Grand Slam XVI: Highlights From Orci Q&A |
jump to navigation

Grand Slam XVI: Highlights From Orci Q&A April 13, 2008

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

The Grand Slam Sci-Fi Summit is over. The Q&A with Star Trek co-writer and exec. producer Bob Orci was well received. The audience was impressed with Orci’s level of geekdom and respect for Trek. Much of the Q&A covered ground that is well known to regulars, but there were a few new items, highlighted below.

Quick highlights from Bob: will have more from the two appearance of the Spocks (Quinto and Nimoy) and a video interview with Bob coming up tomorrow.


1. thefinalfrontier - April 14, 2008

i hope this will put canon nuts to rest. probably not.

2. thefinalfrontier - April 14, 2008

oh and nice analogy with constitutionalists.

3. DJT - April 14, 2008

Cool stuff.

4. SirMartman - April 14, 2008

Cheers for the report,,

Im wishing like hell I could be there,,

: o )

5. PaoloM - April 14, 2008

“Film will have lots of action, but is still mostly about ‘relationships’ and not just about ’swords with lights on them’”

I have faith that the action scenes will be sustained by a smart plot. Action is good and understandable in a big blockbuster movie, but Star Trek needs brain and feelings too. I have no doubt that there will be the right balance.

6. Jordan - April 14, 2008

wow. this must be one damn good script. can’t wait!

7. SciFiMetalGirl - April 14, 2008

Wow! That was one heck of a nice trekmovie report! Sounds even more spectacular than ever!

8. Shat Hands - April 14, 2008

i am liking the sound of this. Very much looking forward to seeing Uhura too!

9. Benjamin Sisko - April 14, 2008

“Using the ’supreme court’ constitutional analogy, your view on if the film ‘fits’ within canon will depend on if you are a ’strict constructionist’ or believe in the ’spirit of the law’ ”

We Europeans praticing Roman law, not Anglosaxon. :D

10. Cheve - April 14, 2008

Bob, We expect full reports on Spielberg’s visit and involvement in the direction of that scene once the movie is released and the secrecy is over!

11. AJ - April 14, 2008

“Not just about swords with lights on them” means STXI has swords with lights on them?

12. sir num nums - April 14, 2008

#11 that was a reference to Star Wars.

I just can’t wait until a new trailer comes out.

13. fakesteve - April 14, 2008

haha, as a strong believer in the ’spirit of the law’ I guess the canon stuff will turn out alright. I just watched some of my favorite TOS eps on Adobes new Media Player and finished reading “Prime Directive” to get in the mood for next May ;))

14. Hat Rick - April 14, 2008

An emphasis on a “living, breathing Constitution” is the approach often contradistinguished from the strict constructionist approach.

Or, in this case, perhaps that should be the living, breathing Constitution class… 1701. ;-)

15. Iowagirl - April 14, 2008

Spielberg’s a legend – love his Close Encounters. I’m confident that scene he helped work out will be great.

16. AJ - April 14, 2008

sir num nums: I’m aware of that ;-)

I wish I had been there. The more Orci talks about this film, the more confidence I have that it will do justice to the franchise.

17. Cheve - April 14, 2008

15. Iowagirl

Did you know that Spielberg directed and edited the whole Obi-Wan vs Anakin fight in Episode III?

18. jabba the hut - April 14, 2008

gettyimage got some nice pics of zachary quinto and leonard nimoy

19. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - April 14, 2008

#17 wasnt that bad!

20. Battletrek - April 14, 2008

Finally nice to learn who got the idea to hire Orci and Kurtzman to work on a new Star Trek, a nameless studio exec. Awesome!

21. Cheve - April 14, 2008

19. Jay

I love episode III. I Like it much more than Return of the Jedi (But a lot less than Empire Strikes Back.

I wasn’t necesarily saying it is a bad thing, only giving some related trivia.

22. CanuckLou - April 14, 2008

Awesome stuff and Orci continues to give the answers that demonstrate his awareness and perceptiveness of Star Trek.

Thanks Anthony!

The adventure continues…

23. Iowagirl - April 14, 2008

#17 Cheve

Didn’t know that because I wasn’t interested in III anymore after finding I and II extremely boring. IV – VI have pride of place in my collection though. Anyway, I might give it a try then, as imo Spielberg’s capable of spicing up an otherwise mediocre film.

24. Captain Hackett - April 14, 2008

Excellent article, Anthony!

25. Battletrek - April 14, 2008

Spielberg didn’t edit the end fight for Ep. 3, he worked on the animatics of it.

26. Jeyl - April 14, 2008

“Targeting PG-13 rating”

God, I hate the pg-13 rating. It’s like they want everything to be tough so they can say to people “You better think twice before bringing your kids!”. That’s not what I recall Star Trek to be about.

27. StarTrekkie - April 14, 2008

@26 – I think you’re over reacting a little bit. Spiderman was PG-13. If the enterprise fires one photon torpedo it would be PG-13.

Ratings have changed since the earlier movies. If Wrath of Kahn were re-rated today it would *definitely* be PG-13.

28. Devon - April 14, 2008

“God, I hate the pg-13 rating. It’s like they want everything to be tough so they can say to people “You better think twice before bringing your kids!”. That’s not what I recall Star Trek to be about.”

Dude chill out.

29. StarTrekkie - April 14, 2008

@26 come to think of it, all the original movies would be rated PG-13 today, except for Motion Picture.

30. Diabolik - April 14, 2008

#29… today, ST:TMP would be rated NA for No Action.

31. Sebastian - April 14, 2008

Sounds great! I do believe more in the “spirit” of the law rather than the “letter” of it, so it sounds like they’re finding the real “essence” of what makes Trek work, not getting the EXACT look of a 40 yr old TV show. As for Nimoy “transferring the soul” of the show to the production; shouldn’t they have called it the “katra?” Kidding! Anyway, judging from the sneaked photos of the shuttle interior and other bits, I really get what they mean by a more “real” Star Trek. Very exciting. And casting Kirk WOULD be a daunting challenge, I imagine. Few characters in pop culture are as often imitated or parodied as Shatner’s Kirk. Comedians have made careers out of it! And a good actor has to walk that thin line between the familiar and making the role his own! Good luck, Chris Pine (eerily close to Chris Pike)! And I agree, #27, Khan would definitely get a PG-13 today.

32. Jackson Roykirk - April 14, 2008

***”…and by director Steven Spielberg who was impressed with the script”***

Did I miss this one before? I know other people have said the script is good, but before now I didn’t know that Spielberg saw the script and commented favorably. That is encouraging, since Speilberg knows a thing or two about films.

33. Cheve - April 14, 2008

Isn’t it fun how Steven Spielberg has readed the script and William Shatner hasn’t?

I must insist. I honestly believe this is due to his absolute inhability to keep his mouth shut and/ or/ a secret.

34. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

And we have to Wait till May 9th of 2009 still little more then a year away Oh man, based on what i have read this going to be very very hard wait.

