Abrams Decries Spoilers – Defends Secrecy | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Abrams Decries Spoilers – Defends Secrecy June 3, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek (2009 film),TrekMovie.com , trackback

JJ Abrams loves a good mystery and, as an amateur magician, loves a big surprise. One look at his TV show Lost and his feature film Cloverfield and you can see that he has taken the art of a secret to a new level…and his new Star Trek film is no exception. Now Abrams talks to the Jossip blog about why he doesn’t like them spoilers.

The Entertainment Weekly article “Spoiler Nation: Secrets About Movie/TV Secrets Revealed!” offers the two sides of the argument for and against spoilers. Abrams is clearly in the anti-spoiler camp. From the article:

For J.J. Abrams, creator of Alias and director of Mission: Impossible III, the growth of spoiler culture has become so alarming, he made a movie in response to it: Cloverfield. Abrams saw his monster flick — shot on the down low and marketed with coy, minimum-disclosure teasers — as a protest against an information overload era where ”people think they’ve experienced things before they really have.” Now the director is shooting the new Star Trek movie, and he finds himself at odds with rabid Trekkies who want to know ”every gory detail about a movie that’s still a year away.” He respects their hunger, but is convinced they are better off waiting until May 8, 2009. ”Learning raw detail and experiencing that detail as it was intended are two totally different things,” he says. ”I would argue that not knowing those details in advance is a more refreshing way to live when it comes to entertainment.”

TrekMovie point of view
Abrams of course has a point. A pure surprise is always an enjoyable experience. However, the Jossip Blog points out “Some see spoiler sites as a pop culture version of Consumer Reports.” TrekMovie agrees. The new Star Trek movie is a new team with a new approach taking on an important TV and film franchise. It is full of many pitfalls and the ‘installed base’ of consumers (aka ‘Trekkies’) range from curious to cautious to downright concerned about the end product. This site has endeavored to keep the Trek community informed with both ‘secret’ and not so secret information in order to help inform the Trekkies, build the Trek brand, and increase the comfort level with the new team. In addition, Spoilers are always an ‘opt-in’ option as well, as Spoilers are labeled as such. That being said there are certain types of spoilers we would not want to reveal, like how the movie ends or any other ‘Luke I am your Father’ level of surprise.

The difference with the new Star Trek movie and a film like Cloverfield is that Trek is a known quantity and so for the general film going audience and the Trekkie audience, there are some pre-conceived notions, many of which could keep people away from the theaters and so they will never see the ‘surprise.’ Spoilers and information on the film can help some make their purchase decision and for others can help build enthusiasm to turn them into evangelists for the film. This approach is actually embraced by some film makers and TV producers. EW cites the example of Heroes, which like Trek is trying to reuild their fanbase:

After a disappointing second season, NBC plans on spilling much beanage over the summer to convince fans that the show is back on track. ”We have to show our wares,” says exec producer Tim Kring, who hopes to screen the Sept. 22 season premiere at Comic-Con in July. ”If getting buzz means spoiling some things, I’ll take buzz any day.”

And of course we are giving people what they want. In a recent poll 94% of visitors said they read spoilers.

What do you think?
Do you like spoilers? Do they help build excitement or do they tamper it?

Comments

1. Austin Rhodes - June 3, 2008

Ummm…then do an original story and no press beforehand…and good luck with that first weekend at the box office!

2. jr - June 3, 2008

spoil me!

3. Daniel Broadway - June 3, 2008

All I want to see is the new Enterprise. After that, I’m find with no more spoilers.

4. GaryP - June 3, 2008

I agree with JJ Abrams. I usually visit this site a few times a day. I will now leave this site and not return until next summer.

Everyone have a great year!

5. ster j - June 3, 2008

Spoilers that reveal the AHA! moments in a film are just mean spirited. However, with the Trek movies, we already know the basic premise and characters. Even if all the publicity pictures were published today, it really wouldn’t be that much of a surprise because we know where the movie is going. The surprise will be in how JJ takes us from point A to B.

I used to buy the movie novelization as soon as it hit the market, read it cover to cover, then go see how what I read in the book played out on the screen. It never spoiled anything for me. If anything, it enhanced the movie experience because, in knowing the backstory whys and wherefores before hand so I didn’t have to wonder what as going on (I can’t always hear the dialogue at the theater).

6. StarTrekExcitement - June 3, 2008

Yes I agree with JJ Abrams and as much as I can’t wait to see this movie … the really big spoilers should be left in the movie and I will see this movie regardless of any revealings of spoilers.

7. montreal paul - June 3, 2008

I love coming to this site.. but I never read the spoilers. I want to go in to a movie not knowing anything about it. That is why I hate movie trailers.. they give too much of the movie away. I want to go in surprised.. I don’t want to watch the movie saying “Oh yeah.. i remember that picture or that is what they were talking about.” I want the awe of seeing it all for the first time. I agree with JJ’s secrecy.

8. Driver - June 3, 2008

This, of course, is meant to keep Shatner ‘s surprise cameo under wraps. You’re not fooling me Mr. Abrams. HA!

9. spockanella - June 3, 2008

I’m ambivalent about it. In a way I wish there were no spoilers, because if there are, I’m gonna look at em. And then I might be disappointed later that I did, kind of like when you snuck into the Christmas presents and tore back the corner of the wrapping paper. I do appreciate Anthony labeling spoilers as such so that people can make up their own minds whether to continue reading. It’s maybe a little naive of JJ to expect that NO spoilers will ever get released. It only makes people dig deeper.

10. OR Coast Trekkie - June 3, 2008

That’s the thing: there are definitely elements which are supposed to be a suprise, as part of the artisitic direction of the film. Perhaps something like the Enterprise reveal is supposed to be one of those things which are supposed to be secret; so we can feel what it is the character is supposed to be feeling.

11. Denise de Arman - June 3, 2008

Anthony- Spoil away, dearheart. I hope we get to see Zachary slip the Vulcan nerve pinch to some unsuspecting bad guy come next May. And, of course, Leonardo must engage some lucky person in the Vulcan mindmeld – that is a given.

12. SteveinSF - June 3, 2008

I read the spoilers. I admit it.

13. SirMartman - June 3, 2008

THEY TAMPER IT!

This is one Trek fan who has made a point of NOT reading spoilers,

and its killing me !!!!

I think,,if you read all the spoilers,, it will just ruin the film if you know what will happen,,you will lose the “WOW” effect.

I think JJ will do a great job,,its killing me not reading the spoilers,,,but I think its better for a true Fan not to read them.

The one thing I do want to know,,is when the next trailer will come out.

14. Commodore Lurker - June 3, 2008

Decloaking . . .
I think TrekMovie.com has been nearly perfect in its application of Spoiler technology. The only change I suggest is a standardized spoiler alert.

Green Alert = Minor Spoilers.
Yellow Alert = Medium Spoilers.
Red Alert = Major Spoilers.

I trust the TrekMovie.com Staff to rate said Spoilers based on my experience here thus far. And IF you find out that Nimoy Spock looks seriously at Young Kirk and says: “Jim, there is a 98.375 % probability that you are my progeny.” I DO NOT WANT TO KNOW.
Recloaking.

15. Marcus Johnson - June 3, 2008

I want everything to be a surprise.

16. US Taxpayer Dude - June 3, 2008

The need for spoilers is really a need for missing trust.

Mr Abrams is an unknown element, insofar as drama goes. I have never seen one of his productions, except for a few episodes of Lost, but it appears he relies on gimmickry if Lost is at all germane, with its deliberate confusion and antilinear portrayal of events.

I do not want gimmicks in my Star Trek. This is why I never bought any fo the various spin-offs — too many gimmicks. Too much deus ex machina. Too much technobabble. Too many foam rubber aliens. Too much bling.

Give me a minimalist play in three or four acts and I’ll be happy. If Abrams can do that, with neat sets and costumes and such thrown in as a bonus, this paying member of John Q. Public will be satisfied I got my money’s worth.

17. Kosher Coder - June 3, 2008

I lost a LOT of respect for JJ with that. I mean, I knew he felt that way, but to see it in black and white. Disappointing.

18. The Underpants Monster - June 3, 2008

“Minimum disclosure teasers?!?” He’s got to be kidding. I saw everything I needed to know about Cloverfield in the teasers – the extra bits I saw when I saw the movie were frosting.

19. Dom - June 3, 2008

I’m careful with spoilers. It’s the old balancing act: feed us a little so we’ll devour the lot later on!

20. Michael - June 3, 2008

I totally agree with you Anthony regarding the kind of spoilers that I care to see. I don’t want to know too much in advance about the story. I’d like to see the ship, some cast photos in uniform, that sort of thing but I can wait to see the story to find out the details which is why I go to the movies in the 1st place. To be honest it would have been better to have only learned of the new movie’s existence a day or 2 before the opening to be truly surprised.

21. ILovespoilers - June 3, 2008

spoiler or no spoiler.. we are;

Going to go
Buy the merchandise
Go again to see what we missed
Buy more merchandise
Talk about buying merchandise
Talk about seeing it over and over
But the DVD when it comes out
Buy the special edition DVD when it comes out…

It makes no difference….

Look at Iron Man – practically that whole movie was available ahead of time…and it’s the biggest movie of the year…

What difference does it make if we get to see a few pictures of our heroes, and the ship they sail…

JJ, please let me see my heroes again.. and let them live in my mind and heart again…

22. Capt. Darrean Lampert - June 3, 2008

Does anybody on the site actually have jobs? Sure your bosses are happy to know your BS’ing about Star Trek and not what your being paid to do? GO TO WORK!!! LOL!

23. Art - June 3, 2008

I do not read spoilers or even critics’ reviews of movies I know I’m going to watch. (If i’m not sure I’ll go to rottentomatoes.com) I’m always reminded of The Simpsons ep. where Homer in the 80′s walks out of Empires Strikes Back and blabs that Vader is Luke’s father within earshot of people waiting for the next showing. Imagine having the internet spoil “Vader is Luke’s Father”, or “He was dead the whole time” or “Who’s Kaizer Soze”.

This site likens spoilers as a sort of Consumer Reports, but we don’t report on the manufacturing of the product before it hits the shelves. We wait until it has been finalized and presented before we analyze the final product.

But I wouldn’t consider it a spoiler if it was revealed that they changed the Vulcan hand sign from “Live long and Prosper” to “Two in the pink, two in the stink.”
That just wrong.
Funny… but wrong.

24. Closettrekker - June 3, 2008

#22i—Some of us are bosses…With that said, if any of my employees were found to be doing what I do at this site or another, they might get a stern talking to. As for me, I’m signing the checks, and this is what I worked hard for years to be able to do with part of my day.

I read the spoilers, but I trust Abrams to surprise me as well. In the past, I’ve actually known too much about Star Trek movies before their release. I don’t think that will be the case this time.

