Comic Con 08: Abrams Team Talk Trek At Fringe Panel | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Comic Con 08: Abrams Team Talk Trek At Fringe Panel July 26, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Conventions/Events/Attractions,Fringe,Orci/Kurtzman,ST09 Creative,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

4 out of 5 of the ‘Supreme Court’ behind the Star Trek movie hit the stage tonight at Comic Con, but they were there to promote their mysterious new show for Fox, Fringe. However, Star Trek could not be denied and it came up a few times during the panel discussion, with updates and post-production, thoughts on George Takei and who is the best villain Khan or the Borg. Details and video below

 

Star Trek almost locked
According to Star Trek director JJ Abrams, he is "very close to locking Trek," meaning that within a few weeks he will have his first cut of the film done. However, executive producer Bryan Burk pointed out that very few of the effects shots are done. Burk also noted that the trailer they are currently working on is not complete due to the lack of effects and that since they moved the film from December to May they are not rushing the effects. However, Abrams also noted that they are still hoping to have the film finished by December.

It still strikes some as surprising that the entire Trek team was in San Diego and yet there was no Star Trek panel (Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman and Burk were on stage tonight and I spied Damon Lindelof and Zachary Quinto in the audience). Abrams did try to explain to the Comic Con audience why this was the case, and also spoke about how he thinks the film is shaping up even without the effects in place:

I am dying to show you this movie. I love this movie. The actors are so good. The script is amazing, that Alex and Bob wrote. It’s one of these things, despite the effects not working* — you know, the Original show was not about the effects it was about the relationships, the dynamics with the characters. The reason I know that the movie is working, I don’t want to jinx it, but when I watch it, the reason I know it is working is that you care about the story and the people. It makes you feel. It is funny, it is scary, it is all these things that we hoped originally. They are walking around and there is nothing on the viewscreen or they are walking around and there is a big thing of green right there, but it is working because the actors are so good. I am dying to show you and I am sorry the strategy of Paramount not being here precludes us from not being able to present to you something that if I were you guys, and I feel like I am, I would really want to see. I hope it will be soon, so I apologize.

* within the context of the discussion, by ‘not working’ Abrams mean the effects weren’t in the cut yet

Abrams and the team also took questions on putting George Takei into a Star Trek movie and also were quized on who is the most badass villain (Khan or the Borg).

VIDEO: Trek questions from Fringe panel

 

Fox nixed Trek footage? + recent footage report debunked
There was a rumor going around the press room that the Trek team did actually bring some Trek footage, but that Fox didn’t want them to show it and upstage Fringe. I heard rumblings of this yesterday and again today. Tonight EW reported they did as well. However this could not be confirmed with any sources, so it may have been some last minute wishful thinking. I was able to talk to a couple of sources about the scene descriptions on AICN we reported yesterday. Both sources agreed that the scenes described are not in the new Star Trek, so false alarm there.

 

More Fringe
TrekMovie will have more on Fringe, including an interview with Orci and Kurtzman tomorrow.

 

Comments

1. konar - July 26, 2008

wow

2. SilverExpress57 - July 26, 2008

I don’t think they would’ve brought footage if Paramount(their bosses) didn’t want them to.

3. lodownX - July 26, 2008

watching the video… I really believe that JJ wants this to be good.

I’m actually kind of glad that we didn’t get any spoilers so that we can all walk in fresh and with open eyes to a “new” Trek. so sweet… I loved this report and thank you to everyone out in sunny San Diego “whale’s vagina” and the home of Regal Begal (+Jack, Chrisy, Janet and the Ropers..+Larry) for this Update.

4. Anthony Thompson - July 27, 2008

JJ: “despite the effects not working…”. I assume (and hope) that what he meant to say is that the effects are not ready.

5. sean - July 27, 2008

Ha, I love his answer about George Takei. “Uhhh, sure.”

6. Sulu! - July 27, 2008

I love that answer at the end about putting Takei in Star Trek. Too funny. :)

7. Littlenatey - July 27, 2008

@ #4 – He was referring to TOS’s sfx.

8. The Angry Klingon - July 27, 2008

blah blah blah…same same…nothing to see here just more excuses about why this and why not that. Dont be surprised if this strategy fails. Not having a panel at SDCC was STUPID and there were rumblings there from people that attribute TREKS absence to Paramounts fear that the movie isnt that good. It will already be out prior to NEXT years Comic Con so they effectively circumnavigated having to show anybody anything in advance.
Shame.
Im personally tired of the complete lack of so much as a table scrap and those ‘posters’ just irritated instead of titilated.
Wake up Paramount, the natives are getting restless and you cant afford to screw us over again.

9. krikzil - July 27, 2008

I also can’t help thinking that just a few minutes of footage at CC could have created enormous buzz — a scene without visual effects would have sufficed. I wanna love and believe too JJ….

10. newkirk - July 27, 2008

just chill, this movie is still 10 months away so it is not unusual that a full trailer is not out yet. a non trek movie, we would not be demanding a trailer so early.. by nov we should have a full trailer..

11. Commodore Redshirt - July 27, 2008

Anthony, you said:
“…sources agreed that the scenes described (on AICN) are not in the new Star Trek, so false alarm there. ”

Thanks for you and your sources. I was a reporter for a few years and I know that to get to the truth of a story, one must weed through false information, misinformation, rumors, and sometimes outright lies regardless of the subject matter covered.
You and the TREKMOVIE crew are upholding the highest standards of journalism.
Thanks. This site is among the most trusted sources of information in any media.