35. CanuckLou - April 14, 2008

Just wanted to add this line:

“Star Trek will make the Trek universe ‘feel real in a way it never has before’ ”

warms the cockles of my heart!

The adventure continues…

36. Mark from Germany - April 14, 2008

Star Trek TMP….I still think this was one of the best Star Trek Movies so far….for me, it really captured the Star Trek spirit. This movie is completely underrated . I think it did for Star Trek in the seventies what I hope STar Trek XI will do for Star Trek nowadays: Give it a big boost in the right direction. Why do most Star trek fans hate Star Trek TMP? Because it had no “action”? I really don’t get it. TMP was really a movie about characters. But most of all, a movie about Spock. He was in the focus of the Story. Just as he will be the focus of the Story in Star Trek XI (as far as we can know with all the secrecy.

37. Sebastian - April 14, 2008

#33 Agreed! As for Shatner’s loose lips, I refer to the “Shatner talks about life on Mars” thread earlier that caused a real tempest in a teacup. I half expect a government agent from the Total Recall universe to drag him away, saying, “You blabbed, Shat! You blabbed about Mars!” Kidding! And if Spielberg gave the new script a thumbs up, well….the man who gave the world my favorite action movie, “Jaws”, can’t be wrong! All the signs for this movie are so good, it’s hard to be cautiously pessimistic anymore!

38. Mark from Germany - April 14, 2008

#35 Right…this sentence strikes me too….great stuff ahead…we never needed a next generation on screen…. we need it behind the scenes…..
I wish the best of luck to JJ, Robert Orci and the rest of the staff and crew

39. Mark from Germany - April 14, 2008

…and to Leonard Nimoy of course….

40. Sebastian - April 14, 2008

#36. Mark, I respectfully disagree. It was the LACK of character drama that was one of the main issues with TMP. If you never watched TOS, you would not know who ANY of those characters were based on TMP alone. And it really did not push the franchise in the right artistic direction, because many in the production team were changed afterward, thus the whole look and feel (and direction) of the sequels was radically different from TMP. If you meant a FINANCIAL push in the right direction, then I agree. TMP did make a lot of money in those days, thus ensuring the survival of the movie series. But artistically, the sequels were a 180 from TMP. And yes, I did enjoy TMP on a visual and aural level, but to me it tried to be more 2001 than Star Trek (not to knock 2001; it’s my favorite sci-fi film of all time). Let’s hope JJ Abrams and Co. do better!

41. Iowagirl - April 14, 2008

– Star Trek will make the Trek universe ‘feel real in a way it never has before’ –

As far as Orci’s referring to the much higher advanced level of filming technology, special effects, etc. – stuff that nowadays is indispensable to make something seem “real” – then he is certainly right.

With respect to intriguing ideas and visions, coherent character interaction, lively plots, and a one-of-a-kind chemistry – in short, the ingredients which eventually characterize the ST universe, it can’t get any better as far as I’m concerned. It always felt perfectly real.

42. Schiefy - April 14, 2008

The analogy of “strict contructionist” versus “sprit of the law” only works if you think the United States Constitution lacks a “strict” interpretation (i.e., The Congress shall have Power…To provide and maintain a Navy”) or think the Amendment process does not allow for a “spirit of the law” revision to take place (i.e., Amendment 18-Liquor Abolished versus Amendment 21-Amend.18 Repealed). Or ask how a “strict constructionist” might interpret Amendment 13-Slavery Abolished versus a “spirit of the law” interpretation? I think I would rather assume a strict constructionist view (slavery IS abolished) rather than argue about whether a “living, breathing constitution” meant only black slavery was intended!

Seems it would be better to assume that where the Constitution is rather clear in its pronouncements we should follow it to the “letter” (that is, not create new “laws” that go beyond the simple statement before us such as a president serving only 4 year terms–not 5 or 6 because we think the founding fathers might not have thought about a sitting president being in the middle or a war or extremely likable by the “majority”) but the Constitution does allow a lot of freedom to live out the “spirit of the law” (that is, “The Congress shall have Power…To establish Post Offices” but we are not told how this is accomplished merely that Congress gets to do it–with as much creativity as the Constitution allows!).

In this latter manner, I think Abrams and company have a lot of freedom to be creative and still be within canon much like Manny Coto was attempting during season four of Enterprise. Plus, if they only accept the TV series and movies as canon there is a rather large universe for them to play in that does not violate either a “strict constructionist” view or doesn’t allow them to move forward with a “spirit of the law” interpretation of the canon!

For the nitpickers I am sure there will be something but for the rest of us who enjoy a good story over the ability to keep every “jot or tittle” (New Testament reference for minutiae) in place–well, I am just going to trust the integrity of the Abrams team to accomplish that and vote them out of office if they fail. :)

43. Scott - April 14, 2008

I’m a strict constructionist — both in my U.S. Constitution and my Star Trek! For example, I think Americans have the right to own muskets so they can serve in their state militia and protect themselves from other states’ incursions, and those pesky Indians. ;-)

I’m sure I’ll enjoy the movie, but I admit I’ll be one of those guys who delights in reading the online lists of all the continuity violations. It’s part of the fun!

Scott B. out.

44. CmdrR - April 14, 2008

So, if my wife Ping asks me to direct the next Star Trek movie, the job is mine? Oh, boy!

Ben Stiller visited the set? I hope they had the seat covers on the E that day. Really, not a selling point.

I’m very glad to hear that they are not married to canon. I know they’ll respect the ideas, but I don’t care if they flub the starbase numbers or duplicate the exact shade of green on the orion slave girls’ heinies. (You said it’s PG-13)

Sounds good! Still want more photos. C’mon, Speed Racer crap is everywhere. You can practically build the key scenes by re-cutting all the ads. ONE little pic of the full E. Puh-leeeeeze.

45. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#36 Mark SMP dragged a bit and had some script and story Issues, but it was definitely an entertaining film. Its visuals even by todays lofty standards still looks stunning. The director of the Film Robert Wise who did another great scifi film The Day the Earth Stood Still, gave the film its larger then life look and feel. Of all the Trek films this is by far the only one that best exemplified the trek philosophy

46. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

Spielberg liked the script and to me that is high praise.I think based on everything that I am reading, that this film is going to great and it may end up being the best trek film ever.

47. Bones (McCoy) Thugs & Harmony - April 14, 2008

So awesome – can not wait til December. I mean – d’oh! – May of NEXT FRIGGIN YEAR! Unfair!!!

Re Spielberg – he and Abrams must be quite chummy – in the commentary track of Cloverfield, Matt Reeves says that Spielberg got to see a very early cut and made “suggestions.”

48. Marcellus - April 14, 2008

” Any changes would be done after much consideration and ‘no differences will be from ignorance’ of Trek lore.”

I’m glad to hear this. It’s the correct approach to updating a franchise – make changes not just for the sake of change, but because it makes a hell of a lot more sense that way.

So, this means that it was a conscious decision to make the arrowhead insignia a universal Starfleet symbol (as seen on Aint It Cool’s pictures of a Starfleet Academy shooting) instead of USS Enterprise assignment patch, right?