25. Scott - June 3, 2008

I prefer not to know the full plot or story synopsis beforehand, But I think finding out what some of the ships will look like and uniforms etc. and some basic plot points can’t possibly spoil the movie for most people. For an example, I remember the thrill of seeing Ralph McQuarrie’s production paintings for Empire Strikes Back and Return Of The Jedi in Starlog magazine when I was a kid, months before the films hit the screeen (and long before the Internet)–getting those glimpses of what was in store was very cool. Knowing a few things prior to sitting down in the theater didn’t in any way diminish the movie-going experience.

26. James Heaney - Wowbagger - June 3, 2008

Every time that man opens his mouth, I look forward to this movie all the more.

I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Abrams. Spoilers enable people to take a movie apart, piece by piece, rather than experiencing the vision of the director and producers and the actors and the writers -as it was intended to be experienced.- It gets even worse when “spoiled” fans get the perverse idea that their knowing movie fragments somehow entitles them to have an opinion on a movie that isn’t even finished yet. I have yet to see a spoiler that *built* excitement… I have only seen those that satisfied fans who were eager for anything (and who would have been *more* excited had no spoilers been available). In short, I believe–firmly–that spoilers *only* hurt movies. Beyond the scantiest of information, released at the proper time (in a teaser or trailer), any benefit fans perceive in spoilers is self-deception.

This being said, I do not begrudge Anthony his decision to run spoilers on TrekMovie.com–it is a news site, after all, and no self-respecting journalist would censor himself without very good reason–and I must say that I’ve never seen a site that is so careful with spoilers as Mr. Pascale is. He deserves high praise for this. What I cannot comprehend is the mentality of the (reported) other 94% of you.

Incidentally, O Mighty Webmaster, does this mean that, should you somehow obtain a full script to XI, you won’t publish it?

27. US Taxpayer Dude - June 3, 2008

^24

Me too. It’s nice when the boss always agrees with you :-)

28. Tom - June 3, 2008

i like to see peaks of the production (ships, uniforms, sets) but that’s it. The idea of “consumer reports” with regard to intellectual property is a slippery thing. And the revealing of spoilers can destroy that property, too, even the good stuff.

But publishing spoilers, even with alerts, can backfire. If a blog or gossip site gets something out, the production may deem them persona non grata and deny them exclusive interviews, etc.

Hope that doesn’t happen here

29. MORN SPEAKS - June 3, 2008

Things that may be in a trailer aren’t really spoilers for me (with the exception of both Enterprises blowing up in their trailers), but I’m happy Abrams is keeping as much as possible under wraps.

Spoilers are like a drug, I don’t want to take them or look at them, but I can’t help myself.

I need a spoiler rehab.

30. krikzil - June 3, 2008

Personally I love spoilers. I’ve read movie scripts while they’re still filming; read novelizations in line for the movie. ;) (My handle in another fandom was “spoilergal” once upon a time.) It doesn’t ruin it for me, just makes me anticipate and imagine the actors giving it life AND also helps accept things that I don’t want to see. LIke Spock’s death in ST2. I still remember sobbing in my hotel room reading the script at a con a good 6 months before the film was due out. I would NEVER have made it through the movie that first time otherwise!

Of course, I think spoilers need to be clearly labeled so as not to ruin it for people who don’t like them.

31. Hat Rick - June 3, 2008

JJ: AMEN, BROTHER! I do not like too many spoilers. I agree that it’s best to keep most things secret so that one can be given the shock of the new upon seeing the film.

Spoilers that are clearly marked are not an issue for me, so long as they are indeed marked. I am speaking of the abstract, in the main; the idea as regards too many spoilers is that they do tend to spoil the broth! At least, methinks.

32. Pizza - June 3, 2008

I avoid spoilers, and look forward to seeing everything fresh. I want the full enjoyment of the entire movie without any knowledge if possible, Which can be difficult in the information age.

Just hang in there everyone. We have less than a year to go. And who knows, they changed their minds once, they might do it again and we could see it sooner.

33. spockanella - June 3, 2008

22′, 24, 27: Yes, some of us are bosses. Some of us who are bosses treat our employees like responsible adults and acknowledge that the occasional brief mental health break makes for a more productive, refreshed staff. Of course, if it gets out of control and productivity suffers, then I’d have an issue. Otherwise, to borrow a phrase, it’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell”.

Keep those spoilers coming, Anthony. I’ll agonize over it, but I’ll read em (sometimes even on company time).

34. Fleet Captain Kor'Tar - June 3, 2008

I respect Mr. Abrams opinion , and I agree, up to a certain point . For example showing us , (the consumers) , a fully rendered U.S.S. Enterprise and fully costumed and made up cast photo from the new bridge, I don’t think would ruin anything for anyone, but stoke the burning fire of the fan base of those familiar with the franchise , and perhaps peak the curiosity of the new fans. Nowhere would the plot be revealed by letting us glimpse the 2 pictures . Just something to consider .

35. Decker's Stubble - June 3, 2008

I have no problems with spoilers. After all, this isn’t a M. Night Shyamalan movie, with some weird trick ending – it’s Star Trek. I mean, we can all pretty much guess how the sandwich is going to turn out, even if the cook doesn’t want to tell us what kind of lunch meat he used. Besides, it’s a fact of life that the hype never, ever matches reality.

Instead of complaining, Abrams should use spoilers to tease the audience and build more excitement. Or, if he’s that concerned, he should run a good old-fashioned disinformation campaign, “leaking” false spoilers along with real ones so that no one trusts anything coming out.

36. Spocko - June 3, 2008

I don’t like spoilers. I hate when a new movie comes out and someone tells the story/ending. And how there are thousands of websites devoted to telling a movies story before the movie gets to. There are a few minor spoilers that I have decided to see here, like a tribble appearance, but other then that, I’ll waite for the movie.

37. Magic_Al - June 3, 2008

Delaying the movie is the wrong way to contain spoilers.

38. Fed up - June 3, 2008

ST XI: No press = silence. How do they intend to promote and build anticipation for the general public in regard to this movie?

Not good, not good at all.

39. demon barber of starfleet - June 3, 2008

I agree with not having any huge spoilers that might give away anything too important about the plot. I want to be in suspense when I see it, not know just what’s going to happen beforehand. But being a rabid Trekkie I can’t help but eagerly assimilate any little tidbits I can get my hands on until the movie.

40. Denise de Arman - June 3, 2008

Decker’s Stubble#35- Like the idea of a disinformation campaign: Will JJ introduce the Vulcan lovegrip to new audiences? Will elder Spock meld with his younger self and convince him that he needs to teach young Kirk the Vulcan lovegrip? Will younger Spock meld with young Kirk and convince him that the Vulcan lovegrip is better than anything he has ever gotten from Ruth, Janice or Carol? Will Anthony sternly reprimand Denise for wandering into dangerous territory on this thread…

41. Cyberghost - June 3, 2008

With a year to go, all I would want to see is a full view of the Enterprise. And the crew, thats it…and as time passes, we will see it. I believe Bob Orci said a second trailer is done, its just a matter of when, my bet is will see a teaser around Christmas time.

42. Splurch - June 3, 2008

I wish that we could stop using the term “Trekkie” to refer to Trek fans. It’s bad enough that the news media focuses on the most extreme & geeky fans and passes them off as the norm, but the term “Trekkie” just makes it worse.

As for spoilers, I agree that a certain amount of information can actually help increase the buzz for a film. I think that most Trek fans want to be assured that they are not going to go into this movie and find it’s like the 1998 Godzilla movie that was a huge disappointment. The producer of that movie also went to extremes to keep the details under wraps. They changed things too much and it wasn’t even recognizable as Godzilla.

43. Xai - June 3, 2008

It’s a year AWAY! You cannot promote a film a year in advance and expect the hype to last and do what it’s intended.

And somehow you know…

44. Xai - June 3, 2008

#43 was directed to #38

45. Xai - June 3, 2008

37. Magic_Al – June 3, 2008
“Delaying the movie is the wrong way to contain spoilers.”

That was not the reason to delay the movie…but you already know that.

46. Michelle - June 3, 2008

“JJ Abrams loves a good mystery and as a amateur…” I think that should read “an amateur” right?

I agree with keeping spoilers at a minimum; I think movies are much more enjoyable in general when you go to see them without knowing TOO much about what is going to happen. That said, I find it very hard to resist temptation to avoid spoilers when it’s something like this that I’m so excited about. I think seeing the trailer to the movie and reading the reviews of movie credits who don’t give away too much of the plot is all one really needs to gauge whether or not this movie is something they have a good chance of enjoying.

If some really juicy spoilers come to light, I’m not sure if I’ll be able to keep from reading them. I’ve ready every spoiler so far that’s come this way, so I’m hoping the secrecy holds so I don’t have to keep failing to give in to my temptations.

47. Nelson - June 3, 2008

I want to be surprised. Spock’s death in Trek 2 was somewhat leaked, but it wasn’t till I saw it happen that I believed it. That’s a huge spoiler.

I don’t want to know till I see the new movie.

48. ThePhaige - June 3, 2008

I just want to see a full length trailer and I will be happy. I am rooting for
JJs stealth machine keeping the secrets. Many are watching closely to see if he can pull off the secrecy up until the end. If the spoiler tank isn’t breached, it will be a huge accomplishment unheard of in this time of flash information.

49. Negotiator - June 3, 2008

Most of us just want to see the new crew and the big E. Those are not spoilers. It’s called marketting. A trailer and promo shots will come out ahead of the movie eventually. Remember this movie got pushed back 6 months. A crew shot or a beauty shot of the big E will apeace and excite the base until the movie comes out. Without the established base of Trekkies, this movie will flop no matter how good it is. This is the crowd that will go back more than once and buy the merchendise and DVDs. That’s how these movies become block busters and directors mega rich and powerful. I’m getting the sence that JJ is afraid to Ps-off or disappoint the base by releasing some pictures. If he doesn’t trust his project, why should we? If JJ is serious about surprises then why put out a teaser at all? Is he not going to promote the movie at all until it comes out? Surprise! Of course not. Pictures will come out from JJ’s team. One now could calm some nerves and help with the extra long wait ahead of us.

50. Garovorkin - June 3, 2008

To much secrecy, I would like to see a few photos or clip or two of film . I am not asking for major spoiler here.

51. CanuckLou - June 3, 2008

All I want between now and May of next year is a shot of the Enterprise and a group shot of the cast. After that no more spoilers for me.

…the adventure continues…

52. Dr. Image - June 3, 2008

#51- YEAH!! (Eh?)

53. CmdrR - June 3, 2008

Spoiler-schmoiler — show me a beauty shot of the full E.

Please.

54. OneBuckFilms - June 3, 2008

My wife doesn’t like spoilers, so she stays away from them.

I, on the other hand, enjoy them and read them.

The secrecy, however frustrating, is actually very good publicity.

It helps build anticipation for the film, and the speculation is actually really fun.