12. DJT - July 27, 2008

Looking forward to Fringe.

JJ is da man.

13. ByGeorge - July 27, 2008

“The reason I know that the movie is working, … but when I watch it, the reason I know it is working is that you care about the story and the people. It makes you feel. It is funny, it is scary, it is all these things that we hoped originally.”

This is the best sign that this movie just might work. For some reason TOS characters were able to evoke emotions and empathy more than any others and why it was so popular and lasting. I just hope newcomers who have never seen Trek will be able to get emotionally affected by these wonderful characters too.

14. Cervantes - July 27, 2008

Although the upcoming Movie’s release is months away yet, the same goes for some of the many other genre releases previewed at the much-anticipated ComicCon convention.

A little bit of carefully selected footage which didn’t need to reveal too much, could have generated a LOTof good ‘buzz’ for the project at this influentual show, and I think it’s been a missed opportunity…. The Studios that make more of an effort are the ones whos product ends up being raved about in advance by the journos that contribute a lot to the many relevant internet sites these days.

It would have been a good chance to impress some of them a little.
Whether it ends up a hit or not, it would have been nice to hear of an advance general ‘feel-good’ factor about this particular Movie from the ComicCon attendees, as these net journos can set a certain ‘perception’ to the general Movie-going public. This one should have been one of the MAIN talking points of the show, even at this point….and it plainly wasn’t. A pity.

15. Holger - July 27, 2008

The movie is due May 08, and we’re almost in August. Time to bring out a trailer, really!

16. Jay - "The Real Jim Kirk" - July 27, 2008

JJ is such a cool guy, and I love the fact that they all share jokes and have a laugh. All the cast and crew appear to get on very well and we’ve heard nothing but good things from both parties. This makes for a good film, if all the cast and crew get on and have fun shooting this film, then we can expect good performances and good editing. Look what happened to Nemesis, none of the cast really got on well with Baird, and it bombed.

17. RuFFeD_UP - July 27, 2008

So if the films gonna be ready in December like JJ hopes wtf is gonna happen? Are the reels just gonna sit in storage collecting dust until next May?

18. SilverExpress57 - July 27, 2008

If the movie was still going to be released in Dec., we probably would’ve seen something at the ‘Con.

Here’s a hypothetical… With the new release date… If we had seen something at the ‘Con, and noone liked it(eventhough they are seeing something out of context), it would create a lot of bad/unwanted buzz that would only grow and grow until May of next year.

It is way too early to show anything. So next year’s ComicCon is after the release of Star Trek. We don’t need the ComicCon in order to for JJ to show us something beforehand. That is what the internet and TrekMovie.com is for.

Someone wondered if the movie was going to just sit on the shelf and collect dust when it is completed in Dec. till the time it is released in May… Well, I’m am digging the idea of ‘Trek being released in the summer with a bigger potential box office draw rather than the original release date of December when people are busy with the holidays. But what I am worried about is that since the movie will be done way ahead of time… This means that their might be a bigger risk that the whole movie is leaked on the ‘net way ahead of time as well. I hope they keep that movie under extra tight security.

19. ThePhaige - July 27, 2008

I think (although very frustrating for us) It is wise to hold the cards at this point. It makes the yearning more intense. JJ is smart as a whip when it comes to presentation. When he feels the time is right we will get some tidbits. If it were me I would not want my labors to be judged before all the elements were in place.

Oh and for the effects maybe they weren’t working. Perhaps JJ wants them to be ground breaking and show a scale we have never seen before. ILM are great but to be honest their effects have been kind of status quo for many years they havent broken alot of new ground. Actually my eye sees the more modern ILM projects to have a plastic quality to them. JJ seems like the kind of guy who wants amazing things and wants the envelope not only pushed but blown open and for perhaps the first time in his career he has the budget to demand such.

I see the glass half full from all of this. I am stoked….

20. CmdrR - July 27, 2008

JJ: OK, so why I’m really excited about this movies is because of the great character moments. Like, there’s this one part near then end when Nero pulls out a Romulan disrupter and blasts Quinto’s Spock, mortally wounding him. So, Pine’s Kirk says, “Oh no, my friend Spock!” Then — and I know hardcore fans will like this — Shatner’s Kirk pops out of thin airs and says, “Quickly, we must get him back to the Enterprise-D. Picard will take us to the Guardian of Forever, and Spock can put his katra into his younger self back on Vulcan while his mom (Winona Ryder) helps me relieve my space ennui.” So…
(JJ’s cellphone rings)
JJ: Hold on. That’s Paramount.
Cellphone: Waa-wa. Wa-wa-wa-wa-waaa.
JJ: (a pause) Um — it’s a great movie. Go see it. Thanks for coming. (leaves)

21. Michael Adams - July 27, 2008

I think the guys really want us to see a trailer, and it will be shown to us at the right time for movies things, but I’ll bet we wont see the Enterprise until we are sitting in the theater itself. I trust the movie will be very far out.

22. Gatortrek - July 27, 2008

Just my opinon, but i have never been to Comic con and my decision to see or not see a Trek film has NEVER been decided by what did or did not happen at the convention. I think the hype of Comic con’s influence is way overblown. I will watch the movies and televison shows i want to see irregardless of the convention. Truth be told I hadn’t heard of the convention until a few years ago. IMHO it just doesn’t affect the majority of movie goers!!!