49. Bones (McCoy) Thugs & Harmony - April 14, 2008

#45 – re Robert Wise – remember he also directed the Andromeda Strain – another SF classic (but very slow by today’s standards.)

50. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#49 Interestingly enough he also directed The Hindenberg and if you look at the opening sequences of that move when they show the airs ship being built the style and visual cues have an interesting similarity the rebuilding of the Enterprise.

51. CmdrR - April 14, 2008

Since we’re opining on TMP… I look at in now as a valuable step in the process. I don’t remember TV being blown-up into movies before TMP. Maybe there were some? (I don’t count Batman, because that had already been a serialized movie many times and because Tim Burton’s first flick looked nothing like the Adam West camp classic.) TMP taught Hollywood how to spend big dough on TV shows at a time when the studios were still trying to figure out what made Star Wars tick. TMP gave us the gorgeous new E, the best in my opinion. The bridge set and uniforms in TWOK was better, but still… TMP also gave us epic thinking for a film. We didn’t see that much in the next few. I would love to see a big scale story from JJ. I think we will.

TMP falls short mostly because of studio interferance. (sp?) It shouldn’t have taken 20 minutes to go through the V’ger cloud, cutting back to George’s looks of astonishment. That was deadly on the first view and continues to be a place to FF. Bless Persis’ memory, but Aliyah was a piece of wood, too. Decker got all the Kirk action, while the Shat sat around in a Florida-ready leisure suit for too many scenes.

But, again, TMP set the stage for TWOK and all that followed, including all the TV series. So, I can’t bash it. I just add it to my “love-laugh at” parts of Trek.

52. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#51 CmdrR It seems to me and I could be wrong on this one, but the whole TV to big screen thing really started with Star Trek The motion picture. It used to be the other way around before Trek, at least that how i remember it.

53. Iowagirl - April 14, 2008

Ok, it’s TMP time then…TMP was state-of-the-art, it introduced the term epic to ST, yet it didn’t forget its roots – great character interaction. One must keep in mind though that this is a film about people who have grown apart as their life has changed considerably since they last met. So, as well as this film tells the story about V’ger’s journey, about its evolution, it tells of a friendship which has to shape anew – coming to its impressive climax in the “Is there nothing more” scene. Both developments need time, coherently allegorized in the cinematic narrative. For me, TMP established ties with TOS in the best way – and it set standards for the ST universe, and for its times.

54. Vulcan Soul - April 14, 2008

The movie is about “relationships”? Then it is really a space opera, not science fiction. (Not that we didn’t have this suspicion before…)

55. Jon - April 14, 2008

Even TMP was given a PG rating when it was re-released on DVD a few years ago. It was originally G as I recall.

56. AJ - April 14, 2008

“If Ilia is a piece of wood…
Then she weighs the same as a duck!
And therefore…”

I don’t think as CmdrR mentions, it was “studio interference” that sunk TMP. Paramount wanted Star Wars ASAP, and Trek was looking pretty good as a similar property to them at that point.

They didn’t get the “Teens in Space” odyssey they perhaps wanted, and I cannot imagine “interference” being an issue, considering the finished product (Hey, Bob. Ummm can you make this scene look even more sterile? Nielsen’s showing whites and grays in a sterile environment are driving the kids crazy today!). There was no swashbuckling or cute arguing robots. Studio would have wanted that.

TMP was a thoughtful film, for sure. “Changeling” with a superduper budget, too much talking, and too much of Sulu staring.

But it loses its value in the Trek pantheon when it’s evaluated simply as a film. “Odds suck compared to evens,” etc.

Who here, of proper age, did not lose their load in the theater when they showed the Big E? I lost it with the D7’s myself, and when we had the beauty passes of refurb Enterprise, well blow me down. They could have run the end credits after Admiral Kirk went aboard, and I would have gone home happy, especially after Goldsmith’s balls-to-the-walls score hammered home the impact of the Big E’s return in Panavision.

V’ger seemed like backstory. Trivia. Because Trek was back.

Did anyone else feel similarly?

57. Mr. Atoz - April 14, 2008


Not sure if you knew…Stiller is a huge Trek Fan.

58. xizro345 - April 14, 2008

Honestly, judging from this recap, the actual info on the movie is….zero. Not very useful.

59. Doug - April 14, 2008

Way back in 1979, I never understood how ST: TMP got a ‘G’ rating. I mean Kirk said ‘damn’ in a scene or two. That should’ve bumped it to PG-rating automatically.

I stand by my earlier posts (in agreement with many here) that the first is still the best! I felt like TREK, it was a big theme; and if it was so bad it sure is interesting how much of the subsequent TREKs emulate its look.

None of the “TREK children” would exist without it. Accept no imitation (as the commercial–I forget the product–used to say)

60. I Love My Moogie - April 14, 2008

PG-13?? Very sad considering when ST hit syndication in the 70’s, kids were a huge chunk of the audience! TMP was rated G & still the highest grossing Trek movie of ’em all!

61. boJac - April 14, 2008


I agree. Of all the movies, TMP felt most like an episode of the series, and I liked that.

62. [The] TOS Purist aka The Purolator - April 14, 2008

If they had done a better job on Transformers, and hadn’t delivered such a mindless explosion flick, I would have a bit more trust in what he’s saying. As it is, I get the impression he’s just blowing smoke.

63. LostOnNCC1701 - April 14, 2008

“The Spirit of the Law” is my opinion on Fictional matters.

64. SPB - April 14, 2008


Nevermind the “damn”… Spock and Chekov both getting zapped were pretty intense scenes for the tykes (as well as the goosebump-inducing screams of the transporter victims) and Ilia getting turned to toast was VERY upsetting to my 7-year old eyes at the time.

No blood was spilled in TMP, but a “G-rating???”

65. Woulfe - April 14, 2008

Ben Stiller has been trying to get in a Star Trek movie forever, I’m of mind they should just let him be in one, even if he ends up with no lines and dead from being the guy who steps on an exploding rock….

Ben would be happy, I just guess he’s that big of a Trek fan, I would be happy as well, even if I was just some nameless guy pushing buttons that don’t do anything sitting in the back of the bridge….

Lt. Leslie anyone, anyone ?

66. US Taxpayer Dude - April 14, 2008

52. Garovorkin – April 14, 2008
#51 CmdrR It seems to me and I could be wrong on this one, but the whole TV to big screen thing really started with Star Trek The motion picture. It used to be the other way around before Trek, at least that how i remember it.

Actually, there was a 1960s Hollywood “Batman” movie starring Adam West and Burt Ward. Shows up on TV regularly on Saturdays.

On Strict Constructionism and the Slavery Amendment:
As a taxpayer, I am reminded every April 15th that I am indeed at the Beck and Call of Our Royal Masters and am compelled against my will to contribute wealth and labor to the United States Government, depsite the 14th Amendment prohibiting slavery.

This is where the Star Trek 2008 comparison ends. You see, I VOLUNTARILY will contribute my wealth and labor to Abrams, PAramount etal to watch it!!!!!