What will the ships look like?

What will the Bridge be like?

Will we hear the classic sound effects, such as the Transporter?

How will they resolve continuity issues raised by the basic plot (romulans seen before Balance of Terror, for example)?

The waiting is as much fun as it is frustrating, and little teases like the shot of the bridge all add to the fun.

In the end, the only way to enjoy the film is to see it, and judge the end result.

We had an idea what Cloverfield was, but the reveal of the monster had greater impact.

Perhaps “Selected” spoilers is the way to go.

Little bits and pieces to tease us and keep us interested, and perhaps hint at dispelling preconceptions.

55. BionicBuddha - June 3, 2008

I can’t wait for the movie

56. Troubled Tribble - June 3, 2008

I’ve been a Trek fan since the early 70′s watching the reruns of TOS on our first color T.V. I have seen every Trek movie in the theaters, usually on opening weekend.
I read all spoilers. They don’t ruin the movies for me. They help me understand where the director is trying to go with the scenes.
I don’t want to know the ending or the “Luke, I’m your father” moments, but I do like to understand the backstory.
Mr. Abrams needs to understand that people like me who have been around since the first days of Trek have a certain amount of concern about this movie. I read the spoilers with high hopes that he will carry Star Trek into a bright NEW future.
Let’s face it people, Rick Berman allowed too many changes in Star Trek : First Contact. Jonathan Frakes didn’t do his home work. Casting James Cromwell as Zephram Cochrane when TOS Cochrane was a shorter stockier person.
The Spoilers I’ve read so far show that Mr. Abrams is trying very hard to stay true to the vision of Gene Roddenberry. I await his movie with GREAT anticipation.

57. Sean - June 3, 2008

Spoilers do exactly what they say they do: they spoil what should be a surprise. That said, I still read every spoiler I can. Having to wait this long for a movie I’m anticipating this much is sheer torture, so I’ll take any tidbits I can get.

58. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - June 3, 2008

I am a spoiler crack-head. I actually read AICN for God’s sake, just because something they say MIGHT be true. That’s how I found this site, by doing a search for any info online about the new Trek movie. I spoiled myself rotten on Transformers, Batman, Nemesis, LOTR, Superman, you name it. I knew that Star Wars was coming out a full year before anyone else I knew did. And that was from an article in Starlog. Well maybe it wasn’t a FULL year, but I saw all the Ralph McQuarrie concept art in that first blurb they had about Star Wars in 1976.

And I love that this article is right above a spoiler announcement.

59. TL - June 3, 2008

Its not so much the spoiler of the story that I am interseted in as much as the design and look of the new picture. I think too many directors now a days want to keep everything hidden, not even allowing critics to review their films before the mass release.

The problem with a film like star trek too much power and control is always given to the executive producer, that is why the majority of the films fail. The TV shows I believe are more successful because many more people contribute to the production and as a result you get better storylines.

If JJ maybe was more forthcoming in revealing what he is doing perhaps more critical eyes looking at it would make for a better picture. In the last few years I have been really upset at famous directors screwing up classic film characters such as; Planet of the Apes; Superman Returns and most recently Indian Jones. I bet all these films would have been better if not for the for their ‘secret’ nature. I am still crossing my fingers, but if JJ is so afraid to show as photos of the Enterprise I wonder what the script will be like.

60. cap97 - June 3, 2008

I want to see uniforms and I want to see the ship. Otherwise, I can wait. (Well, I’ll wait one way or the other, but you know what I mean.)

61. Tanner Waterbury - June 3, 2008

Ok I JUST WANT TO SEE THE BLOODY SHIP JJ! THAT IS IT, JUST THE NEW ENTERPRISE NCC 1701, NO BLOODY A, B, C, D, or E! JUST LET US SEE THE BIG E ONCE AND FOR ALL, AND WELL ALL BE HAPPY!

62. Denise de Arman - June 3, 2008

I have said this before, and at the risk of repeating myself (which I have been known to do on occasion), I am 100% certain something is going to break at the Vegas con. How do you know this Denise, you ask? Elementary, my dear Watson:

1) Leonardo and Quinto have recently been added to the celebrity guest list, as well as the sexy Nichelle Nichols and the sweet Walter Koenig. Look for George Takai to be added soon.
2) The reason the appearance of Nichelle, Walter and George is different at this particular con concerns their scheduling time. Leonardo always appears on Sunday at the cons; however, our other three crew members usually appear Friday or Saturday. The only times you see them all show up on the same day something momentous occurs, and, if you take a look at the Creation website, there is a rather long-worded hint that there will indeed be a big surprise for the fans.

So, alongside the fact that The Experience will be closing after the con, yet another good reason to make pilgrimage to Vegas in August.

63. Daoud - June 3, 2008

#14 How about adding a “Reed Alert”, should there be any spoiler about any NX-01 reference in Star Trek XI. ;)

64. Commodore Redshirt - June 3, 2008

I know others have said this, but my feeling is yes… and no.

I’d like to see the ships, sets, costumes, maybe have a tease clip or two, but not too much! I want enough info to keep me pumped up, but I also want to have an “Oooh…Ah!” moment or two when I see the film.

So I agree with both sides…

65. Schultz - June 3, 2008

A little “spoiler theory” I just came up with (~_^):

Making films is not like creating a painting. You paint, on your own, and then you present the result to the public. You make a film, but never on your own. On a film like “Star Trek” there are way over a thousand people involved, so filmmaking is actually a very modern form of art, where it’s not so much about the old dualism of subject & object, but about “project”, about teamwork, and yeah, there are still hierarchies, but a film is the result of an artistic effort of many people. And film—as this modern, democratic, “projective” form of art—naturally creates the illusion of treating its recipients in a different way than “old-school art”. Films are global storytelling, they are about direct and immediate infusion of emotion for a unified multitude. The recipients are tied much closer to a film, a director, an actor etc. than to a singular painter etc., even more so with a franchise like “Star Trek”, even more so in today’s delayless world. This direct and also directly emotional involvement on the recipient level to my mind has its conjoined twin in the “spoiler culture”. The bigger the film, the greater the involvement. It’s the recipients realizing the teamwork nature of filmmaking, and consequently wanting to participate in this experience—from the very beginning, like the filmmakers themselves. But since they’re not part of the crew, they need different channels. They need some way of overcoming the schism between a modern artform and their role as recipients in a very traditional sense. So if Mr. Abrams wants to reduce the effects of “spoiler culture”, he has to either produce a different kind of films (as he has shown with “Cloverfield”) or redefine the role of film audiences, push for a further development to take the audience’s role beyond the mere “recipient” level. As long as film audiences simply stay “audience”, they’ll never be satisfied… not today, not anymore.

66. Crewman Darnell - June 3, 2008

I can’t resist the spoilers mainly for one reason – Because I’m one of those from the “downright concerned about the end product” camp. Under any other circumstances I’d prefer to be surprised. I keep tabs on the spoilers in hopes of finding basic reassurance that this film won’t be a colossal disappointment.

Finally seeing the new “Big E” design will make a huge impression on me ..but until that happens, I’m remaining optimistic while trusting JJ’s talent and reputation.

67. 342 more to go - June 3, 2008

What’s up with “Leonardo”?

What’s breaking in Vegas is Takei’s honeymoon.

Here comes the bride……!

68. British Naval Dude - June 3, 2008

arrrrr… I gots me some minimal disclosure underpants. Ya’ see it’s tha’ secret of what’s ta’ come (so ta’ speak) that makes tha’ journey all the more enjoyable than tha’ final experience.

Besides, I have good old memories of mammories which I still reflect upon… even when tha’ young lady turned out ta’ have titty poison and tha’ arrival was farrrrr bad.

Oh, and BND is quasi-back, baby!

arrrrrr…

69. Papa Jim - June 3, 2008

As an old trekker, I look forward to seeing this movie with fresh eyes.

Small spoilers are ok. Like which alien might be in the movie, but any major spoiler will, in my opinion, ruin the experience.

It like peeking at a Christmas present. You might have a moments satisfaction, but it would ruin Christmas morning.

70. S. John Ross - June 3, 2008

As far as I’m concerned it always comes down to this: a great movie is invulnerable to spoilers; only the disposable ones are at risk.

That said, I continue to sincely hope that secrecy is just a personal fetish/delight for Abrams, and that his insistence on it reflects his own tastes as a fan (or his own beliefs as a businessman), and does not reflect on his film. I hope I hope I hope.

71. Captain Robert April - June 3, 2008

The higher-than-usual hunger for spoilers is easy to explain, JJ. A lot of us don’t trust you yet. We need some reassurances that you aren’t goin to take what may very well be Star Trek’s last chance in front of the camera in a long time if this thing flops and wind up royally screwing the pooch. We’d kinda like to get a heads up on this possibility BEFORE we plunk down our hard earned shekels and only find out when it’s too late to do anything about it.

In other words, you’re flirting with the possibility of another anemic opening like Nemesis, where the fans stay home and wait for the word of mouth to filter back.

SHOW US THE DAMNED SHIP ALREADY!!!!

72. OR Coast Trekkie - June 3, 2008

Well, look at it this way: We have approx. 70 posts here regarding the lack of spoilers. If anything, the lack of spoilers seems to be generating MORE talk amongst Trek fans.

Plus, Abrams and co. read this site, and probably startrekmovie.com as well. Everyone on here saying “show me the ship” and “show me the uniforms” are the same people saying “if the ship is off, or if the uniforms are off, JJ dind’t get it and I’ll not go see the movie.” Well goodness, if you read that kind of response and saw that kind of thinking, why would JJ want to show us those things?

73. T. E. Tucker - June 3, 2008

My problem with JJ Abrams was Cloverfield. I loved Lost for the first 2 seasons but then lost all interest in it. It happens. But Cloverfield, there were a couple of trailers popping up over a year before the movie actually came out and I found them annoyingly vague.

I remember thinking how uninteresting it was that he had a trailer for a movie that didn’t even have a name at the time and wasn’t to reach theaters for a little more than a year and why would I want to go see a movie that I know very little about?

Then as it came close to the release date, the annoying trailers were played even more. Lost all respect for him and truth be told, I still refuse to see it.

Imagine my disappointment when I’d heard he was taking on the Star Trek movie! I thought his “mystery” tactics for Cloverfield seemed like nothing more than an attempt to lure the curious in for a blockbuster weekend with a mediocre movie. I don’t want mystery without substance!

74. Jordan - June 3, 2008

I hate spoilers but I can’t help myself. I read all of the “Nemesis” spoilers and even an analysis of the screenplay that leaked to AICN, I think… so I knew all about the ending where B-4 sings “Blue Skies” in Picard’s ready room. (sigh) “Nemesis” may have had its problems but I went into that theater with a hell of a lot of prejudice. I’m a rabid fan and I check this site daily, but I may refrain from reading into spoilers in the future…

75. Benjamin Sisko - June 3, 2008

It’s obviously that people who agrees with Abrams are working for him.