23. Anthony Thompson - July 27, 2008

What I wanna know is: When are they gonna make the big announcement that The Shat is in the movie? C’mon, Bob and JJ, my cred with all the Shatner fanatics is on the line here! They have been panting with anticipation ever since my prediction of a Comic Con surprise announcement! : )

24. Xai - July 27, 2008

4 & 23 Anthony Thompson

re FX:
Note that Anthony addresses that in the story.

re: Your prediction:
You are gonna owe people money :)

25. MORN SPEAKS - July 27, 2008

Wow, so they pretty much have a trailer done, but they just need to finish the effects. So, I wonder when we’ll see it? I’d assume we’d see it before the end of the year!

26. Mr. Bob Dobalina - July 27, 2008

Paramount could have really helped helped the publicity inertia of the last two years by allowing a panel as well as a sneak peak with some simple non-revealing footage.

As it stands, all the buzz is about Watchmen. Wouldn’t it have been nice to have the buzz be about Trek instead?

Oh well.

27. T NegativeD - July 27, 2008

I think we’ll see a trailer in December or January.

28. Zodou - July 27, 2008

I would like to start off by saying I’ve never been to Comic Con. However, I am aware of the number of attendees, somewhere in the hundred thousand + range. That’s a lot of fanboy and fangirl buzz, which now a days is very important to the film industry since they appear to be catering to that demographic.

It’s no longer just the fans that attend the con, it’s the press as well. And that is probably the most key factor in films attending the con is to get that press buzz. What I’m saying is that, while comic con might not be important to you and me, it is very influential to those who are still on the fences; it helps to inform those who are not regular trekmovie.com visitors.

Even if the footage was received negatively, it still would have been better than not showing any thing at all, because now people are going to think that Paramount doesn’t have any faith in the project. And unfortunately, that can create even more negative buzz and negative reaction amongst the fans than crappy footage.

I feel it was a major misstep in the handling of this film to not attend the con. And yes, I know they had a booth with a poster and some bags. That won’t cut it these days; do you guys know how much is spent on advertising alone for the average summer blockbuster? $100 million + that’s an insane amount; it’s also the reason why movies have to make two or three times their cost to be considered profitable. Early Comic Con buzz goes along way to help that.

Too late now, I guess

29. David P - July 27, 2008

nice comments from JJ, the film sounds good except for one thing
LACK OF SHAT!

30. Einstein Jones - July 27, 2008

I’m confused. I hear so much whining that I think maybe I’m in a daycare, and not on a web site.

Those fans who threaten Paramount make me laugh with cold Klingon disdain. Paramount knows they’ll see the movie anyway.

I don’t understand to need to speak negatively about the film before it is seen. It’s like saying you’re not going to like a meal at a new restaurant before you’ve even gone. There’s no basis for the claim and it just makes the whiner look like a tiresome oaf.

If this movie alienates some of those “fans” and attracts new, less whiney ones, then I’m all for it. This series needs more mature fans. Let the babies break away and go watch Star Wars.

That being said, I’m not excited about Fringe in the least. I haven’t liked any of Abrams’ TV shows. Both Alias and Lost were/are tiresome. In fact, I didn’t like Mission Impossible III either, so I should be the biggest whiner here. But I’m not. I’m excited and looking forward to Star Trek.

Hugs and kisses!

31. Xai - July 27, 2008

28. Zodou – July 27, 2008
“.. because now people are going to think that Paramount doesn’t have any faith in the project. And unfortunately, that can create even more negative buzz and negative reaction amongst the fans than crappy footage.”

- I respect your opinion, however, I disagree. I didn’t go to the Con either and while I’d enjoy seeing something, a lack of film doesn’t make me feel that Paramount has lost faith in this project. If it’s not ready to show, it’s not ready. Attendees got bags and posters and a lot neat toys (that I want). Trek was half the Paramount display I am told.

This is not a sign of a lack of faith.

32. Xai - July 27, 2008

15. Holger – July 27, 2008
“The movie is due May 08, and we’re almost in August. Time to bring out a trailer, really!”

They did.

33. Holger - July 27, 2008

18: “It is way too early to show anything.”
This would be true for some movie where you don’t have scores of starved-out die-hard fans and where you don’t have such a ridiculously long delay between estimated completion and release date.
This movie may be intended to reach a wider audience, and that’s fine, but the movie won’t be a success without the fan base. And the fan base, it seems, grows impatient.
I would like to see all this talk about how dedicated everyone is to the project backed up by some evidence, preferably of visual nature.

34. Izbot - July 27, 2008

30. Einstein Jones
“If this movie alienates some of those “fans” and attracts new, less whiney ones, then I’m all for it. This series needs more mature fans. Let the babies break away and go watch Star Wars.”

Hear, hear! Hey, whiners: Paramount doesn’t *owe* you anything. Threatening them with boycotting the film just ‘cuz they haven’t given you a trailer *10 months* before the movie even comes out is pretty silly. This franchise has given you many years of entertainment and hopefully many more to come but Paramount does not work for you and making angry demands of them makes you sound like a self-entitled schmuck.

And to everyone who’s been interpreting the lack of spoliers out there as Paramount, JJ & company being disappointed with what they’ve got so far — are we reading the same articles? Everything I’ve read in the past year, everything the team controlling the film has said sounds like confidence in the project is very high. They just don’t want to spoil it almost a year in advance.