67. sean - April 14, 2008

Again, if Trek II had been released today, it would be a guaranteed PG-13. The ratings are just different now. It doesn’t mean they’re going for a cheap thrill. I think people are taking the ratings discussion far too seriously.

As for TMP, I love it. However, it features some bad editing choices (it was far too in love with its own special effects in many places) as well as some incredibly stiff performances from our beloved actors (aside from Leonard Nimoy – as a Vulcan, he was SUPPOSED to be stiff – who probably had the most intensely emotional scene of the entire movie). Plus, the Shatner Stammer is in overdrive in that movie. All I can say is thank goodness for Nicholas Meyer and his ‘multiple takes’ technique! :)

68. Duane - April 14, 2008

The reference to “an appropriate transfer of the soul” is extremely interesting. Could it be that the young Spock dies and Nimoy’s Spock (who is closer to a clone of Spock than the real Spock, as of ST: III) transfers his katra to the young Spock?

69. Alec Peters - April 14, 2008

Anthony did a great job with the interview. I wish all guests had someone interviewing them so us fans don’t have to listen to the stupid questions constantly being asked. I didn’t even sit through Nimoy’s session because the questions were painful.

Creation should just hire Anthony.


70. Mr. Poopey face (the poster formerly known as Closettrekker) - April 14, 2008

#62—They have a whole lot more to work with in Star Trek. Transformers was supposed to be a mindless action film! It was based upon a toy and a 1980’s cartoon! There is no comparison between the source material.

71. [The] TOS Purist aka The Purolator - April 14, 2008

#70 – The “Transformers” source material had a lot more to it than people think. The cartoon’s story had a LOT of potential for making depth in the characters, and really bringing to fruition various dramatic plots. The characters were established as being a certain way, and the comics (for example) were really what the movie should have been.

72. Myrth - April 14, 2008

For thoes worried about the pg-13 please realize that that actualy means more kids will see it. Let me explain. Kids under 13 will almost always be going with parents and the pg-13 rating does not discourage most of them form bring theior kids anyway. Kids 13 and over will go see a pg-13 movie over a PG movie on the principal of seeing a more adult rated film. The PG-13 rating will do more to help the kid audiance than a PG rating ever will.

73. Nathan - April 14, 2008

Ha! Unfortunately for Orci, I am definitely a “strict constructionist”…at least on constitutional issues. On Trek canon, though, I’m on their side…

74. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

56. AJ : I certainly did. Nothing will ever match the feeling I had, after so much time with no new Star Trek, when those big Klingon Cruisers moved across the big screen. Nothing, no how, no way. But that said, I look forward to this movie to attempt to come close.


75. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

68. Duane: I am thinking he means from TOS to the new movie. The passing of the torch in other words. Although…ya never know. :)

76. Captain Pike - April 14, 2008

“That is encouraging, since Spielberg knows a thing or two about films.”

Steven: Yeah, the script is good but it needs something…some kids…in danger…being chased by…Nazis…Pirates…A dinosaur in a runaway Semi. Put that in act 2 between the Romulans and the Space Battle. There you go. Perfect.

Seriously though I think SW:III had slightly better character direction than SW:II. Most of the acting was still quite poor for such a major production. Who would have thought Hayden Christiansen would make us long for the nuanced performance of Jake Lloyd in Phantom Menace.

TMP vs. ST:XI? I think ST:XI will be action adventure more in the spirit of TOS as opposed to TMP which was “Gene Roddenberry’s Vision®”. Sure TMP as exciting because Trek was back but TMP just wasn’t like the Trek I enjoyed on TV. The studio may have wanted Star Wars but they got something more like 2001:A Space Odyssey planned by a committee.

77. MORN SPEAKS - April 14, 2008

Spielberg helping out with a scene, that’s geek heaven right there!

78. konar - April 14, 2008

62 — when you judge what the writers did with Transformers and use it as a comparison to what they could do with Trek, keep in mind you are talking about making a story out of a kid’s cartoon as opposed to making a story out of the rich Trek universe and 3-D beloved characters. There’s more to work with from the beginning — and a completely different audience with different expectations.

79. KirkRulz#1 - April 14, 2008

3-D beloved characters? Who changed? How? Don’t get me wrong, I love the classic series, but who changed and how?

80. Ethan Shuster - April 14, 2008

Remember, Spielberg said some positive things about Transformers, too. But , anyway…

Are there really people who still have the “Star Trek vs. Star Wars” debate? I myself am a big fan of both. I might even say equally. They’re two different things, compared just cuz they both have spaceships and laser beams. But one’s more sci-fi than fantasy, while the other’s more fantasy than sci-fi. It’s like having a “gladiator movie vs. western” debate cuz they both have people riding horses.

81. Hat Rick - April 14, 2008

56, you asked, “Did anyone else feel similarly”‘ about TMP — meaning that we felt good that Trek was back. The answer is, Hell yeah! :-)

I watched it first-run in theaters and couldn’t take my eyes off the screen. I literally “felt” the movie in my head for days and days. That was how much it had an effect on me.

The Enterprise: What a beautiful ship. And TMP had a nice plot line, to boot. After all, it’s about transcendence, and what science fiction nut brought up on Asimov and Clarke and Heinlein and Simak didn’t enjoy a story about THAT?

82. EnterprisingGuy - April 14, 2008

Has anyone ever wondered why Kirk needed Dr. McCoy so badly in TMP? Other than needing to be in the movie he really had nothing significant to do. And why didn’t he return to his civilian life afterwards? Was there ever an explanation in any of the books?

As far as Spielberg goes…I hope his help is more like Close Encounters and less like A.I.!!

83. Katie G. - April 14, 2008

I’d rather not have Ben Stiller anywhere near my Star Trek. Can’t stand any of his movies. He may be a really nice guy but I really don’t like any of the characters he’s played. However, if all he said was “yes, sir” or “no, sir” and got blown up, I guess would be okay…

I know. I’m bad.


84. Katie G. - April 14, 2008

Sorry – – forgot to say “thank you”, Anthony. Excellent article.


85. Mr. Poopey face (the poster formerly known as Closettrekker) - April 14, 2008

#71—It was still based on a toy that simply turned a robot into a “hotwheel”, while Star Trek was a vision for the future of mankind. The point is, Transformers, as a feature film, was exactly what it set out to be. There is a huge market for such productions, and Transformers fit the bill. I am sorry that you saw the potential for a more “serious” film, and were disappointed that they did not share your vision, but it was exactly what I expected it to be. My older sons (who are between the ages of 6-14) enjoyed it, and I’d say that was a favorable result, given the objective and the amount of money it made.

Star Trek is a different animal, and since the producer, director, and writers are fans of the franchise, what on Earth would give you the sense that they would regard STXI as an opprotunity to make a mindless action film? JJ Abrams, D. Lindelof, and Roberto Orci have all said that their favorite ST movie, and inspiration, is TWOK. Is that, in your opinion, a mindless action movie? Is “Lost” mindless action?