76. ShawnP - June 3, 2008

#69. I agree with your Christmas (or whichever holiday) present analogy. It’s like the difference between seeing a magic trick for the first time and being entertained by it. Sure, you can see the trick afterward, and it still may be amazing and you may not know how it’s done, but it doesn’t quite have that same appeal of the first time around when you had no idea what to expect. Now imagine if you were told the mechanics of a trick and then shown the trick. I’m sure that would make for some great entertainment.

That being said, I’m one of the naughty ones that reads the spoilers. Damn my lack of willpower…

77. angry but i'll get over it - June 3, 2008

they had to say it….may 2009, i was in a good mood now i just realized there’s still a whole year to go…

78. mojonaut - June 3, 2008

Here’s a spoiler: Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu… in fact all of the crew…. survive.

79. Blake powers - June 3, 2008

I would like to say that I almost view myself ad above spoilers. My love for star trek exceeds my need for it to be a good experience for me. I want it to spread to other people. All my friends are going to see the new movie because i tell them that it will be a truly different experience for them. The live postings of the cast and Crew that one day on trekmovie has made me a one man marketing machine.

80. trekee - June 3, 2008

@76 – It’s now less than a year though, yeah? Cheer up, the time will emm, fly in…. umm. (Yeah, sucks doesn’t it?)

Anyyyway, I think most people are in the “let’s see the Enterprise but don’t tell me the plot” camp.

I think it’s the trust thing… we just want to know they’re not messing with the old girl too much so we can either relax, or go to Rabid Fanboi Frenzy Mode and start with the umm, “measured debate”.

I’m looking forward to not knowing any more details thanks.

81. Billie Goat - June 3, 2008

The new enterprise?

I’ve seen several articles addressing the fact that Gabe Koerner’s enterprise is NOT the one that will appear in the new movie. However, all these articles seem to refer to this model:

http://www.gabekoerner.com/ent/ent_010706_0000.jpg

What about this one?

http://www.gabekoerner.com/ent/1701b_092007_011.jpg

I’ve written to TrekMove asking about this and have received no answers. I’ve also not seen this one put up and shown off as much. Have anyone specifically seen this *NEW* Gabe Koerner model addressed anywhere with reference to the movie?

82. Nick Dellaney - June 4, 2008

The reason he’s against spoilers is because if anyone knew beforehand just how horrible his projects turn out, they wouldn’t bother wasting their time or money to see it. He’s a genius at marketing!

Convince people it’s going to be awesome without showing them a damn thing. Keeps you looking at the left hand while the right one is doing something you didn’t notice. Amateur magician my ass, he’s a pro! Bring on the next crapfest!

83. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

I agree spoilers ruin things but at least if I saw something I can see evidence that JJ is not screwing with the Star Trek we love.

I think fans need assurance that Trek is in good hands and JJ keeping it under lids is making us concerned it will be totally different.

I hope for a good film. If its good I wil be able to realease my concerns over set design and recast

84. The Angry Klingon - June 4, 2008

I would agree with JJ EXCEPT they raised expectation with a trailer and a release date and then pulled the rug out from under the fans. All we’re getting now is some really tired retread interviews that tell us nothing but the same canned responses…”JJ really respects the fans and this will honor them but also open up Trek to a whole new audience”.
Fine.
We got that.
But you screwed us by pushing everything back and if you DONT give us something…toss us a bone…like a look at teh ship or uniforms or props or SOMETHING that SHOWS us you are ‘honoring the original’ then dont expect excitement to GROW rather expect it to wane. It certainly has for me…matter of fact Im really rather bored and ‘meh’ about the same old same old…we ordered hamburger and instead of beef we’re being fed oatmeal. You have a year to go and people’s enthusiasm is already dwindling so be smart…

85. Iowagirl - June 4, 2008

Who am I to argue with an amateur magician…

86. Dom - June 4, 2008

I’m my own boss, so talking with you guys is costing me money, dammit!!! ;)

87. Luke - June 4, 2008

Little spoilers like twhat aliens may be in the movie or who is playing who but not plot spoilers!

88. Carl-Oscar Alsén - June 4, 2008

I totallt agree with JJ. Think about it, often the best film you’ve seen are films you didn’t know anything about. It’s pure logic, if you spend more than a year anticipating for two hours then it’s very likely you’ll be dissapointed. You’ll have so high expectations of which film you want to see, instead of just relaxing and let yourself get carried away.

Therefor, I have chosen to not really bother that much about the new film. I read the spoilers but thinkin’ I oughta’ quit that.

Looking back, was new years eve 1999 really the greatest party of your life? Possibly, but probably not.

89. DJ Neelix - June 4, 2008

Oh, accidently put my real name in there just now. Bogga’.

90. The Last Maquis - June 4, 2008

Alright, JJ do your worst buddy, but this is Trek we’re Talking here.
Somehow, someway someone Will Leak us something!! Probably soon even ,and you’ll be surprised by it. Only then will you realize that you shouldn’t have underestimated the Fans, or messed around with ‘em. A little respect and a freakin’ scrap once and a while won’t hurt. Come on Doesn’t Garak still have
some associates in the “Obsidian Order” who can help us out? Jeez.

91. Data_Lives_B4 - June 4, 2008

I avoid spoilers like the plague.

It’s the best when I haven’t even seen the trailer to a movie. Those rare occasions have been my best flimgoing experiences.

I am so stoked about Abrams’ STAR TREK.

92. Jim Smith - June 4, 2008

Why can no one quote Vader’s big reveal right ?

It’s – “No…. *I* am your Father”.

93. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

I dont want to know everything, I like to see pics of the uniforms and sets just so I know that JJ Abrams is not changing things drastically.

I want to see these things because I want this film to feel like Star Trek and see if I can accept it. I like to see that the bridge does not look totally alien and more futuristic than the Enterprise D Bridge from the 24th Century. I accept a few changes.

I’m sure there are a few who would like to see images of uniforms and the bridge just to alieviate some concerns? I wish he kept Herman Zimmerman as production designer as he is the best production designer of Star Trek.

I hope the film will be good. If its’s good I will probably get over my concerns about the recast. But I will never feel the same as Shatner and Nimoy are the true versions.

94. Biodredd - June 4, 2008

I don’t understand this who concept of NOT reading spoilers.

How in the world can you read something and have it ruined? Nothing can compare to the visual moment on the screen. The acting, the staging, the look, the texture, the music and sound effects all combine to make the maximum impact.

A few typed words on a page is going to ruin a film for you?

And I have to agree on only thing. I could care less about spoilers appearing here or not. But one thing Paramount has consistently done with all the different versions of Trek theatrical and otherwise (with the exception of Star Trek IV)… they’ve always revealed the new design of the Enterprise long before the film or TV series premiered.

I don’t care what the uniforms look like, or the color of someone’s hair or any of the other stuff. We’ve seen pictures of the cast, I hardly seem spoiled, but without the Enterprise, there is no adventure. Its as big a star (if not bigger) than any other name on the poster.

I wanna see the ship. If another pic of anything else were never published I’d be happy. Just show me ship.

95. Bryan with Pointy Nacelles and a large Dish - June 4, 2008

Spoilers is like escargott before the salad and steak. Just that simple.
Or perhaps the allure of a see thru negligee before……….

Don’t call it a spoiler, call it the tease.

96. Biodredd - June 4, 2008

In #93 I mentioned how ST:IV was an exception in terms of revealing the Enterprise. Paramount worked their backsides off to keep the new Enterprise a secret from everyone.

I had a display I had created for a local movie theater that was part of a contest to win passes and Trek novels, and VHS copies of the films and so on. The display was built around… what’s wrong with this display? Within, we had a number of objects and one of them was a beautifully built model of the new Enterprise… what we didn’t know was the registration number. The marketing folks for the theater chain tried every tactic they knew to get that number and nothing worked. Finally, an exhibitor screening was held a two weeks ahead of time in Detroit. I finally had a source and got the new registration number in a frantic phone call as soon as the screening was over. The model kit was finished, delivered 24 hours later and hung in the display.

Entries started flooding in. Little did I realize that there would be two errors in the display. Someone had loaned us a red shirt replica from the original series… the error was that is contained the command symbol on it instead of the engineering symbol. DUH!

Thankfully, in making arrangements for prizes, I had went slightly overboard in creating prize packages so I was able to award prizes for both errors. (red shirt and enterprise reg number). We had the winners arrive for a special sneak preview where James Doohan made an appearence… after the sneak preview of ST:IV, he showed a 16mm film of the making of the movie and then took questions and answers for an hour and signed autographs for our winners.

It was a fun project, very rewarding, and quite exhausting. Ah, to be young again.

97. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

Roberto Orci and Zachary Quinto are at Vegas this year. At least I can try and get a few answers from them which I hope will have me feeling more positive. I dont want to know the plot just that it still feels and looks like the Star Trek we know and love.

At this time its still hard for me to get use to the recast I’ll admit but I can accept them if they do good jobs. Compare the original actors as the Connery’s, new ones will prob be viewed like Roger Moore. Prob beembraced but never taking the place of the originals.

98. Mark Lynch - June 4, 2008

One photo of the ship and bridge crew in uniform will be enough for me. The rest I can and want to wait for…

99. Kirk. James T. - June 4, 2008

All credit to JJ Abrams in his defiant opinion on spoilers but you know, Star Trek needs them, Of course obvious spoilers like how the film ends or the “luke i am your father” level of spoiler is not going to help. but visual spoilers like a picture of the new Enterprise or bridge or the crew in their uniforms or elder spock in his costume i think are essential to this production. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg and also Christopher Nolan have it spot on in marketing Star Wars, Indiana Jones and the Dark Knight, respectively. These big global names such as Star Trek, need big things from the film such as Indie’s costume and the batmobile and the Enterprise to be shown to the public – most people will respond to visuals, the look of the movie – and for Star Trek it is even more important that there is such images and viral’s out there that will intrigue potential audiences. If this movie is left shrouded in secrecy, it will fail because the name Star Trek now or countless posters of the insignia is not enough to interest people, fan or not.

100. Andy Patterson - June 4, 2008

”I would argue that not knowing those details in advance is a more refreshing way to live when it comes to entertainment.”

I tend to agree. You hear all the time on sites like Superherohype that fans are mad that nothing new is out. While I like my tidbits as much as the next person, and I know new news is what keeps these sites going I’ve long felt we reveal a little too much at times.

101. Captain Dunsel - June 4, 2008

I read all I could find on Nemesis. Unfortunately, I learned of Data’s death in advance and thus spoiled the end of the film for myself.

I prefer to know a little but not too much now. Looking forward to seeing costumes, ships and sets but don’t want to know the plot.