I am excited about the film. The franchise needs invigorating. I’m sure some things will be accepted as welcome improvements and other aspects will be harder to swallow. Some stuff may even outrage some people. But from what I’m reading I’m pretty optimistic that it’ll be largely satisfying. Why don’t we all just wait and see before declaring it all a DISASTER a year before it’s out.

35. Xai - July 27, 2008

33. Holger – July 27, 2008
” And the fan base, it seems, grows impatient.
I would like to see all this talk about how dedicated everyone is to the project backed up by some evidence, preferably of visual nature.”

Of course you would… we all would. But even if we don’t see a trailer until Nov or Dec…. I’ll bet you 99%+ of all who complained still go to the theater in May. There will be no boycott except by a few and they’ll sneak in when their friends are not looking.

Give them time to do it right.

36. DaveM - July 27, 2008

The ego of some people…

If any Trek film relied solely on the fan base none of them would have been a succss by any means measurable. Movies are not made for the fans. True, the fan have some level in helping the film succeed… films are made to make money and the fan base would not have been going to enough repeat showings to make the films profitable.

And once again… marketing isn’t geared to the fans as a target audience. Marketing is geared to the rest of the population. Its those dollars the studio has to worry about targeting. Anyone who comesinto these forums and says they are not going for this reason or that must really think they are the con artists of the new millennium. You will be in line just like everyone else. If for no other reason then you simply believe the film will fall flat on its pratt becasue they didn’t put Shatner in it or the engine nacelles glow, or the shuttlecraft is the wrong shape. You’ll pay your money to see if you were right and if you were wrong, you will never have the stomach to come in here and admit it.

And for everyone else… the trailer will not be available until the holidays. I know I’m starting to sound like a broken record, but get over it. Marketing at Paramount has their timetable for these things and there is nothing that the production people on the film can do to change this. Marketing departments have ben seliing people on films for over 75 years. A few Trek fans are not going to convince them to do otherwise.

The film will be what it is when its released. We can’t change it and we shouldn’t try. Find something to occupy your time until November or December. Until then you are going to see very little concerning Trek except for a ton of interviews (and that’s only because all these talented people have other projects to promote and Trek wil obviously come up during those interviews).

37. Xai - July 27, 2008

#36 DaveM

Yep.

38. Andy Patterson - July 27, 2008

I would have said Khan too. But if I were up on that dais I would have said neither…..I think Captain Ron Tracy was more “bad ass”.

39. Wesley - July 27, 2008

Just lob in some Bran Ferren Effects from Star Trek V!

Once again, I am tired of them saying how amazing this movie is! What are they going to say? That it is horrible?

40. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Xai,

-”I respect your opinion, however, I disagree. I didn’t go to the Con either and while I’d enjoy seeing something, a lack of film doesn’t make me feel that Paramount has lost faith in this project. If it’s not ready to show, it’s not ready. Attendees got bags and posters and a lot neat toys (that I want). Trek was half the Paramount display I am told.

This is not a sign of a lack of faith.”

Thank you, this is YOUR opinion. Not necessarily the opinion of everyone. Go back and re-read my post I didn’t say Paramount has a lack of faith in the project. I said it makes it appear to others that they have a lack of faith.

Go read AICN.com I know you have to wade through a lot of garbage to get some honest opinions but go read their talkbacks, they have a wide and varied readership and I find it’s a good way to get an idea as to what’s popular and what’s not. Let’s take The Dark Knight for example, it had pictures and video out long before the film was finished and look at the returns on that. These days it’s all about buzz, how do you create buzz? You advertise and not with a stock Photoshop headshot poster. They needed to dominate Comic Con to get some buzz out there, they didn’t and now Watchmen has the buzz.

I must say, I don’t care about buzz at all, in fact I hate it. I hate the advertising machine. I never use that as a basis on what I choose to watch. But the fact is some do. It is they that Paramount needs to appeal to for this film to succeed.

To those of you whining about the supposed whiners: Your on a message board where people share their Opinions, they don’t necessarily have to match yours. So to save face you may want to consider that before you berate them for having a stance on something.

41. NotBob - July 27, 2008

Why is it that when describing this movie Abrams insists on using the adjectives “funny and scary?”

I love horror films. I enjoy good comedy. But I also like geart sci-action adventure films. I wouldn’t describe the ones that are great as funny or scary. Stop with the funny and scary stuff. It’s sounds like this movie is so funny it’s scary.

And throw me a bone. Don’t show clips. Fine. Just a series of promotional/preduction pics of some of the characters in their costumes. You know, so we know that the uniforms look like and what the cast looks like. That four part poster cut half of spocks face, much of Nero’s head (maybe the other ear is pointed) and the pic of Pine as Kirk gives a sense that he is a crazy mime on the loose (which I don’t fault Pine for. They posed him and they chose the picture).
He looked like he was about to say, “here’s Johnny,” in a real crazy way.

42. Mar'c - July 27, 2008

- Is this movie a complete remake of the original show or..a prequel..??
This is a really burnin’ question..to Bob and J.J…Should we expect to se brand new kilngons in the new movie.. too..???
The ‘big secret’ is really understandable for me and for the rest of the fans …

43. Boborci - July 27, 2008

The movie is not a remake.

We were considering showing some Trek stuff at the panel, and we were literally discussing it up there on stage, but then we collectively concluded it didn’t feel right to do it there at that time.

