn
And Nimoy is likely the same.

Remember, Nimoy’s “I am not Spock”.

173. Balock - January 29, 2008

I still say that its a shame to loose the exterior of TOS E. Classic, iconic, futuristic, etc.

174. Captain Robert April - January 29, 2008

I might be more forgiving if they’d just come out and admit that it’s a reboot.

Doesn’t make it any more likely that I’d go see it, because I have no interest whatsofrackingever in a reboot, but I wouldn’t be so hostile.

As it is, it’s becoming more and more clear that this IS going to be a reboot, and a retcon, and THEY HAVE BEEN LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH EVERY STEP OF THE WAY!

And that is what I really find unforgiveable.

175. Closettrekker - January 30, 2008

#174–“Lying through their teeth”? Really? That is a harsh statement. What have they been lying about? Have you some proof of this, or is it just your speculative interpretation of their comments in an interview? I’ve seen NO evidence that it is a “reboot” at all. It seems to me that they are simply “revisiting” Star Trek’s greatest characters and time period. There has been nothing whatsoever to give any of us reason to believe that this film cannot be true to Mr. Roddenberry’s post-war vision of mankind’s utopian-like future. That remains to be seen. How is it that you choose to define “reboot”? Is it any departure from the 1960’s set design, etc.? Is that what TOS is to you? Are you in possession of knowledge which indicates that JJ and co. will violate Star Trek’s canon history? If so, please share with the rest of us.

176. KevinA Melbourne Australia - January 30, 2008

I’m sorry but it’s “Never forget the name…Enterprise” moment in TNG “Yesterday’s Enterprise”. There is no “of the ship” in it. This is one phrase definately burnt in to my mind.

177. Closettrekker - January 30, 2008

#173–You have not lost it. It’s actually available on dvd. The whole reason for the “refit” in TMP was that it was unworthy of the big screen. Use your imagination. Just think of this as the Enterprise that TOS was incapable of showing to you due to its budget constraints, dated color schemes, and technological handicaps. And if you just want the nostalgic look, there is always “New Voyages”. I am quite sure that Mr. Roddenberry would want the new guys to use every tool at their disposal to make it believable as a 23rd Century starship, and wish them great success in making his vision of our future, as well as his great characters, come to life once again in an adventure worthy of the name–Star Trek.

178. Alex Rosenzweig - January 30, 2008

#174 – Now, in my case, it’s sort of the reverse. I’ll be more forgiving of a bit of visual adjustment, as long as they keep the integrity of the fictional ‘verse, in terms of characters and events and the *general* look, intact. And, so far, as closettrekker has said, that’s what it looks like they’re doing.

Now if they *are* doing a reboot in the sense that they’re throwing out previous continuity, then *I* would be hostile. ;) If that were to happen, I’d have to agree that they have been lying through their teeth, and then they’d be on my bad-side twice over, once for doing it, and once for lying and saying that they weren’t. (And, yes, time travel creating an alternate continuity no longer beholden to what’s come before fits that category.)

*But*… Until and unless it is revealed that they’re getting rid of the Trekverse that we’ve had for the last 40 years (and, yes, I get that it’s not been perfect, either, in terms of every continuity detail), I’m willing to cut the current team a bit of slack. For all the differences from TOS that folks have fixated upon, I think we’ve seen too little of the big picture to be able to fairly assess the similarities. And if “Star Trek” (2008) does indeed, as Roberto has implied, “fit within the continuum” of the Trek we know, I’ll be happy with that, even if it’s not exactly, 100% identical to TOS.

179. Closettrekker - January 30, 2008

#179–The voice of reason….

180. Captain Robert April - January 30, 2008

It’ll require a tap dancing routine worthy of Gregory Hines to make this thing fit into established continuity.

181. Alex Rosenzweig - January 30, 2008

#180 – Why? On what do you base that assertion?

Seems to me that they’re spending a lot of the movie playing in realms for which there is no established continuity (on film, at any rate), thus making it relatively easy not to run afoul of same.

182. Closettrekker - January 30, 2008

#181–Exactly. There were only 79 episodes of TOS, and there is nothing to suggest that is the whole of the 5 year mission. Furthermore, a significant portion of the film seems to be set before we ever saw Kirk on screen. There is also the possibility that some of the movie could take place between TOS and TMp, between TMP and TWOK, etc. I’m not sure where some people get those speculative assumptions of “violating canon”, or “continuity”.
Maybe Captain April and his wife, Sarah, should worry about their own existence/non-existence in canon. LOL

183. Lee Whiteside - January 30, 2008

I’d like to thank Roberto, J.J. and the rest who spent time talking with the fans last Friday and through the weekend. It’s definitely given us a bit more info on the movie and made most of us look forward to it even more. And I’ll have some new information to talk about at our Star Trek panel at Gallifrey One in Los Angeles in a couple of weeks (Now if someone involved with the movie would want to take part in that panel, it can probably be arranged…).

184. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - January 31, 2008

It seems to me that Orci and JJ are trying not to ruin the movie by revealing too much. It always kills me that a lot of fans hunger for info but them get disappointed they were spoiled.

From all I have heard this movie is a major time travel story. Dealing with a concerted effort to change the time line and Spock trying to prevent that.

So…I believe it will be as simple as this. Spock saves the day but things aren’t exactly as they were before he set out to do so.

Which sets up the franchise for its new series of movies if it proves successful.

185. Decillia - January 31, 2008

#150; So where exactly does this “fanboy-ishness” come in, pray tell? Jumping the gun a little bit, are we?
hmm maybe writing Nimoy into this movie qualifies as fan-boyish doesn’t. He hasn’t play Spock in 17 years and he got his fanfare in TUC.
I do support a reboot or re-visual Star Trek TOS and it is overall great idea but i feel that they should have started this movie with a fresh clean sheet.. and no Nimoy & alternative timeline. That is my 2 cent.

186. Gary - January 31, 2008

#184, that is my thinking as well and I hope you are correct. I think that would be an acceptable way to change canon IMHO. What would also have been nice is that somehow as a result of the change, Kirk never died on Veridian. That woudl have left an opening for a scene with Shatner. Too fanboyish perhaps? I dunno, but I sure would love to see such an ending.

187. Closettrekker - January 31, 2008

#185–It’s not simple “fanboy-ishness” (I think we just trumped Don King) to have Nimoy in the movie if the Spock from the current Trek timeline is key to the story, and the fact that Nimoy agreed to do the film after all of this time is evidence that he feels the story is good. And we have yet to see any evidence that this story, in any way, involves an “alternate timeline”. That is mere speculation on the part of some fans here, as are the suggestions that the film is “rewriting Star Trek history”, and so on…There is no reason to believe that, as there is enough unexplored Trek history in that time period to tell many great stories. “Fanboys/girls”, who know the timeline as well or better than the moviemakers, should be able to see that. For further explanation, see post #182…

188. AJ - January 31, 2008

I just hope their are no references to: Veridian III, the Nexus, ENT, Sybok & the Vulcan Princess, and anything that reflects the various lowpoints in Trek’s history.

The idea that Spock would come back, save Kirk, and somehow reboot the entire timeline seems somewhat unethical, as has been pointed out here before.

I suppose if he believes in the existence of parallel timelines, and that he is simply creating a new one, then he could justify it. Then we will see him in his own time at JTK’s grave, and filled with loads of memories from his altered past, which will now begin unfolding.

189. Gary - January 31, 2008

#188, perhaps it would not be unethical if his reason for changing the timeline was to save the existance of the Federation (very much like what Kirk had to do in City on the Edge of Forever).

190. Closettrekker - January 31, 2008

#189–What they did in “City”, was to correct the timeline after they had mistakingly changed it by preventing a seemingly insignificant death, a short-sided act that resulted in terrible consequences. If anything, the lessons learned there would reinforce Spock’s belief that doing so would be irresponsible—and unethical, even to save the life of his best friend.
It appears that only “Admiral” Janeway is so irresponsible, selfish, void of integrity, and purely unethical as to disregard the ongoing lives of so many by changing the present to her personal liking…Please don’t suggest that our beloved Spock would ever go down the same abhorrent and unbecoming path. That would be so out-of-character for one of Star Fleet’s (and the Federation’s) greatest heroes that it might sink the franchise even further below the abyss which VOY unfortunately steered it to with that ending to a series that was only mediocre at best.

191. Alex Rosenzweig - January 31, 2008

#187 – “And we have yet to see any evidence that this story, in any way, involves an “alternate timeline”. That is mere speculation on the part of some fans here, as are the suggestions that the film is “rewriting Star Trek history”, and so on…There is no reason to believe that, as there is enough unexplored Trek history in that time period to tell many great stories. ”

Agreed. It seems that the speculation has gripped the SF/Trek fan community because of A) that show that now bears Galactica’s name, and B) trying to come up with a way to justify the visual differences.

It strikes me that the logical thing to do, especially given the stated desire to reach out to both the fan community and the public-at-large who aren’t (yet) Trek fans, would be to avoid confusing stuff like alternate timelines and just tell the story, and let the long-time fans find their own ways of dealing with/rationalizing the visual differences. If the idea is to not make the non-fan public feel isolated in some way from the story, then the last thing one would really want to do is spend time in the film talking about how suddenly this is different from what originally was, because then one’s telling them, “Oh, by the way, there’s all this other stuff you missed.”

It seems to me that if one is so deeply intent on explaining every little difference in production design, then it would have entailed far less effort to just make that design an almost-replica of the original and move on.