102. Duncan MacLeod - June 4, 2008

#23 said…

This site likens spoilers as a sort of Consumer Reports, but we don’t report on the manufacturing of the product before it hits the shelves. We wait until it has been finalized and presented before we analyze the final product.

Please go visit a site like Engadget or Slashdot. Engadget in particular reports on products that are rumoured, then trademark sketches, then leaked photos of prototypes, then FCC photos, more leaked photos, and FINALLY a finished product review.

103. Randall - June 4, 2008

I don’t want the entire plot of a film revealed to me in advance; but a photo here and there, a little rumor about this or that plot point, even a scrap of dialogue… that stuff just whets my appetite and, if it’s intriguing, makes me more likely to see a film.

Clearly this thing about revealing huge parts of a script in advance–yes, I can see why someone like Abrams would be against that, and I am too. But then, on the flip side of that, not every little thing in a film needs to be secret, either. I mean, what aspect of the cinematic experience is hurt if, say, we see a photo of a new uniform in advance, or a glimpse of the Enterprise? I don’t go to see films to only be surprised–I go to films to be ENTERTAINED. The fun of seeing all the little details in a film–costume, effects, etc.–sure, they add a little to the enjoyment–but the main thing I’m there for is the story.

I think Abrams is coming at this from the angle of “viewing a film is a multi-faceted experience”… which it is, sure…. but not all facets are equal. Show me a photo with Quinto in his ears. I don’t care. That’s not going to spoil the film for me, it’s just going to get me more excited to see the thing. No, I don’t want the whole script handed to me beforehand—but some tantalizing bits here and there add to the thrill–they don’t subtract.

104. star trackie - June 4, 2008

I remember walking into WOK, knowing Spock would die. But I didn’t know when. I walked in not knowing the pants were flared again. Cool. I had no idea Kyle would pop up on the reliant. Cool. I had no idea Chekov would be on the reliant. Cool.

There were a lot of surprises in Trek 2 and the enjoyment and emotional response was totally different from Trek 6, where I had read the entire script ahead of time. I personally want to thank JJ and his team for keeping a lid on things because, while I don”t seek out spoilers, I can’t keep from peeking if it’s put in front of me.

105. Mark Lynch - June 4, 2008

Perhaps the reason why we have not seen the ship yet is because JJ and team truly fear the backlash they will get from some real obessives around here… :)

Yeah, I’m one, where the ship is concerned anyway. ;)

106. Danpaine - June 4, 2008

Spoil me.

107. Mark Lynch - June 4, 2008

#49
Have to disagree with you there.

I don’t believe this films success depends on the core trek fan base at all. Whether we like it or not, the movie has to hit the common denominator in terms of movie goers if it is going to return a profit. And it is going to have to be a huge amount of bums on seats if the $150 million budget is accurate.

Assuming $20 a ticket (is that right? I don’t live in the US) that means 7.5 million tickets sold to make $150 millon at the box office. But what percentage of the ticket do Paramount get? Does anyone know?
If I guessed 50% goes to the studio then that means 15 million tickets need to be sold just to break even. Is this probable for a Star Trek film?

Anyone have any thoughts or other figures on this?

108. Zikki R. - June 4, 2008

after reading a spoiler or 2, i got an idea ’bout the movie’s story. XP

109. mooseday - June 4, 2008

The movie is still a year old. They are better of not shooting their load ( ewww ) now when it will all be wasted. Come Xmas is where u want to start building the hype for the summer.

110. John N - June 4, 2008

#51 CanuckLou

Completely agree… a few still shots of the Enterprise, or publicity photos of the cast is fine.

I don’t want to hear one ounce of what the story is about. Please keep lableling the appropriate articles as “SPOILERS”, and I will gladly skip those articles.

I stopped reading most of the comments a LONG time ago for the same reasons…

111. John Gill - June 4, 2008

Spoilers: I treat them ALL as entertaining “rumors”, I can take it or leave it. That way I will not be disappointed later. The only ones I take as concrete evidence are the photos… SO GIVE ME MORE!!!!!!

112. Closettrekker - June 4, 2008

#106—It’s more like $10 per ticket, but your point is very solid. A “core base of Trekkies” wouldn’t put a dent in that even if they all saw it 3 times on opening weekend.

113. JB Gestl - June 4, 2008

Show us the Main Crew Uniforms!

We need to know what to wear to the theater!

114. Biodredd - June 4, 2008

#106 – Ticket grosses at the boxoffice work on a sliding scale for the studios and the theater. The longer the film plays, the more the movie theater gets.

When the film opens the split will run something like 90/10 for the first few weeks… then it drops to 80/20 for the next two or three.. and so on.

During runs of E.T. – after six or seven months the theaters were making big money. Sadly those days are over with 20 screen complexes all over the place and theaters running four or more copies of the film every 20 minutes… sell out crowds are rare, and a movie playing for more then six weeks is a rarity.

Ticket prices in the US vary by region… big cities like New york, Chicago and Los Angeles are paying close to $12 per ticket in some cinemas. Smaller cities like Grand Rapids, Kansas City or Sacramento see ticket prices around $10. Small towns that acquire the film second run will see ticket prices between $3 and $5 dollars.

115. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

I hope the uniforms are not completely different, if before the 5 year mission then need to be the Cage uniforms in style.

If they change it drastically then its confirmed as a reboot.

Do you fans think this will work or do you think this is an insult to Roddenberry?

116. zirclet - June 4, 2008

I may be banished forever for mentioning this film in here, but I recently attended a screening at which the ‘Sex and the City’ trailer showed… they uttered Big’s real name onscreen (apparently HUGE spoiler for fans of this show*) and one woman screamed WHAAAAT?!?!, as if she’d just heard news of a death in the family. Moral here: be careful what you wish for spoiler-wise…

*side-note- after watching this film with my GF, I must note that ‘SATC’ fans have NO grounds on which to poke fun at Trekkies/ers… they were picking continuity apart like the most die-hard Trek fan never could…!

117. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

It probably will work but I hope the new fans watch all the old episodes. They need to see the proper actors behind them all. I will accept the new actors if they do the roles justice, but they wont nor should take the place of the originals.

It will be painful seeing these kids watch Pine only and go ‘who?’ when you say William Shatner.

As for meeting the captains, I have met Shatner, Brooks and Mulgrew. Will be meeting bakula at Vegas this year. So only captain left to meet is Stewart. Not sure how Pine will fit in since he is playing an existing captain, but I will accept him if he did a good job.

118. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

dont mean to be unfair a recast just was something I never expected to happen in Star Trek due to the spin offs.

119. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

if pine does a con after seeing thhe movie and he did the role well I will prob meet him. Quinto is at the con this year but I feel like I want to wait and see him as Spock before I go out and get a photo op with him and Leonard Nimoy.

Should we embrace the new actors now or are many waiting to see how they play them before you do?

120. Cervantes - June 4, 2008

#3 Daniel Broadway

All I wanted to really know was what the ‘rebooted’ Enterprise looked like too….but instead I now know that it’s a ‘time-travel’ story involving bald Romulans and ‘Elderly’ Spock in a ‘one-man time-travelling ship’ who DOESN’T save ‘Elderly’ Kirk ….

Damn this here internet device, and damn my weak will….

121. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

#68: Ahoy there, mate! Thought fer sure the kraken had got ya.

122. James Heaney - Wowbagger - June 4, 2008

Hey, #119! No spoilers in the spoiler discussion thread! Same goes for you #77!

#74: I *wish* I were working for Abrams. Does that count?

123. Mark Lynch - June 4, 2008

#113
All I can say is wow! Even the expensive cinema tickets are cheap compared with what we pay in the UK.
I live in a relatively small town and we have a multi-screen cinema complex. They closed the original single big screen cinema and turned it into a pub(!) :(
Anyhow, ticket prices vary a bit but the usual price for an adult ticket in my town is £7 ($14) and if you go to London, expect to pay at least £10 ($20)

Just to go off on a bit of a tangent, petrol has now hit around £5.40 ($10-11) a gallon. Someone on another thread was really upset that petrol had hit $4 a gallon where he lived. Thought this snippet of information might make them feel better.

Don’t come to live in the UK!

124. Captain Otter - June 4, 2008

I like my spoilers to be more less Playboy and more Victoria’s Secret Catalog. Peak my interest, but leave my imagination some room. (Pardon me for the crude analogy.)

125. Daoud - June 4, 2008

#80 Shhhhh. Loose lips sink ships. ;)

#91 “You killed my father…” I liked Luke’s version of history better. It removes Hayden Christensen’s whiny Anakin. ;)

#various Spoiler, schmoiler. What JJ seems to miss the point on, is that feeding the monster non-script-related spoilers can cut down on the digging for spoilers.

There’s really no reason not to release images of the crew in various costumes: Before the original series, we had TV Guide providing pictures of Shatner, Nimoy, and Whitney (vavoom!) in various poses, that we know as iconic TOS images… But they were promo-type spoilers. Releasing images of Quinto, Pine, et al. in makeup, with costumes that may or may not be actually in the film, wouldn’t hurt AT ALL! Honestly, releasing images of them in exacting TOS replicas, might really be fun! Imagine a series of them in Cage-era replicas, TOS replicas, TMP replicas, ST2-6 replicas, and even TNG season 3-7 replicas. That would be funny, and at the same time, build the marketing of the movie up!!! I’d sell it as “What If?” images.

Now, releasing images of the Kelvin, and the *various* versions of the Enterprise could be done: the story isn’t dependent on them. However, I think the more practical reason is that they’re trying to have extra time to render the ships and the like. If they release preliminaries now, when they might be working on this well into next February, they’re tying their hands a bit.

So, in a nutshell: images of cast in makeup, in filmed, non-filmed, or replica costumes could be great.

Images of the sets, within reason: hey, perhaps “puzzle like”, where you need to collect the images to assemble the picture a la the back of various collector card sets in the 70s and 80s could be fun and build excitement too.

Images of the ships, I know will have to wait: ILM isn’t anywhere near done. However, in the meantime, Gabe does a great job sketching it out and extrapolating from the lone Under Construction promos.

126. Keldaria - June 4, 2008

Personally I think they should’ve just shot the movie with little or no PR like cloverfield with only a surprise trailer showing up about 3-4 months before it was due and then running a normal advertising campain with it.

Spoilers are nice but I’ve found that with too much of an advace knowtis of the project and multipul spoilers tend to leave the community ether continuely raising the bar on what they expect or in some extremme cases lead to the more “Avid fans” to try and make suggestions (so and so should be playing X character not So and So he sucks for example)about how the project should be done or needs to be changed agian leading to disappointment all around. Plus with a early announcement comes constant hounding of loyal fans to disclose these “spoilers” or to “talk about the upcoming project” which probibly causes more problems than its worth in the long run.