44. user 200083747849 - July 27, 2008

What brought you to that conclusion Bob? I think it would have gotten everyone very exited.

45. Boborci - July 27, 2008

We were there to talk about Fringe with three of our cast members who’ve literally moved from various parts around the world to work on this show, and I think it would’ve been disrespectful to them to turn the Fringe panel into something else.

Also, Damon wasn’t up there with us and that would’ve felt a tad weird as well.

46. The Last Maquis - July 27, 2008

Odd how I almost want to say “I don’t care about the FX I just want to see a new Trailer regardless”. I mean I know they’re Important and all, but Lucas spent a lot of time on FX and look what happened there. I know there’s a story Here and great Effects will be cool, but ……Ahhh whatever.

47. user 200083747849 - July 27, 2008

I can understand that. Why do you think paramount didn’t have a Star Trek board? Or at least more of a presence.

48. Xai - July 27, 2008

40. Zodou – July 27, 2008

First, AICN. Yes, I’ve been there and if you are using that as a basis for any informed opinion… the nicest thing I can say is, reconsider. Regarding this movie, they have once and possibly twice posted “spy” reports on private screenings that were false. Anthony disproved the second one and the first hasn’t been backed up with facts that I have seen.
Second, I did acknowledge it was Your opinion and never offered mine as anything more than a differing view. You weren’t “berated” on your opinion. In fact I said I respected your opinion, however I disagreed and said so. There was not the animosity you seem to be reading into it.
I don’t agree that JJ should have shown any film, good or “crappy”, at the Con just so they could say they did, as you said in #28. They’ve said it’s not ready to view and obviously a trailer is not on the timetable yet.
Third. The “buzz”. I am not in the business of making or promoting movies and I am not an expert in the massive marketing campaigns required for a blockbuster. But I am in advertising and while my Trek-fan self says “I want a trailer, and photos and details… gimmee, gimmee, my other half doesn’t disagree with the ad plan JJ and Paramount currently has in place.
In my OPINION, the presence they had at the Con was good enough (partly because they have no trailer ready) and it’s far too early (yes, I know about Batman, IronMan, etc.) I expect a trailer with the holiday films. Probably November or so at the earliest.
Last, nobody insulted you, so don’t act put out.

49. Xai - July 27, 2008

Bob Orci, hello

Can you throw us a clue when we might see the next trailer?

50. Michael Hall - July 27, 2008

Indeed, Mr. Orci. I’ve never been to a Comic Con, and I live in San Diego. This year may very well have been my first, but for the announcement that Trek wouldn’t be featured on any of the panels, a decision which still seems inexplicable to me. This is the largest fan gathering in existence, with a considerable presence of entertainment media, and Paramount chooses not to use it as a venue to promote one of the biggest genre films of 2009? If you don’t care to explain, then fine–but please don’t try to tell us it was because none of the visual FX have been completed or it’s too early to start giving away information about the plot, as such excuses just insult the intelligence of everyone who posts here.

51. TheLovelyBonesMcCoy - July 27, 2008

Boborci,

Are you (collectively) considering a right time to show us something? Do you have a date in mind? Is it soon? Or are we on target in thinking we won’t see anyhting until the first trailer around December?

BTW Fringe sounds pretty cool.

52. Boborci - July 27, 2008

user 200083747849 – July 27, 2008
I can understand that. Why do you think paramount didn’t have a Star Trek board? Or at least more of a presence.

They have a marketing schedule that they feel would peak at the wrong time if they started too early, and they didn’t want to phone something in with no new revelations.

53. Xai - July 27, 2008

50. Michael Hall – July 27, 2008
“….but please don’t try to tell us it was because none of the visual FX have been completed or it’s too early to start giving away information about the plot, as such excuses just insult the intelligence of everyone who posts here.”

You don’t speak for me, only for yourself. The man you are insulting has been kind enough to share time and information with us here on the site.
Posts like yours ARE insulting to me.

54. Wheeli - July 27, 2008

You guys are forgetting Creation Con at Vegas next Month, where better to make some surprise announcement or bring a Trailer then the biggest Trek Convention of the year, and this year with Star Trek the Experience closing down there may be more there than usual. I thin kSome thing will happen in Vegas.

55. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Xai,

What are you suggesting I said in my #28 post?

My “berated” comment was not directed at you specifically, but those who were speaking ill of others for rendering an opinion.

“This is not a sign of a lack of faith”

That sound like a statement of fact to me. You may want to rephrase it so as to avoid confusion.

As far as AICN, before you disregard it completely I suggest you reconsider and check out what the readers say not the reporters. As I said, they have a large and varied readership including Hollywood insiders and it’s a good way to see what non trekkers think of this project.

And no Xai, it is not the only thing with which I base my informed opinion. It is however, a helpful tool.

I never suggested anyone insulted me so don’t act defensive.

56. user 200083747849 - July 27, 2008

Thank you for explaining that Bob, while I don’t agree with the decision on paramounts part, I appriciate the explanation.

57. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Let me ask you this Xai,

Why do you think it is all these films that are a year or more away create a large presence at comic con?

58. Xai - July 27, 2008

#55 Zoudou

In your #28 post? Sorry, if I wasn’t clear enough, were you?

The “Faith” comment?…. please… you railed on about opinions and the fact that everyone here posts them. You know what that statement is without being cute. There’s only one person here I’ll rephrase it for and you aren’t him.
And I have been to AICN as I said.