And for that matter, what does it say about the character of Spock that he’d be on a mission to correct a changed timeline and then fail? Either he’ll succeed completely, or the variation will be so minor as to not be worth mentioning, e.g., the changed timeline at the end of the episode “Yesteryear”, in effect changing nothing of substance.

I could be wrong, of course, but that’s the way I’m seeing it, as of right now. Might it change tomorrow? Who knows? ;)

192. Gary - January 31, 2008

I think Spock would change the timeline, to save his friend, but more so to save the existance of the Federation which stands for everything he believes in. I do not think such a decision would be unethical and would be very much in character.. The old Spock from TOS might not have done it but the new post STTMP Spock would. And if he were somehow conviced that the changes in the imeline would be minor, he would be even more prone to do it. Has anyone ever see the movie The Final Countdown? In that movie, a modern aircraft carrier is thrown back in time to 1941 near Hawaii, just hours before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour. The Captain of the ship must decide whether to launch a preemptive strike against the incoming Japanese carrier fleet with their more advanced air wing, or allow history to take its course. In this movie the captain makes the only moral decision he could, just as I’m sure Spock would come to his decision.

193. Closettrekker - January 31, 2008

#192–The notion that he could be “somehow convinced that changes in the timeline would be minor” is flawed, to put it mildly. There are far too many variables. Any interaction, whether it seems minor at the time or not, between Kirk and ANYONE else, could alter the timeline. And what constitutes “minor”? What if it resulted in someone’s parents never meeting? That’s minor, right? What if a chance conversation distracted someone who wasn’t distracted at that moment before, and the results were a death or injury that had a spiral effect? Is that minor? How could he be convinced of that? Will he drop Kirk off on Talos IV with Pike? Will he lock Jim up in a case that can never be opened? Would you suggest bringing back the Nexus (I hope not)?
I understand that Spock goes through changes between TOS and the end of TMP, but what leads you to believe he has lost his integrity, his sense of morality, or his ethics? Would the Spock you and I know put his personal feelings and the life of one man above the well being of the entire Alpha Quadrant and everyone in it? No. There is no getting around that. No.
I have no doubt that he would want to save his friend if he thought he could, but he wouldn’t wait years to do it by going back in time, and setting the film immediately after Generations would not really have accomplished the goal of tying the “Star Trek present” to the beginnings of Kirk and co., would it? You could say that Spock has no choice but to prevent Kirk’s death, but making that a “do or die” scenario for him would be a weak storyline and certainly not one strong enough to save the franchise. Honestly, if that were the story, I doubt Mr. Nimoy would even have agreed to do it. Fortunately, it wasn’t, and he has agreed to play Spock again.
Yes, I have seen that film, and it does nothing to convince me that Spock has gone mad. It would make this movie as bad as the Voyager finale, and I couldn’t bear to see Spock do it–not for Jim Kirk or anyone else.

194. Gary - January 31, 2008

OK Closettrekker, we disagree. But tell me. Do you not think that Spock would not alter the timeline to save his beloved Federation from ceasing to exist, especially if its nonexistance was caused by the Romulans or some other enemy. And whose to say some alien technology, or perhaps the Q for example could not assure him that the changes would be minor?

195. Closettrekker - January 31, 2008

#194–Gary (my middle name, by the way), are you asking me if Spock would travel back in time to “protect” or “restore” the timeline, assuming the Federation’s existence was being threatened by a time-travelling villain? If so, my answer is yes. Asking me to believe he would go back and “alter” it is something different. Going back to prevent Kirk’s death would fall into the latter category. Does that answer your question?

196. Gary - January 31, 2008

Yes Closettrekker. You answered my question. Restoration is a much better word. I have a feeling that if this is the premise of the movie, that Spock would hope not to alter the timeline to save his friend or the Federation, but that due to unforseen circumstances, the timeline is altered anyhow.

197. Red Shirt - February 1, 2008

109. I AM THX-1138 – January 28, 2008
Holy cow! Is Redshirt related to Roberto Orci? Guess Roberto was taking pity on a poor soul about to die. (Y’a know, sacrificial redshirts? Ha Ha?)

Why do you think I might be related to Roberto? And what do you mean that he was “taking pity on me”

198. TOS - February 2, 2008

I told you Closettrekker,
From TOS:
J.J.’s teaser trailer mirror Footage of Steelworkers building war-machines in WWII.

From Trekmovie.com:
From what I’ve been told it will be a very kick-ass version – essentially an all-out warship.

199. Jacques Scatenato - March 10, 2012

Anyone who has lost track of time when working with some type of computer knows the propensity to dream, the urge to generate dreams becoming reality along with the tendency to overlook lunch.
Remind people that profit may be the distinction between revenue and expense. As a result you appear smart.

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