IMHO some things are best left to the creative thinking of the artist or group that started piecing it together in the first place, that way they can concentrate more on creating a good finished product rather than having fans Rush the production and/or make them run the gauntlet trying to please everyone’s idea of what it should be. the end all goal would be to see the project finished and without the spoilers would lead to a great experience all around rather than the .. “well this part isn’t as good as i was expecting” kind of thing you get from well documented movies or books that turn into movies(like Lord of the Rings / Harry Potter for example)

you may have knowtised me saying “project or product” instead of “movie” and thats because its my firm beleave that this can be applied to all things that take time to develop. Take Star Trek Online for example, its a stunning example of what an over eager fan base can do to the course of a games development. I think PE spent more time tring to please our expectations by saying we’ve desided to do this then going back and changing it a week later to the former than they ever did programming the game. lets face it they had 100′s of good ideas (and a quite a few bad aswell) that they would throw out as concepts and without a good hard background of what the game would be nearly everyone of those ideas could and would be twisted into being a bad idea

altho that being siad, I must admit that i too look at spoilers, but I try to keep an open mind about everything because its how the finish product as a whole works together not how each peice looks at face value

127. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - June 4, 2008

#68–”Oh, and BND is quasi-back, baby!”

Does that mean you have a “hunch” about what’s in the new movie?

And about spoilers: I don’t know why people complain, at least about this site in regards to spoilers. They are flagged. If you don’t like ‘em, don’t read ‘em.

128. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

126: THX, come on over to the chat for a minute if you can.

129. tbk1701 - June 4, 2008

I am such a huge fan of Star Trek that I have no self control when it comes to spoilers. I will find them. I wish I could wait but I can’t. Which is why I love this site, even though the news has been slow (I think thanks to the movie date changing). So please keep the spoilers coming because if I don’t find them here I know I will find them somewhere. I need my Star Trek fix every day. =) Oh and a little off topic but when is the Star Trek Tour coming to San Francisco? Has anybody heard any more on that?

130. Ciarán - June 4, 2008

I look at spoilers. I admit that. But I am not asking for a complete scene-by-scene synopsis of the movie here. All I’d like to see is a great big picture of the Enterprise, a shot of the cast (in uniform on the bridge) and a full length, insightful trailer that will keep us pondering and yet keep our mouths watering for more. This movie is just inder a year away. JJ is making a HUGE mistake by not even giving us a cast photo at least. I agree with a certain level of secrecy, but this has got to be madness.

131. Andy Patterson - June 4, 2008

124

…” I liked Luke’s version of history better. It removes Hayden Christensen’s whiny Anakin. ;)

I’m wih you on that. Like…where has Lawrence Kasden been on the last few projects? He wrote the best Raiders. The best Star Wars…uhh,…why didn’t we use him again? And I could add a few more things to that list. But as I’ve said before….that’s probably for another post, another forum…etc, etc.

Where has Lawrence Kasden been on the last few projects? He wrote the best Raiders. The best Star Wars…Uhh,…why didn’t we use him again?

132. Ciarán - June 4, 2008

I look at spoilers. I admit that. But I am not asking for a complete scene-by-scene synopsis of the movie here. All I’d like to see is a great big picture of the Enterprise, a shot of the cast (in uniform on the bridge) and a full length, insightful trailer that will keep us pondering and yet keep our mouths watering for more. This movie is just under a year away. JJ is making a HUGE mistake by not even giving us a cast photo at least. I agree with a certain level of secrecy, but this has got to be madness.

133. tbk1701 - June 4, 2008

But having said that I am still very happy how hush hush JJ is. I know it will make the movie an even better experience for all of us.

134. Q - June 4, 2008

Okay, If the movie had come out in May of this year, then I wouldn’t have read the spoilers, because it wouldn’t have been that long a wait to see the real thing. But, since the movie is a year away, I NEED these spoilers! lol. The spoilers will…’keep me calm’ so to speak (Well, actually I get really excited) untill the actual movie comes out. So, I like spoilers right about now.

135. Closettrekker - June 4, 2008

#124—”There’s really no reason not to release images of the crew in various costumes…”

I agree, and I’m sure that type of thing will start happening around Christmas time, when it is actually appropriate to begin the true marketing campaign in earnest.

As for spoilers in general, like most fans, I cannot help but read them, but I agree 100% with Abrams and his philosophy of maintaining a great deal of secrecy to protect the genuine surprise of my movie-going experience. I often use the example of TWOK. I think we knew too much. I would have preferred to be totally unaware of Ricardo Montalban’s involvement, for example. How fantastic would it have been to learn that Khan was on the planet’s surface only when Checkov did? How much more dramatic would it have been to be totally shocked at Spock’s death in Engineering, without knowing in advance that he was going to die? IMO, it would have enhanced the experience tenfold.

136. Anthony Pascale - June 4, 2008

WARNING

this article may be about spoilers, but it is SPOILER FREE, which means the discussion thread itself should be spoiler free. Please do not discuss items from our spoiler articles anywhere except within spoiler articles

thank you

- The Management

137. Uncle Happy Time - June 4, 2008

I agree with J.J. It would be better, for us as Trek fans, to not know until the film is released and we’ve seen it. At the same time, it’s probably a good idea to let people in on a little bit of info to help build excitement for the project. However, isn’t it a little bit early? I want to know what’s up with the film just as much as the next person, but a little self discipline and some ‘stop & think’ time should inform us that we’ll find out in good time regardless. Good things come to those who wait…

138. captain_neill - June 4, 2008

crew shots and a photo of the enterprise is all I want to see. I dont want to know the story. I just want to see something so that I can relax nad be happy that JJ is not screwing up our favourite show just because he thinks he can.

139. victor espinosa - June 4, 2008

no spoilers policy… well the truth is abrams is a poor schmuck lucky enough to know the knucleheads in charge of paramount… in fact they’re not even worth being really insulted… because what is really insulting is the fact (which they will never acknowledge) is that the movie was so messed up… as soon as the writer’s strike was over they returned to try and fix the mess they made… i mean, star trek is NOT for the general public… it is for the people who like star trek here and know… to be more clear… star trek had to win on the public back in ’66 when it premiered… when it first saw the light… today… well, the general public doesn’t care about anything… even less, star trek… now, the ones who like the show and it’s ideas or themes have had plenty of it for years… but the the studio got greedy… the people behind it got creative… and ruined it by trying to give us something else with the name ENTERPRISE on it… then we could only get exclusives as if they were doing us the fans a big favor… and after all… well, we get abrams… his LOST series is such a big stupidity… just knowing it exists is enough torture… now he will give us HIS vision of star trek… updating and twisting the whole concept to make it appeal to the general public… and the only truth is he is keeping everything under wraps… A) because the general public doesn’t give a damn about it and B) because he knows he’s making such a twisted movie that he can only anger us, the fans… frankly if you want good star trek… pick up THE WRATH OF KHAN… any of the original series 3 seasons or season 4 of THE NEXT GENERATION… stay cool and wait for the playmate toys which will be the only cool thing about the movie about two months before it opens in theaters and on may 2009 prepare to see such a twisted and stupid movie that they had to drag LEONARD NIMOY out of wherever he was just to validate it to the world… because all things said, SHATNER would have never accepted… that story about his character being killed in GENERATIONS… a) the film was written by braga… so it was lame… ronald moore has twisted galactica even worse… and berman… maybe they promised him to be on the next film… and then nothing!!! as MARINA SIRTIS said… they had better scripts for the show than the movies… and forget about cannon or prequel ideas… the STAR TREK you’ll get in 2009 will be a sorry excuse for a movie that it will have Roddenberry spinning on his grave… just forget about it… get the star trek you like on DVD now and forget about abrams and all this stupid game of no spoilers… or who cares about CLOVERFIELD??? who even remembers it??? did anyone buy the DVD??? it is the same as MI3 you can almost get them for free at any video store… ’cause nobody likes them!!! the same will happen to abrams’ TREK ATTEMPT… enjoy indiana jones with all it’s flaws… go watch incredible hulk and iron man… forget about all this spoiler thing and go vote… we need a good president people… not someone worse than bushy jr. who will make vietnam feel like a field trip… as shatner said… (and i’ll include myself) GET A LIFE!!!

140. Daoud - June 4, 2008

#135 Well, the title “The Vengeance of Khan” really telegraphed all that, no? Perhaps they should have called it “The Wrath of Carol” ;)

I was just thinking even more about releasing images of the crew. Remember the “Galaxy Quest: The Next Generation” intro that ended the GQ film, and the Travis Latke website? THOSE are examples of what COULD be done, too.

I mean exactly WHAT would be spoiled by a put-on put-together trailer with classic “Robin Hood” type poses and small bits of action, and CORNY dialogue.. something like this: “Coming, May 2009, to a theater near you:”… “Chris Pine is James T. Kirk, young man from Iowa, working in space, exploring new worlds and the residents thereof” [insert picture of Rachel Nichols in green makeup!]… “Zach Quinto as Spock, green-blooded half-human scientist from a strange alien planet” [have him speak some Shakespearanesque dialogue!]… “Zoe Saldana shines as Uhura, a future captain of adventure, your communications expert and master” [F*** yeah, hailing frequencies open.]… “Transporting in as country doctor Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy, Karl Urban, handy with mint julep, or newfound diseases” [Yes, but can you transport a caesar salad without tossing up its atoms?]… “Your able ship’s engineer, Montgomery Scott, featuring Simon Pegg in this iconic role” [It'll be a couple dead days in spacedock before I can get all the zombies out of mee wee bairns, kap'n!]… “Checking in as cadet Chekov, Anton Yelchin”… “and physicist pilot extraordinaire Sulu, who can milk a fine escape from any alien trap, John Cho” [So Ensign Sulu, have you ewer seen the nuclear wessels museum?-- No, Pavel, but my great great grandfather Sato helped build the whale exhibit at Sausalito.]

ANNNyway… cornball promotion would REALLY be appropriate for this movie.

141. Robert Gillis - June 4, 2008

I read the spoilers. It gets me excited about the movie. if the script were on line (as in st:generations) I would NOT read it and report the offender. I want teasers, hints, tidbits, and that keeps me interested while waiting. Anthony, is there a central location or thread on this site for ‘what we know for sure” about the movie spoilers? Also, I hope that Shatner is pretending and that he has already filmed his bit for the movie. Fanboy concerns aside, this is an opportunity to right Kirk’s death in canon and it would be VERY nice to see Shatner do a “final” bit as Kirk. Even Star trek: new Voyages establishes that Kirk is somehow alive as an admiral in 2373 and never explained it. the new film can do the same thing. But either way, keep the spoilers coming!