I stand corrected… Who berated you?

59. Michael Hall - July 27, 2008

Okay, Xai, fair enough. But just as it’s not my place to speak for you, neither is it yours to speak for Bob Orci, who in no way did I mean to insult, as my criticism was only for a hypothetical non-response, not to anything the man had actually done or said.

And Mr. Orci, thanks once again for posting here. I still don’t really understand Paramount’s reasoning in all this, but after this weekend it’s all water under the bridge in any event. Time to move on.

60. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Bob,

Nice to have you here. As per my statement above I too feel it was a misstep on Paramounts part to not push Trek more at the Con.

But, I appreciate your dialog with the fans and wish you the best of luck on Star Trek.

61. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Xai,

It’s Zodou actually and you still haven’t answered my question.

Yes, I was clear, it is you who was not.

Also, why so argumentative? You come off as a major troll.

62. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Xai,

“The “Faith” comment?…. please… you railed on about opinions and the fact that everyone here posts them. You know what that statement is without being cute. There’s only one person here I’ll rephrase it for and you aren’t him.”

What did you mean with this last statement?

63. Xai - July 27, 2008

57. Zodou – July 27, 2008

Let’s address that another way because ultimately we are talking Trek…

“They have a marketing schedule that they feel would peak at the wrong time if they started too early, and they didn’t want to phone something in with no new revelations.” (52. Boborci – July 27, 2008)

I am not privy to any studios marketing plans, but it seems to me that some films have less to “lose” than a revised Trek if they show a trailer or stills. Batman didn’t change remarkably in look, IronMan doesn’t have a massive fanbase like Trek and needed to cause a stir early. This Trek has a new cast, a new ship and a new attitude that TPTB must feel need to be held under wraps a while longer. And JJ loves to surprise. Plus JJ did say the effects were not ready.

You said you hate the marketing machine, and you don’t base your decisions on it… so why are you all worried about it?

64. Xai - July 27, 2008

59. Michael Hall – July 27, 2008
Granted… I’ll let Mr. Orci tell you he was insulted. I said your comment was insulting to me.
Like you said… water under the bridge.

65. Xai - July 27, 2008

#62 Zodou,
I don’t see where you have been insulted, yet I get called a troll and argumentative.

Fine, clarification … All the statements in the posts are opinions, like we already discussed. If the site owner dislikes something that was posted, I am sure he will warn that party.

66. Adam E - July 27, 2008

54. Wheeli – July 27, 2008
“I thin kSome thing will happen in Vegas.” [sic]

I also think (and hope) that something will happen in Vegas.
Unlike Comic Con, Creation Con Vegas is specifically Star Trek and the new movie will be impossible to ignore. It still might be too early for a full length trailer but another teaser would be great. Or just some more photos. The new posters from Comic Con are excelent.

67. The Underpants Monster - July 27, 2008

Props to all of them – I don’t think I could have found the restraint to sit there and calmly say, “Khan” instrad of screaming, “KHAAAAAN!!”

68. Zodou - July 27, 2008

Xai,

#65
I never said I was insulted again that statement was not directed at you. and in my opinion, you come off as being argumentative. Which is the difficult part of trying to converse online one’s intent is not always clear.

“If the site owner dislikes something that was posted, I am sure he will warn that party.”

Agreed.

#63
“I am not privy to any studios marketing plans, but it seems to me that some films have less to “lose” than a revised Trek if they show a trailer or stills. Batman didn’t change remarkably in look, IronMan doesn’t have a massive fanbase like Trek and needed to cause a stir early. This Trek has a new cast, a new ship and a new attitude that TPTB must feel need to be held under wraps a while longer. And JJ loves to surprise. Plus JJ did say the effects were not ready.”

A few points I would disagree on. Iron Man does have a large fan base the comic has been around for quite some time. I think as long as Trek. Batman Begins was a drastic aesthetic change from the films that preceded it and yet they had pictures of the Tumbler (the most drastic change of all in my opinion) long before the movie came out. Both properties are lucrative and both films were just as costly if not more so that Trek XI, IM and Batman had just as much to lose as Trek.

It’s not about what you stand to lose Xai, It’s what you stand to gain. They are on record stating they want to appeal to a larger audience; there is no larger genre audience than Comic con. That is a fact, last years attendance was 128,000 + that’s a lot of interest not garnered.

“And JJ loves to surprise. Plus JJ did say the effects were not ready.”

That may be, but didn’t Bob say that they personally wanted to show something?

“We were considering showing some Trek stuff at the panel, and we were literally discussing it up there on stage, but then we collectively concluded it didn’t feel right to do it there at that time.”

I don’t think its J.J’s propensity for surprise that is keeping any ship, uniform or set pics. From being revealed. My understanding is that it was the fact that Paramount had very little advertising presence for all of their properties, G.I. Joe, TF, and Trek and all involved with Trek were there for other projects.

I can understand them not wanting to show footage if the effects were not locked (although that doesn’t seem to stop any other studio) but really, I think even some set pics would have been more engaging than one solitary poster and some bags. Remember Xai, Star Trek is no longer just for the fans, it’s for the average Joe consumer.

“You said you hate the marketing machine, and you don’t base your decisions on it… so why are you all worried about it?”

It’s not the machine I’m worried about Xai, it’s Star Trek.