I am not following your doubts…

86. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#85 Transformers was meant to be nothing for then a popcorn move designed to entertain, not wax philisophical about life and everything else. It was pure escapist entertainment fun, serving no other purpose after all it is based off of toys and the purpose of toys is fun .Not all movie have to have serious messages in order to entertain, that would be boring.

87. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

76. Captain Pike: TMP had its flaws. But it had the very best production values to date, the best soundtrack to date, and the best visuals to date of any other Star Trek film. Also it grossed more per capita than any other Star Trek film. But as I said, it had flaws. One of the flaws was NOT the story, Excellent science fiction story about transcendence. The main flaw was some of the pacing, acting and the fact it was rushed to completion before it was ready. I recommend everyone watch the directors cut on DVD. Makes a difference.

79. KirkRulz#1: Kirk, because he learned that he was obsessed with the Enterprise and learned that he has to put that aside of the mission will fail.

Spock, because he finally comes to the realization that he is half Vulcan and half Human and must let the two halves exist in harmony.

Decker transcends to a whole new consciousness. Can’t get more changed than that. :)

80. Ethan Shuster : Well, that really depends on if you like Science Fiction vs. Space Fantasy. I don’t hate Star Wars, but I really don’t dig Space Fantasy near as much as I do SF. So ergo, SW compares very poorly to ST to my mind. The same goes for the second analogy. I like westerns MUCH more than Gladiator movies. Despite them both having horses. :) I want more than horses and ships and lasers.

81. Hat Rick: Bingo, Bongo, Bango. :)

88. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#87 the pacing of the motion pictures was the main issue I found it problematic that Admiral Kirk of Star Fleet would be that unfamiliar with the latest up grades to starship designs. The story itself does work from a scif standpoint. IN terms of visuals it still looks great by today’s standards.

89. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

71. [The] TOS Purist aka The Purolator: There is no arguing that Transformers had potential to be something more. Because most if not all things do. But some things aren’t meant to. And I am aware that the comics, especially the UK comics explored some of that. In comics you sort of have to. But the fact is when you compare the readership of any of the comics to the audience of the cartoon…well thats a disparity that Hollywood is never going to ignore. It is after all a business. Thats why comic book movies try and bring in others to watch those movies on top of comics fans. Because comic fans can’t carry them alone. Same goes for “Trekkers” and “Trekkies” really. JJ and Paramount are wanting to bring in that mass audience that watch TMP and Voyage Home and TOS in syndication. The ones who don’t know an action figure from a phaser replica and think Con means to cheat. They just watch the show.

90. snake - April 14, 2008

ratings – I recall Wrath of Khan was given a PG in the cinema – yet when released on vhs was a ’15’ (in the UK 15 and 18 translates as an R in the US)…Its now a ’12’ (PG 13) on dvd as is First Contact and Nemesis…Unusally Voyage Home has been registered as a ’15’ (R) on special edition dvd…strange as its only the disc 2 extras which has the 15..the film itself is PG…maybe that 1986 interview with a seemingly threatening shatner bumped it up to 15 for psychological distress? he was in a foul mood I swear I though Shats was gonna smack the guys lights out at one point..(Although to be fair the interviweer was pretty awful and asking some really stupid questions)

That is new news about Spielberg reading and liking the script, wanting JJ to do it and helping direct a scene – imagine if he had wanted to direct it:

Paramount Pictures presents…A Steven Spielberg Film…’Star Trek’….

Wasnt Spielberg approached to direct The Motion Picture in the late 70s..?

maybe JJ Abrams will become the new Spielberg…directing genre refining hit after hit over the next 25 years..

80 – Spielberg has also said great things about MI 3’s bridge scene

oh yeah – about Ben Stiller – i was expecting to hear about him at some point – i was kinda hoping they wouldnt have let him on the set…I really hope he dosnt have a cameo..the world needs a nice long break from Ben Stiller.

91. Dennis Bailey - April 14, 2008

“Space opera” is science fiction. Most of “Star Trek” has always been space opera – from day one – so this should not be a surprise.

92. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

88. Garovorkin: I can buy the premise. Admirals are paper pushers. Kirk was more of a PR prop for Starfleet than anything. Thats why he hated it so much and longed to get back to what he was really meant to do. His first best destiny indeed. And I can certainly believe that the brand new not even tested state of the art Starship upgrades may be secret enough to be only known by the very top brass and the ones working on it. I really liked the dynamic of Decker and Kirk and how it all resolved. Decker served as an antagonist for the first part of the film, (Until Ilia could personalize V’ger.), but the fact was he was good as what he did and he was right about a lot of things. But Kirk also showed him that he was right and that he was the right man to lead the mission. And Decker found his own destiny.

Gene’s novelization and books like The Lost Years expand on a lot of these things. But it all makes sense to me. And we know Kirk can get obsessed, we have this last weeks episode to remind us.

Now don’t get me wrong. I can see why it makes people feel uncomfortable to see Kirk be so flawed. And I was right with everyone when seeing it the first time. But in the end it just makes him all the more rich and full character.

93. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

91. Dennis Bailey : If you want to get really broad with the interpretation of Space Opera, well then fine, Star Trek is Space Opera. We could do the same with rock and roll. Britney Spears and Bruce Springsteen both put out music in that very broad genre. However I don’t think most people listen to both. I know that I don’t. Substitute any two disparaging and very different acts for those two in case you don’t listen to either one. In other words if Star Trek is at the North of Space Opera, then Star Wars is South. Or ST is East and SW west. However we can couch it.

But I do remind you that I said that Star Wars was Space Fantasy actually. And while Trek certainly has some fantasy elements, it does not have near as much as Star Wars. And Star Wars was MADE to be Space Opera. Star Trek TOS and TAS was written by guys like Ellison, Sturgeon, Spinard and Niven. It had much more science fiction ideas than SW has had. More stories based from technology and how people were affected by it. Explorations of alien culture. Metaphysical ideas.

So, in other words, I stand by my statment. :)

94. Robert Bernardo - April 14, 2008

boJac wrote:

> Of all the movies, TMP felt most like an episode of the series…

For me, ST: The Final Frontier felt most like a series episode.

95. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

91. Dennis Bailey: Oh and I forgot to add that I admire and respect all what yous guys are doing with Exeter. I have mentioned that here before but never to you personally. Great work. You guys nail TOS.

That said tho, you have now giving me two head scratching moments for someone who seems to get TOS so well. First you defend TNG and now you want to join ST and SW at the hip. LOL.

I am bamboozled. :)

96. Dennis Bailey - April 14, 2008

Thanks for the kind words about “Exeter.”

As far as the rest – everyone who “gets TOS” doesn’t look down on TNG.

And the other thing – “space opera,” “science fiction,” “space fantasy” and so on – is a confusion resulting from taking positions based on terminology that sounds precise but has no real meaning. All of these are nothing more than marketing categories, and as labels tell one nothing about the content of a given story other than how the people selling it would like it to be perceived at point of sale.