142. Joel - June 4, 2008

This is something my wife mentioned about me a few weeks back. “Why do you follow some of those movies like you do, hun? Doesn’t that just ruin it for you when you go to the theater to see it?” You know something? – It does. I agree with Abrams. I have to admit that I’ve “ruined” plenty a movie with having read and watched every movie clip and story detail. When I’m in the theater, I’ve said many times to myself, “Oh yes, I saw this party already.” Sure, it’s still cool, but today there are no surprises and I think I need to get back to not following movies so closely. It wouldn’t hurt if all other movie productions did like he’s doing and just put up a basic movie website, but put out a whole lot of stuff. Like SirMartman mentioned, if you read all the spoilers and know what’s coming, you ruin the Wow! effect. Therefore, I am making a commitment from here on out to not do that anymore. I’ve got other more important stuff to do with my time anyway. Here’s to thoroughly enjoying a movie for the first time in the theater!

143. EFFeX - June 4, 2008

I agree with Abrams, spoilers ruin a movie completely.

Why would I want to read about the movie and see blurry photographs of the set instead of experiencing the movie the way it was meant to be seen in theaters?

I know personally with me, if I know all the details ahead of time there’s nothign to look forward to.

144. CmdrR - June 4, 2008

**SPOILER ALERT**

Just learned that “JJ” stands for:

Jumpin’ Jeehosephat

or…

Jiggling Jello

or…

2/3 of John Jacob Jingleheimerschmidt

or…

Just Joshin’

or…

145. Holger - June 4, 2008

As long as spoilers are appropriately marked and reasonably safeguarded against accidental viewing, let everybody chose his or her own way!
I wouldn’t wanna be spoilered about plot details, but spaceships, uniforms, aliens etc.: anytime!!

146. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - June 4, 2008

# 139

There is so much wrong about your tirade that it is hard to know where to start.

I have ALL the Star Trek that is available on DVD thus far. I have seen it, and memorized it. I am hungry for more. If you don’t want any, just ignore this movie and don’t get your panties in a bunch over it. You make it sound like JJ Abrams is making this movie to jerk you around personally. As for dragging Nimoy from somewhere to make the movie more legit, way to not give any credit to Leonard Nimoy’s decision making ability. Maybe they just held a gun to his head. Where Shatner is concerned, you can bet your arse he wanted and still wants to be involved. He’s only said he was hurt about his non-inclusion about a hundred times in the press. And BTW, what in the world does BSG have to do with any of this? I liked Cloverfield and MI:III. But they are not Star Trek. You tell us what we need to do, so I’ll return the favor: put in your favorite Trek vid, pop a ritalin or two to help with the ADD, and stop trolling a site that reports on a new Star Trek movie you obviously dread. And please let those of us who wish to look forward to it alone and stop being a wet blanket.

147. jeffery w wright - June 4, 2008

“…but is convinced they are better off waiting until May 8, ”

yes, thanks jj, you know whats best for us…

heres an idea, for the fans who dont want to have the surprise spoiled, they can choose to avoid them, since spoilers always come with warning, fans can exercise their power of choice.

crazy? yeah.

i didnt go see cloverfield because of his anti-spoiler strategy, i saw it because he is directing the new trek

why not let us decide for ourselves?

it sure didnt do the star wars series any harm, did it?

148. Promoboy - June 4, 2008

“Give me the Information!!!”– Ilia Probe- ST: TMP

149. Closettrekker - June 4, 2008

#140—”Well, the title “The Vengeance of Khan” really telegraphed all that, no? Perhaps they should have called it “The Wrath of Carol” ;)”

It goes without saying that the title would have needed to be different…At least I thought it did. The first film was titled, “Star Trek: The Motion Picture”. TWOK could have instead been titled, “Star Trek II”, without any reference to who the villain was to be. Montalban had very few actual scenes, and his could have been shot in secret over a couple of days. At any rate, I just think that, along with Spock’s death, would have been even more dramatic as a surprise. Imagine the goosebumps in the theater when Checkov sees the “Botany Bay” insignia and when the man in the mask reveals himself to be Khan, making his intention to find James Kirk known to Terrell and his First Officer. I do not have to point out what a shocker Spock’s sacrifice could have been if it had remained a secret.

I just think that JJ is on the right track with the secrecy. We know enough already (with regard to plot) it seems.

150. Closettrekker - June 4, 2008

#148—The carbon units which infest trekmovie.com need this information! (LOL).

151. NoonienSpock - June 4, 2008

Don’t we know by now that ‘having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting’?

152. The_Bear - June 4, 2008

Throw me a fraking bone here! Give me some spoilers. You don’t have to give everything away. At least give us hard core geeks a *good* look at the USS Enterprise, and the uniforms at the very least. Geez, don’t be so selfish JJ!

153. T'lara - June 4, 2008

#149 – Spock’s ‘real’ death WAS a shocker!

Every time Abrams opens his trap, he just leaves me worrying that this is going to be pants. Why else the fanatical secrecy?

154. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

139: Wow, that’s the longest run-on sentence I’ve ever seen.

155. Closettrekker - June 4, 2008

#153—”Spock’s ‘real’ death WAS a shocker!”

To whom? We all knew going into the theater that he was going to be killed, we just did not know how. If it was not already common knowledge, it really would have been a shock. As it was, I knew he was going to give his life for the ship as soon as he spun around in his chair and stood up to leave the bridge. It is still a fantastic scene, but I stand by my assertion that keeping it a secret would have made it that much more astonishing and dramatic.

“Why else the fanatical secrecy?”

I’ll let JJ answer that, since you are apparently unfamiliar with his work (see “Lost”).

”Learning raw detail and experiencing that detail as it was intended are two totally different things,” he says. ”I would argue that not knowing those details in advance is a more refreshing way to live when it comes to entertainment.”

And I could not agree more.

156. Scott1 - June 4, 2008

By and Far, for the Trekkers and the Trekkies, spoilers as you state don’t necessarily spoil, but instead provide those fans who have been yearning for more with the appetizers that either satiate ourselves for awhile, or at least provide with the inside look into our treasured trek. Of course many want to see them. I respect those who don’t just as much and think that a spoiler might be thought of by Filmmakers in the same vein as a preview trailer at a theater could be viewed by someone who doesn’t consider themselves a fan, a Trekkie, or the Trekker.

Spoilers are a service and of course will never go away, just as the media never will go away. As long as someone has an inside view to tell, someone will want to know. Thank heavens.

157. J W Wright - June 4, 2008

”I would argue that not knowing those details in advance is a more refreshing way to live when it comes to entertainment.”

how about letting the fans decide for themselves?

we’re not children who need to be told what is good for us, for as much as star wars fans dislike geo lucas, at least he went to great pains to keep fans who wanted to be, well informed with movie production as it progressed. complete with pictures of the sets, actors in costume, props, etc… and on the free section of the site

there were probably fans who chose not to know, i bet. but for us who wanted to, it was there and get this: no harm done.

i might suggest that to date geo is a more successful director than abrahms could hope to be, but hey… what does george lucas know, anyway?

jj knows whats best for us, hmmm?

there is nothing noble in accepting this imposition on the fans, but you wouldnt think that the case, according to many posts here gleefully embracing this condescending treatment.

158. Kaiju - June 4, 2008

My sense of the article is that Abrams is speaking more about plot and scene spoilers — the general meaning of the term — rather than things like cast and prop photos. With the merchandising blitz that’s sure to take place, I doubt that TPTB at Paramount will hold back on all of that publicity.

Remember the live chat from the set? By allowing that kind of interaction it doesn’t seem to me like he’s turning his back on the fans.

Take another look at his talk about “the mystery box” from the TED Conference to get a sense of his ideas on secrecy and suspense:

http://trekmovie.com/2008/01/26/jj-abrams-man-of-mystery/

159. Boborci - June 4, 2008

I agree with the secrecy.

160. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

159: I’ll bet! :)

We sure know how to stir the pot, don’t we?

161. Boborci - June 4, 2008

Spockanella – June 4, 2008

You’ll thanks us later!

Unless of course everything is leaked:)

162. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

161: Y’know, in a way I already do…since I don’t have the willpower to avoid spoilers if I see ‘em, it’s probably better not to have the temptation in front of me!

163. CmdrR - June 4, 2008

Bob, can you at least tell us whether the Klingons and Romulans have ridges? I hope not.

164. Viking - June 4, 2008

Bob, we’re gonna brainwash you into our spoiler Manchurian Candidate……. LOL

165. Boborci - June 4, 2008

CmdrR – June 4, 2008
Bob, can you at least tell us whether the Klingons and Romulans have ridges? I hope not.

A; I can tell you that Ruffels have ridges.

164. Viking – June 4, 2008
Bob, we’re gonna brainwash you into our spoiler Manchurian Candidate……. LOL

A: Must… not…. submit (gasping for control)

166. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

163: As usual, you have hit on the most important issue. Enquiring minds want to know…nay, demand to know! :)

167. Viking - June 4, 2008

Remember, Bob……..when you see the queen of diamonds………leak the pics………

168. Anthony Pascale - June 4, 2008

http://www.trekmovie.com/images/boblookatthis.jpg

169. Viking - June 4, 2008

Hee hee HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA………..jeez. :-)

170. Sxottlan - June 4, 2008

I do not like spoilers and 9 times out of 10, I’m pretty good at avoiding them. I was rather proud of myself for not clicking on the recent spoiler article about the ships that will be seen in the film. And I’m a huge ship fanatic, so that took quite a bit of will to not look.

The problem is avoiding those who thoughtlessly talk about the spoilers. So I’ve pretty much avoided most discussion forums and will do so through the release of the film.

171. Trek Nerd Central - June 4, 2008

I’m with Abrams. I hate spoilers and avoid them like the plague.

172. Ed - June 4, 2008

I really don’t need to know a whole lot about the story, I’m going to see it either way. I am a sucker for pics of the actors in the costumes or ships, the sets so I’m all for those.

173. Denise de Arman - June 4, 2008

Anthony#168- Man, you are good…

174. CmdrR - June 4, 2008

The Queen has ridges!!!

175. Boborci - June 4, 2008

Alright, since I saw the queen I can give you a spoiler about the Sutdio’s state of mind (not about the movie itself). The spoiler is that they already want to lock us down to write the sequel. Take that as you will.

176. Spockanella - June 4, 2008

174: NOOOOOOO!

175: What a great idea.

177. OR Coast Trekkie - June 4, 2008

Let’s face it: you SAY you would be ok with just getting a picture of the ship, or a picture of unifroms, buuutt… we all know that if you got that, you would want a bit more after a time. Soon, you’re oging to want video footage of the characters, to make sure they sound like your Kirk or Spock. You would want video footage of the ship moving to make sure it moves right, or footage of the bridge to make sure sound effects were right. And eventually, yes, you will want some plot points, to make sure it is a Star Trek plot.

Plus, Abrams already gave a picture of the Enterprise in the trailer, and what was the reaction: “The font is wrong” “The nacelle ends look the wrong size.” See, one other thing Abrams knows is that theres that percentage of Star Trek fans would take a released picture, and with their Hi-Res Hi-Def screens, along with other programs, analyze to see if the shading of color on the uniform is exact, or see if the thread count on the uniforms is exact, or see if all of the angles and scale and size of everything is exact, and listen to see if pitch of sounds are exact. I personally know Star Trek fans that are like this.