69. Jay - July 27, 2008

I think we’ll probably see a second teaser sometime this fall, maybe with Quantum of Solace? Then, the first real trailer with wall to wall footage sometime in early ’09, like late January- early February, then a final trailer a few weeks before the opening in the spring of next year.

70. ThePhaige - July 27, 2008

I think they did just enough. The pics released were just enough of a tease.
I think is was a respectable collective decision to keep focus on Fringe. On the same token though you can feel the pressure for information as no matter who it is , in interviews etc…. the questions about Trek are always asked.

I think when everyone thought Trek was coming in Dec they had been in the infancy of starting a campaign , and with the date push out I think some awkward beaks were put on. I don’t think that campaign will start again until Dec or Feb…then watch out. They do have to pace it out properly I can understand that…

71. Xai - July 27, 2008

Zodou,
They made an appearance at the Con, they answered questions and yes, Bob Orci said they talked about showing something. He didn’t say what, and that would possibly contradict JJ’s apology and it’s reasons. We don’t know, we weren’t there.
I think they will be fine. You said it’s a huge convention and I don’t doubt you. But it’s not the only means of getting the word and images out. They won’t miss igniting the general public or the fanbase by not showing a clip at this Con. They already have a lot of publicity going for this movie with very little $$ invested. For instance, this site. And their own and Intel’s and the quotes that make it to the general public. The news media I work for has a habit of picking up the Trek interviews and stories and so do others.
This movie won’t lack for promotion. 10 months early is far too early to start an effective buzz in the general public, so any pics or flicks this early in the game are fan fodder. People have lives and other concerns. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see them hold the start of any ads or releases beyond the US general election.
I am not worried that IronMan or Batman were at this Con last year with clips and Trek wasn’t this year. Show me where there’s a correlation between a ComicCon appearance and success. There’s a thousand different ways to market now and I don’t feel this was a loss.

72. krikzil - July 27, 2008

Just hearing the buzz now for Watchmen — which was viewed in a somewhat worried fashion by a lot of fans up to this point — makes the missed CC opportunity all the more puzzling to me.

Zodou#28 — Exactly!

73. Devon - July 27, 2008

# 8 – The Angry Klingon – “Not having a panel at SDCC was STUPID and there were rumblings there from people that attribute TREKS absence to Paramounts fear that the movie isnt that good.”

Something to consider, if they weren’t going to have a panel to Star Trek because they felt it wasn’t good.. then why was half the Paramount Booth dedicated to the new Star Trek then? Also, they didn’t have panels for their other summer movies as well. Are you implying that Paramount hates their entire summer schedule?

74. Devon - July 27, 2008

Also # 8 – “Not having a panel at SDCC was STUPID”

While I agree that Comic-con is a big deal… when have you ever known Comic Con to make or break a movie?

75. sean - July 27, 2008

Guys, Watchmen was going to rule the Comic Con whether there was a Star Trek panel or not. It’s one of the most beloved and respected graphic novels of all time and for nearly 20 years they called it ‘unfilmable’. The controversy involved in hiring Zach Snyder, not to mention Alan Moore’s long-standing hatred of any filmed version of his works would have generated substantial buzz. Factor in the phenomenal trailer in front of TDK, and frankly, Trek would have been lost in the din.

If I were Paramount, I probably would have skipped it too. Why try to compete with that when you can make a big splash closer to the release date and have it all to yourself?

76. Einstein Jones - July 27, 2008

Welcome to the Zodou and Xai show!

77. Xai - July 27, 2008

Jump in… I am tired of tap-dancing

78. krikzil - July 27, 2008

“While I agree that Comic-con is a big deal… when have you ever known Comic Con to make or break a movie?”

300 and Iron Man were helped by the buzz from Comic Con.

And if CC were so unimportant, JJ would not have introduced the 2 Spocks — months before the filming had even begun — at CC last year. Comic Con is simply a way to generate interest with a fan base who is very tapped into the internet and vocal in general. That “buzz” then spreads to Joe Average in the streets months later. The audience liked the Watchmen footage and the buzz now coming out of CC — and being picked up by the media — is positive. They needed that since as sean mentioned, a lot of people thought it would be “unfilmable” and all the other negative controversy surrounding the project.

CC got coverage in TVGuide and Entertainment Weekly and a lot of celebrities took the time to appear at the con — more each year — so it is deemed valuable and important in the entertainment industry.

Did anyone watch any of the G4 coverage of the con. Every single time something about Trek was mentioned, the audience behind the anchors cheered. Obviously there was a hunger for Trek there.

79. Orbitalic - July 27, 2008

Trek missed a Con that’s 10 months away from it’s opening day.

So?

80. Devon - July 27, 2008

#71 – Excellent post. I think it was a bit silly too, but some are reading way too much in to this and think that showing a clip at this convention is going to make Star Trek a huge success.

It may get some publicity going.. but I don’t think it will make or break a movie. Did any of the major media television outlets report on the Trek Panel last year as their top story? Did people pass others on the street and hear them talking about a movie because of what they saw at comic con? No.

A majority of the people have short attention spans so they may still be able to get what they are doing by showing the stuff to the MASSES in the general public within just months of the premiere such as a trailer, etc. That’s where the real effectiveness will come. Plus, who is to say there aren’t other opportunities in the next few months to do something? And showing something at Comic Con is sort of like preaching to the converted in a way, not in the bad way. Would have loved to have seen some stuff.

81. Devon - July 27, 2008

“300 and Iron Man were helped by the buzz from Comic Con.”