97. Alex Prewitt - April 14, 2008

For frak’s sake, when are we gonna get some official pictures?!!

Please, Paramount, please!!

98. Jay - April 14, 2008

About the Spielberg reference, did they mention why Spielberg would have read the script. Was it just as a friend who happened to be a fan and wanted to see what they were coming up with? or was that they wanted his input and possible involvement in the film? Could he become another producer on the film? or could it be that they were trying to get him to direct- (sorry I just blew my own mind).

99. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

96. Dennis Bailey -: Your welcome. And I certainly believe I “get” TOS. Better than I get most else. And I’m not “looking down” at TNG or for that matter Star Wars. But I do maintain they are different animals. SW is passably entertaining and enjoyable. But I don’t even remotely love it like I do TOS or many other Science Fiction properties. And I do not like TNG at all. And I have very valid reasons, many of them in fact, but I don’t think anyone wants a laundry list like that here and now. Suffice to say that if its goal was to be Star Trek, in my humble opinion it failed, at least for me it did. And I speak of someone who was there, on time, every week watching and hoping.

My comments were jests, albeit based on some of my personal feelings and stance. Sorry you took them the wrong way. :)

Regardless I will be there with bated breath for the next installment of ‘The Tressaurian Intersection.” Just like I did for TNG. The difference of course it that I believe I will enjoy yours better. C’est la vie.

100. I Love My Moogie - April 14, 2008

Spielberg aided Lucas on The Phantom Menace & it still didn’t prevent it from being a dud.

101. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Anthony, it was totally cool to be able to meet you and Mr. Bob at the con. And they should have given you guys chairs for the Q & A.

102. TREK_OFFICIAL - April 14, 2008


103. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#102 Cannons to the Right of us ,Cannon to the left of Us, Cannon in front of us. Who Care!!

104. Michael Spurlock - April 14, 2008

Remember when they were saying this was an alternate storyline and not a reinvention?
I knew that was a lie.
We’ve been retconned.

105. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

#102 Trek_Official have you actually got anything useful to contribute to this whole discussion? besides the same Not Cannon statement everytime something about the new trek movie displeases you. Your not the lat word on what trk is or is not. Abrams and Company are doing a movie which by definition will be a True Star Trek movie. This definition far exceeds you rather narrow perspective on what is and what is not trek. So instead of doing Potificating two word declaration , how about a few sentence or paragraphs telling us all what you mean by not cannon.

106. sean - April 14, 2008


Actually, Spielberg only helped Lucas on Revenge of the Sith (the only prequel that came close to getting things right).

107. Stanky McFibberich - April 14, 2008

Nothing there that really says anything we haven’t been told before.
Talk it up, talk it up, talk it up. How many times has that been done and the end product was a dud? Plenty.
I think some people get too excited over nothing more than wishful thinking and all the cheerleading that’s being done.
You can say the script is good…you can say the “team gets it”…you can say whatever you want, but the proof is over a year away.

108. Mr. Poopey face (the poster formerly known as Closettrekker) - April 14, 2008

#100–The movie was still a “dud”, as you say, but the animation contributions Spielberg made in that particular scene were not, so what is your point?

109. Michael make it so... - April 14, 2008

megatron a phaser haha!!!
wish i didnt have to wait until next year.
trek will be hitting the 21st century, phasers on stun and new trekkies on the way!!!!

110. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

My problem with star wars is that the prequel triology was just plain god Awful. Lukas said he had been working on the stories for the prequels for 20 something years and this is the best he could do?First off lucas is not a good writer he never really was. His approach to movie making is that rather then tell a good story, pile on the special effects to compensate for lack of story combined with the factthat he hd been out of the directors chair for over two decades and even when he was a director he was not terribly good with actors.

111. krikzil - April 14, 2008

“Anthony did a great job with the interview. I wish all guests had someone interviewing them so us fans don’t have to listen to the stupid questions constantly being asked. I didn’t even sit through Nimoy’s session because the questions were painful.”

Amen to that. I’ve been going to cons since I was 13 (a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…oops, wrong series!) and the questions some fans ask still have the power to make me cringe.

I was there and thought the questions were great. And I enjoyed Orci and his sly wit. I’m sorry his partner didn’t make it. I would have liked to have heard more about their creative process.

I really ejoyed Quinto and Nimoy together. For his first true con appearance, he really seemed to handle himself well. I spent most of the time thinking about how he will be as Spock. Nimoy was a delight as usual — loved his comments about Shatner.

112. Dennis Bailey - April 14, 2008

#99: “My comments were jests, albeit based on some of my personal feelings and stance. Sorry you took them the wrong way. :)”

I hope I didn’t “take them the wrong way.” I just thought you wanted me to answer.

113. sean - April 14, 2008


What ‘they’ are you referring to? Abrams, Orci & Lindelof have always been vague – calling it a ‘reimagining or reinvigoration’. I think that alternate universe stuff came mostly from AICN.

114. I Love My Moogie - April 14, 2008

#106: “Actually, Spielberg only helped Lucas on Revenge of the Sith”

WRONG! Lucas needed help with the last third of Phantom Menace & Spielberg helped with the battle scenes.

#110: “My problem with star wars is that the prequel triology was just plain god Awful”

Garovorkin, for once I agree with you 110%

115. sean - April 14, 2008


I think Lucas is good at conceptualizing, but it’s the execution where he gets it all wrong. His broad strokes are right (even in the prequels) but the man can’t seem to write dialogue to save his life.

116. Janice BS - April 14, 2008

RE: #111 Krikzil

What did Nimoy say about Shatner?

I’m dying of curiosity. Thanks for the feed back.

117. Janice BS - April 14, 2008

Fellow Trekkies,
Please stop bashing Star Wars. There is enough room in the universe for both franchises. And, this silly debate gets old fast. yawnnnnnn.

118. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

krikzil#111- Quinto was in total control the entire time, wasn’t he – bodes well for his future Vulcan characterization. Would never have guessed it was his first con. He was intelligent, funny and thoughtful – also really felt the chemistry between himself and Mr N.

119. sean - April 14, 2008


I’ve never heard that one, and can’t find anything on it on IMDB, Wikipedia or elsewhere. But if true I still think it speaks in Spielberg’s favor. After all, isn’t the only watchable portion of TPM the last 1/3?

120. Janice BS - April 14, 2008

RE: #118 Denise

You’re killing me. Do you have video? please, please please…….

121. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Janice#120- I wish I had video. Leonardo and Quinto could not have been better together – sensitive of each other, caring, funny. Oh, and did I mention the hugs? It was Eden, sister.