For those of you waiting to judge the movie: You’ll get trailers, pictures and whatnot during the holiday season. That is 6 months before the movie comes out, and will be PLENTY of time for you to decide if you like what will be presented or not.

And keep this in mind: Just because Abrams may have gotten the look right doesn’t necessarily mean it will be a good movie. Likewise, if Abrams didn’t quite get it exactly right doesn’t mean it will be a bad movie.

178. CmdrR - June 4, 2008

Congrats, Bob. I guess you guys are pretty busy lately. That’s two franchises, and how many other pics?
Let me know if you get to Atlanta. I’d like to do a news story on how you can actually turn a buck as a writer.

179. The Underpants Monster - June 4, 2008

Me, I’m satisifed with a healthy dose of wild, unfounded speculation.

180. James Heaney - Wowbagger - June 4, 2008

SEQUEL PARTY, BABY!

*hugs Boberto*

#177: Well said.

181. Viking - June 4, 2008

Jeezus, we try to get Raymond Shaw, and we got Maxwell Smart. Bob, that spoiler sucked. *AHEM* Now, look closely at the queen again…………concentrate…………………..the Enterprise…………show us the Enterprise…………..the queen, Bob…………the queen………….LOL :-)

182. AJ - June 4, 2008

Paramount is obviously in tentpeg revival/renewal mode now, and with Indy and Trek, Beverly Hills Cop upcoming, and the thankful success of Iron Man, there is much to focus on.

Iron Man’s trailer is a wonderful and quick piece of entertainment. The Indy trailers were, too, and we had so much info on Indy before release, including on-set rumors and Lucas expectation-moderating blurts which still did not prevent it from a $311m opening week.

Trek must do the same next year, and it makes no sense to have nothing behind it to the point of drop-dead silence.

183. Denise de Arman - June 4, 2008

#175- Mr. Bob, fantastinormous news! Before you are locked away into yet another writers’ jail with your cohort Kurtzman, let me first say that, as regards the sequel, there can never be too many Spock-glorification scenes (numerous mindmelds, of course, included).

184. The Last Maquis - June 4, 2008

175. Boborci Uhh…maybe it’s just fatigue, and that’s certainly okay, because of all the Big projects your working on,(maybe)but you didn’t spell “Studio” correctly. Pardon my Skepticism, but you are a writer, right? Again I’m just Sayin’.

185. Platitude - June 4, 2008

I would love just for a few photos, maybe of the cast (all in uniform) and the enterprise. But nothing story related.

186. Pat Payne - June 4, 2008

Boborci (or any other kindly passing gents from the production) :

All kidding aside, I understand and applaud Abrams for wanting to keep a lid on the movie as much as possible. The less we know about the actual plot and such, the better we’ll probably be for it, as it willhave the “gee-whiz” quality of something totally fresh. That being said, someone’s going to have to (as a wise old sage once said) “throw [us] a frickin’ bone here” sooner or later, just to appease the restless natives. Even one nice shot of what the Big E looks like in the film. I doubt anyone wants JJ to release the entire shooting script to the public (and anyone silly enough to try asking deserves to be told where to go), but a couple of appetizers to whet our interest would be greatly appreciated at some point down the line.

Just my $0.02.

187. Viking - June 4, 2008

Amen to what #186 said. I don’t want to know one iota of plot, over and above what has already been disclosed for syopsis purposes. I’m in 200% agreement with that. But a ‘teaser’ pic or two of the props, the cast in costume, etc., isn’t going to throw a bucket of cold water on the whole project, nor is it going to ignite a shitstorm of negative ions over the potential finished product. It WOULD, however, generate some protracted buzz over it. Lookit, I worked at the Pentagon for three years, and I had an easier time tripping over nuclear intel above my clearance level, than anyone from On High feels we should be privy to out here. That’s not a slam on you, Bob – I don’t envy your position, and I’m pretty sure that you’d love to show us some ‘MRI scans’ of the ‘baby in the womb’, being one of the proud daddies. But the suits in the head office seem like they don’t even wanna admit they’re preggo. LOL

188. Crusty McCoy - June 4, 2008

Boborci,

Congrats on a possible sequel — that is fantastic!

And don’t listen to these fans about wanting spoilers. Give ‘em nothing up until release date. In fact, when the film is released don’t even show the video portion of the movie — audio only. And then show the Enterprise for about ten seconds in the sequel only. Yeah, that’ll show ‘em.

189. TK - June 4, 2008

#168 So funny!!! BTW, no spoilers for me please!! I just ignore the spoiler threads. I want to experience fainting in the cinema!! XD

190. Admiral - June 4, 2008

I think it’s one thing to ask us to wait to find out every “gory detail” for a little while, say… til December 2008. But when the movie will be ready by then, and the release date is moved back to MAY (!?!?!??!?!?!??!), it’s a LOT to ask those of us who live and die by our Starfleet oaths to not get some info.

IT BETTER START COMING!!

191. Spiked Canon - June 4, 2008

Mr. Orci said

You’ll thanks us later!

Unless of course everything is leaked:)

WOW..just when I was in a mellow place I’m rocked again

192. Viking - June 4, 2008

174. CmdrR – June 4, 2008
The Queen has ridges!!!

Bob – if we don’t get ridges, can we have codpieces instead? If not spiked Gene Simmons codpieces, at least prancing Ian Anderson codpieces? Huh? HANH? LOL

193. Daoud - June 4, 2008

#175 Boborci, you are the Great Bobwhite of the Galaxy: thanks for the great news that Star Trek XII is a go on story development. This is some of the best news since you got involved in XI, comparable to when word came that Manny Coto was getting to run the last season of Enterprise.

I’m sure you’re already looking forward to all the wonderful opportunities to “explain away” anything that seems out of place in XI. :) But meanwhile, stare at this special deck of cards… where every one of the 52 is a diamond QUEEN….

194. J W Wright - June 4, 2008

why dont we put it to a poll?

should spoilers in the form of production pics of actors, costumes, ships, sets, snippets of story and dialogue, etc… be available to those who want them?

1. no, jj knows whats best for us, he’ll save us from ourselves.

2. i’m all grown up and can decide for myself wether i want to know what is revealed by spoilers or not.

give the people what they want, and why not?

195. OneBuckFilms - June 4, 2008

Boborci,

Congratulations to you and everyone else involved.

It might be an SOP (Standard Operating Procedure), but it’s a welcome one based on what we know.

The little spoilers we’ve had have actually revealed very little, and perhaps that’s the way it should be.

That little tease of a camera phone image from the Bridge was fun.

I’ll be reading some spoilers, but only to a point.

I trust you guys.

196. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - June 4, 2008

I know that Bobby me boy won’t read this, but just in case he does……

Ahem…….may I put forth……………………………..

TIMMY!

(apologies)

197. James Heaney - Wowbagger - June 4, 2008

#184: For some reason, when on the internet, Bob Orci is completely incapable of spelling. It’s sort of a trademark of his on this board.

I really don’t know why, though. I see it surprisingly often where reputable, intelligent people devolve into long ellipses and poor capitalization the moment they turn on their computers. Maybe Orci does the writing and Kurtzman does spelling and grammar checking?

198. Katie G. - June 4, 2008

#197. James Heaney – Wowbagger

Nah, you guys have got it all wrong. It’s not his spelling, it’s his TYPING!

He’s probably got one of those new-fangled, ergonomic, save-the-wrists, scifi keyboard and he can’t see the right keys to hit.

Right, Bob?

Or else he had to repeat Grade 3. Take your pick…

kg

199. T. E. Tucker - June 5, 2008

#194, I choose option 2. Although from the posts here I think I’m in the minority. I find it interesting that people are willing to allow someone that really has not proven himself in terms of Trek to be “Daddy” and decide what’s appropriate for -all- fans. I personally like spoilers ESPECIALLY when
what is being spoiled is something that is important to me but has been redone.

This just reminds me of when I laughed so hard when I read about Winona Ryder have fits because she couldn’t have her smoke-breaks…. because having pictures of her in costume, smoking would spoil everything.

200. TL - June 5, 2008

The high number of comments on this post should indicate to JJ how much interest the fans have invested in Star Trek, and that he should listen to the fans and give them some glimpse of what this picture will eventually look like.

201. Pat Payne - June 5, 2008

# 192

“My uncle Baldrick was in a play once.”
“Really?”
“Yeah, it was called Macbeth.”
“And what did he play?”
“Second Codpiece. Macbeth wore him in the fight scenes.”
“So he was a stunt codpiece. Did he have a large part?”
“Depends who’s playin’ Macbeth…”

202. Bussani - June 5, 2008

Anyone remember when Star Trek III came out, and the trailer gave away one of the biggest spoilers in the movie?

Sometimes I don’t mind spoilers, but I’d rather be surprised if I can help it. It’s bad enough how a lot of TV shows are really predictable these days anyway.

203. Bussani - June 5, 2008

Oh, and I’d like to add that I -would- like a peek at the new Enterprise before seeing the movie, but as far as story details go, I say keep hiding those spoilers!

204. Katie G. - June 5, 2008

#202. Bussani

I can’t remember – - what was the spoiler that spoiled the surprise in ST:III?

kg

205. Bussani - June 5, 2008

#204

I didn’t want to say in case someone out there somehow hadn’t already seen the film, but it was the destruction of the Enterprise. The producers had kept it a secret, but then a separate team made the trailer and gave it away without them approving to do so, if I remember correctly.

206. Katie G. - June 5, 2008

Unless it was something that exposed that Spock was going to “return”…

kg

207. Katie G. - June 5, 2008

Really?

All I can say is “glorious” (to coin a phrase)…

:-)

Thanks, I couldn’t remember. And I agree with you, I don’t mind a teensy, weensy spoiler but even though I beg and plead to know what’s going to happen I really don’t want to know.

So, keep on “decrying”, J. J. and thanks for having our best in mind.

kg

208. TL - June 6, 2008

# 204 to answer your question; The spoiler in Star Trek III was actually seeing the Enterprise blow up in the movie trailer, so no one was surprised going into the theater that it would to be the last voyage of the NCC-1701.

209. Katie G. - June 6, 2008

#208. TL

Thank you!!

kg

210. Raymond Holmes - October 3, 2008

The only thing I am greatly concerned about is Abram’s design for the Enterprise and the way he follows Star Trek history. I hope his design for the USS Enterprise doesn’t deviate from Gene Roddenberry’s Enterprise that was in the original pilot, “The Cage.” We must remember that we are going back in time- not forward. If I am familiar with Enterprise 1701 Captain’s, Capt. April was the first and he was followed by Capt. Pike.
In this modern age of high tech and better special effects, it wouldn’t do Star Trek any justice for J.J. Abrams to redo the starship Enterprise. The best thing he could do is give it a brand new shiney look.

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