122. NTH - April 14, 2008

#56 AJ: I was also blown away by the majestic sight of the updated Enterprise on the big screen in TMP.The scene in which Spock appears on the bridge for the first time to me truly magic–Kirks palpable relief at seeing his friend in the context of his pent up and growing frustration,the enthuasiasm of fellow crewmates and Spocks own nonchalance and coldness towards them all in the context of his own alterior motives.The transition from a television programme to a major motion picture was without question quite a sight to behold and as you said Goldsmiths scoring was truly memorable reinforcing the epic feeling of the film.TMP represented a re-imaginging of the Star Trek universe but with the original actors and some new characters.JJ.Abrams re-imagining with new actors with Nimoys involvement “being the key” to “resolve continuity issues “and to enable “an appropriate transfer of the soul”,as per Bob Orci,sounds intriguing and promising.Roll on May 2009

123. Spielberg, Abrams collaborated on Trek | - April 14, 2008

[…] dishes the latest details on J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek. Interestingly, screenwriter Roberto Orci […]

124. colonyearth - April 14, 2008

That’s freakin’ awesome! Spielberg not only helped convince JJ to direct after reading the script which he loved, but also visited the set (while shooting Indy 4 no doubt) and helped JJ with an action sequence (which Spielberg is a master of)! Spielberg is my idol!

That’s just…freakin’ awesome!!


125. Joel - April 14, 2008

Great news. Spielberg loving the script and making sure Abrams hopped on board is what people need to hear. Good confidence in the film. Glad to hear, hope cool news continues to come out throughout the spring/summer/winter/spring…sigh….can’t this just come out for Christmas this year?!

126. Stanky McFibberich - April 14, 2008

re: 108. Mr. Poopey face (the poster formerly known as Closettrekker) – April 14, 2008
“#100–The movie was still a “dud”, as you say, but the animation contributions Spielberg made in that particular scene were not, so what is your point?”

I made no reference to Mr. Spielberg or any scene. My point is simply that for any given movie in general, there are going to be people talking it up and rah-rahing for it and people who will be taken in by that. This would be true for hits as well as duds. So, just because people who are involved with the project are cheerleading for it means nothing. They are naturally going to do that to try to drum up business. Some guy selling you shoes is not going to tell you they are crap.
This just happens to be Star Trek related, so the effect is magnified, with people salivating all over every word anyone closely or even remotely attached to the project says. It comes across kind of like this…
“Yay! There’s a new Star Trek movie! Yay! Somebody said it’s gonna be good, so it’s gonna be awesome! Yay!”
Be excited if you want, people, but for heaven’s sake, there has been virtually nothing concrete shown about the movie yet…A few spy photos and a teaser which may or may not have anything to do with the movie. . . A bunch of vague comments that reveal nothing of substance.
Really the only things we know for sure from a what ends up on film standpoint is who the actors are. And that is far from exciting.
I guess if any actual photos or the like had been shown so a person could get a real idea of what it will be like, I could understand the mania, but I don’t understand people buying into the propaganda without much more to go on.

127. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

126. Stanky McFibberich: I suppose the proper alternative would be to be negative, grouse and be a spoilsport?

You make some valid points. But it cuts both ways.

And I see nothing wrong with feeling a positive vibe of hope at this point. It reminds me of those days when we would get drips and drabs of news about TMP.

Honestly, there hasn’t been anything to get excited about for me since 1991. So forgive me if I find the prospect of something that may well be worthwhile potentially exciting.

128. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

Paramount has alot riding on this film from what i have been hearing the budget is 200 million dollars. If true that quite a princely sum for a trek film .If this turns out to be a money loser for the studio can you image what the fallout could end up being for the whole Trek Franchise and the studio and for Abrams? No They know what they are doing as does Abrams.

129. Stanky McFibberich - April 14, 2008

re: 127. I Am Morg Not Eymorg – April 14, 2008
“126. Stanky McFibberich: I suppose the proper alternative would be to be negative, grouse and be a spoilsport?”

Well, somebody has to try to balance out the rah-rah crowd :)

130. VOODOO - April 14, 2008

I find it interesting that Leonard Nimoy “is the key to the film”

I was expecting little more than a glorified cameo.

131. I Love My Moogie - April 14, 2008

Spielberg also loved the script for “1941” & almost destroyed his career because of his bad judgement. Steven has given thumbs up to many a turkey so don’t assume his loving the STXI script means it’s actually good.

132. Garovorkin - April 14, 2008

# 131 Moogie Heresy 1941 is one of the greatest films ever produced, it deserves mention along side such cinema classics as Plan 9 from outer Space, Toxic Avenger,The incredible Melting Man, The queen from outer Space., Catwomen on the Moon, A Nyphoid Barbarian in Dinosaur Hell and Surf Nazis Must DIe. oh yeah classics all.

133. The Vulcanista - April 14, 2008

Denise: So did Leonard make an announcement that he and his wife are formally adopting ZQ? ;-) <— (wish I could make that bigger and bolder!)

Anthony, I know you’ve got a life outside this site, but I’m sure looking forward to a report on the Spocks at the con! And thanks so much for the excellent features you’ve delivered thus far!!

Here a Spock, there a Spock, everywhere a SpockSpock…

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

134. Bill Peters - April 14, 2008

Sounds like the movie is getting better and better, anyone see Jeopardy on monday! The Final Jeopardy Question was ” What are Tribbles?” So I don’t know Answer that was used a a clue.

135. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Vulcanista#133- LOL! After seeing Quinto up-close-and-personal, I would like to adopt him myself.

136. The Vulcanista - April 14, 2008


A: Small living balls of fur that, as far as we can tell, are born pregnant?


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

137. The Vulcanista - April 14, 2008


Yeah, just keep him away from your skull area…

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

138. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Vulcanista#137- LOL!

139. I Love My Moogie - April 14, 2008


Garovorkin, Ed Wood (the director, not the movie) may be surpassed next May.

140. Robert Bernardo - April 14, 2008

Denise wrote:

> Anthony, it was totally cool to be able to meet you and Mr. Bob at the
> con.

Yes, now I know what our faithful leader looks like. :-)

> And they should have given you guys chairs for the Q & A.

Agreed. I guess the chairs were left for the stars, Quinto and Nimoy, who were coming up next. ;-)

> [Quinto] was intelligent, funny and thoughtful – also really felt the
> chemistry between himself and Mr N.

Yeah, Quinto by himself… not so much. But Quinto and Nimoy… what a pair! Too bad Quinto wouldn’t divulge one iota of the movie. But it was great that he and Nimoy did the Vulcan sign together and both said, “Live long and prosper”. (Hey, Quinto used his left hand to do the Vulcan sign and Nimoy used his right…. hmm.) :-)

141. Robert Bernardo - April 14, 2008

Janice BS wrote:

> Do you have video? please, please please…….

Denise de Arman wrote:

> I wish I had video

I have it in a different form.

142. Anthony Pascale - April 14, 2008

I cant believe how many people have talked about the chairs. Actually we were offered chairs but thought that without them it would be more dynamic.

However I think Bob and I ended up facing eachother too much and not looking out to the crowd and maybe from their perspective it looked like they were watching two nerds having a chat.

I am probably going to do another ‘ presents’ panel in Vegas…maybe for that one I will use chairs.

I will have a report and pics from Nimoy and quinto up shortly

143. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Anthony, your Q & A with Mr. Bob was great – we were only thinking of your comfort, as you are our fearless leader and he is the mind behind the movie. As someone on the thread mentioned earlier, I know it is tradition for Nimoy. etc. to take audience questions; however, at this particular con I would much rather have seen you interviewing Leonardo and Quinto – the audience questions were by far the most inane I have ever heard. You and Mr. Bob – great. The audience – horrific.

144. Robert Bernardo - April 14, 2008

Anthony Pascale wrote:

> However I think Bob and I ended up facing each other too much and not
> looking out to the crowd and maybe from their perspective it looked like
> they were watching two nerds having a chat.

Nah, you looked fine.

> I am probably going to do another ‘ presents’ panel in
> Vegas…maybe for that one I will use chairs

Ooo, I’ll be there.

145. Anthony Pascale - April 14, 2008

you know a lot of people came up to me afterwards and said they would like to see more moderated things. I am listening to my recording of Nimoy/Quinto now and some questions were a bit much like ‘what was it like being the sexiest vulcan’ or ‘will you mind meld with me’ or ‘how do you pronounce Spock’s unpronounceable names’

However, those people paid good money and it is there moment to interact. That being said I talked to both the Creation guys and to Zach back stage. He said he didn’t really know what to talk about and said he might want some moderating…so we will see what happens.

I am surprised no one has mentioned my comedy routine pointing out all the ‘errors’ on the image of the new Enterprise on the big screen. I got big laughs from that one…and I couldnt have done it in a chair since i was running around pointing at things on the screen.

anyway back to work

146. Robert Bernardo - April 14, 2008

Anthony Pascale wrote:

> I am surprised no one has mentioned my comedy routine pointing out all
> the ‘errors’ on the image of the new Enterprise on the big screen. I got big
> laughs from that one…and I couldnt have done it in a chair since i was
> running around pointing at things on the screen.

That was great!! All of a sudden you’re there, a bundle of energy, nitpicking the heck out of it (as some of us do when we get carried away). :-D

147. Denise de Arman - April 14, 2008

Oh, sorry I forgot about that one Anthony – that was funny. Use a laser pointer in the future if you are sitting. Perhaps the old classic of the hamster running-in-the-wheel should end up in the new Enterprise engineroom schematics for Vegas…

148. Thomas - April 14, 2008

How Spielberg felt about 1941 doesn’t matter, he’s a major player and he has a proven track record. Nobody has a perfect record, he’s just been able to score more hits than misses.

149. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

129. Stanky McFibberich: Heh, fair enough I suppose. So let me close with: THIS MOVIE IS GONNA ROCK! WOOT! LOL

150. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 14, 2008

139. I Love My Moogie: My, I have experienced people with little or no faith in something, but you actively hate this thing don’t you?

151. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 15, 2008

82. EnterprisingGuy: As consul. And he served ably in that capacity. He was the one who helped Kirk see he was obsessed.

152. Chris M - April 15, 2008

Some awesome and very interesting facts about Star Trek (2009)!

153. The Vulcanista - April 15, 2008

#150, Yeah, Moogie’s our li’l ray o’ sunshine, all right.

Good news on the “Heroes” scene, though. More deliciously evil Sylar next season! Yay!

Looking forward to the video of the Spocks, Anthony!

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

154. The Vulcanista - April 15, 2008

#142 Oh, sorry. Just re-read your post. No video.

Crazy 8 hasn’t kicked in yet.

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

155. Mr. Bob Dobalina - April 15, 2008

1941…boy what an overblown stinker that was. Granted Spielberg has some serious problems with comedy….but his talent for moving the camera ,action and suspense is undeniable. And since Spielberg was helping JJ stage an action sequence, I have no worries.

156. Garovorkin - April 15, 2008

#155 it was also one of John Belushi’s last films

157. Garovorkin - April 15, 2008

#155 It was also one of John Belushi’s last films

158. krikzil - April 15, 2008

“What did Nimoy say about Shatner?
I’m dying of curiosity. Thanks for the feed back.”

Janice —

Anthony answered this in part in his new thread today. Nimoy was defending and explaining about Kirk not being in the movie. He went on record about how awful he thought Kirk’s death was in Generations and it was one of the reasons he wasn’t in the movie. (That and the fact it was only a cameo really.) He was offered the director’s chair and turned that down as well. He joked that if he’d been there; Kirk would still be alive. He also defended Bill as director in STV which I thought was sweet. He repeatedly mentioned that he and Bill were friends, even using that line in STII — I have been and always shall be…. I got all misty!

” I am surprised no one has mentioned my comedy routine pointing out all the ‘errors’ on the image of the new Enterprise on the big screen. I got big laughs from that one…and I couldnt have done it in a chair since i was
running around pointing at things on the screen.”

Anthony –Even as one of the canonistas you were mocking, I laughed. You were funny and very comfortable on stage. (I’d rather play in traffic than stand in front of a con audience!) I was wondering about the chairs thing. Look forward to seeing you in Vegas later in the year.

“krikzil#111- Quinto was in total control the entire time, wasn’t he – bodes well for his future Vulcan characterization. Would never have guessed it was his first con. He was intelligent, funny and thoughtful – also really felt the chemistry between himself and Mr N.”

Denise — Yes, I totally agree. He was great on stage. I don’t think it’s going to go to his head or wig him out in the future. He mentioned he’d done a lot of theatre and it really showed. I loved his chemistry with Nimoy. Nimoy was so gracious and Quinto so respectful.

159. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - April 16, 2008

157. Garovorkin:

Actually it was more in the middle. John did 7 movies. 1941 was his 4th.

In order they were Animal House, Goin’ South, Old Boyfriends, 1941, The Blues Brothers, Continental Divide and Neighbors. He was slated for other things, including Ghost Busters but that of course tragically never happened.

160. 790 - April 16, 2008

Great Job, Anthony and I did laugh at your nitpick of the ship. (what does this thing run on steam?)

Also liked it when you asked Bob what’s the site name and he’s said “” and you said “your fired Bob!”.

Great work allthough Bob did seem a tad nervous on stage.

161. Chris Basken - May 12, 2008

I know this is old, but re: science fiction vs. fantasy vs. space opera. Any publisher will tell you that the genre is in the trappings. Does it have spaceships and robots? Science fiction. Does it have wizards or dragons or elves? Fantasy.

Star Wars is science fiction. The only fantastical element is the Force, and it’s no more fantasy than Spock’s mind meld or Deanna Troi’s telepathy. It feels less like science fiction because the plot doesn’t get into the scientific details. We never (or rarely) hear SW characters discussing anything regarding how hyperdrive works, or using technobabble, and the films themselves are shot and produced with more of an eye toward and epic, sweeping feel that somehow makes them kin to Lord of the Rings. But when you get down to it, Geordi and Data use technobabble in a kind of magical, hocus-pocus fashion that really resembles something like what you’d expect Gandalf to say.

A lot of Isaac Asimov’s early stories are undoubtedly science fiction, but he no more gets into the scientific details than they do in Star Wars. Read his early Robot or Foundation novels and tell me where it differs (with respect to the “sciencey” stuff) from Star Wars. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.