Helped? I said “Make Or Break.” You can’t tell me that most of its success came from Comic-Con. Let’s be completely honest here.

“And if CC were so unimportant,”

That is NOT what I said.

” JJ would not have introduced the 2 Spocks — months before the filming had even begun — at CC last year.”

Again, I never said that CC was unimportant, but I don’t think it’s going to kill a movie if something is not shown there. PLENTY of blockbusters happened and had nothing to do with Comic Con.

“CC got coverage in TVGuide and Entertainment Weekly and a lot of celebrities took the time to appear at the con — more each year — so it is deemed valuable and important in the entertainment industry.”

I don’t doubt that, but that isn’t what I said. Plus, Trek just got some coverage with the posters in Entertainment Weekly that tied in with Comic Con. So no harm done there.

“That “buzz” then spreads to Joe Average in the streets months later.”

Oh puhleeze. You mean trailers, commercials, TV reports from the set, independent media coverage and whatever other marketing aren’t going to take up a bulk of that? It’s going to be a convention out in San Diego that the masses know about first?

“CC got coverage in TVGuide and Entertainment Weekly and a lot of celebrities took the time to appear at the con — more each year — so it is deemed valuable and important in the entertainment industry.”

I’m not sure, but I did not say that Comic con “wasn’t deemed valuable by the Entertainment Industry.” My original point was that it likely will not make or break a movie! If it does, please provide realistic evidence!

82. Orbitalic - July 27, 2008

JJ could have premiered a clip at the Vatican today, made the papers and network and cable news and it’s still too early to promote the film. The sizzle would die in 2 days.

83. krikzil - July 27, 2008

>>Helped? I said “Make Or Break.” You can’t tell me that most of its success came from Comic-Con. Let’s be completely honest here.

300 was helped enormously by CC– some do say “made” as that’s where the buzz began — the clip shown electrified people and got a lot of coverage. It can be a gauge to see if the property will be popular and what it’s chances are to cross over. See Snyder’s comments:

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2008-07-23-comic-con-hollywood_N.htm

It also works for TV — look at Heroes. And JJ and Co were at CC this year hyping Fringe along with Keifer Sutherland for his show, as were many others. Studios, producers, actors and directors don’t waste their time and money unless it’s for a reason — they think it’s important to the success of their product. CC is important as a part of the whole marketing chain — I never said it’s the end all/be all — but I do think a lot of you dismiss it out of hand.

The success of many genre films start at grassroots levels — cons — who better to appeal to first than as someone above said, a built-in receptive audience? [Sadly, the absence of anything can be a problem -- folks rush in to fill the vacuum when there's nothing out there.] From the slide-shows I saw for ET and Star Wars (the dark ages, I know) to the wiz-bang film clips & panels & previews they show today at CC, it does help long before a campaign is rolled out to mainstream audiences and can jump start it. Currently ABC, CNN, FoxNews, USAToday, LATimes and NYTimes are covering CC — not out of the goodness of their heart.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2008-07-22-comic-con-inside_N.htm

http://movies.ign.com/articles/720/720524p1.html

84. Closettrekker - July 27, 2008

Star Trek can only sustain the hype machine for a few months. I think it will begin around Christmastime and sustain itself until the film’s release in May.
This is supported by Mr. Orci’s comments about Paramount’s marketing schedule and concern over where it peaks.
I’ve been saying this since we first learned about the release date being chaned to May 2009. It is just common sense. I fail to understand why all of these “amateur promoters” find it such a difficult concept.
JJ has a penchant for secrecy, so it is likely that spoilers will be rare and not much will be given away at all prior to opening week. Expecting such little detail to be effectively spread out over 10 full months is absolutely ridiculous. I look for an intense and extremely concentrated hype campaign. The logical kickoff point is X-Mas…whether the fanboys like it or not.

85. VOODOO - July 27, 2008

Why do people get so upset over this comic con stuff?

Why do you want spoilers nearly a year before the film is released?

86. Xai - July 27, 2008

If Trek were still a Christmas release, I’d be less inclined to be a skeptic, but it’s still 10 months away.

Most of humanity doesn’t look at something now and then suddenly have a “V8 moment”, strike themselves in the forehead and say “Yea, that’s the movie that was hyped at Comic Con 10 months ago.”
A geek might, but not average Joe.

You may effect the fanbase in the Con (they are coming anyway), but the rest won’t truly be aware of the film until a few months ahead of it’s release when the TV, print, viral and commercial tie-ends start up, along with a trailer in the theater.

Oh yea, that’s my opinion.

87. Andy Patterson - July 27, 2008

Alright, I’m going to jump in on this one. Marketing time line or not….I’m going to use a line I heard a kid at the comic shop use today….., “I think they (JJ) should have gone all “John Favreau” and brought some stuff the way they did for Iron Man last year”. That’s a pretty good line for a 16 yr old kid. Pretty good line for any age.

That movie was a year in advance. Sure seemed to stoke things for us and it certainly did well this summer. I was there last year for that and it sure was exciting to come in and dish it up for us that way. The buzz and energy in the place was very palpable. Fun to be a part of that.

And to address someone’s statement from earlier,…..from what I understand Comic Con helped make Star Wars all those years ago and really if you get down to it, the reverse is true also.

88. JBond - July 27, 2008

I have to agree with Xai… I don’t think Trek not having a trailer ready for Comic Con is that big a deal.

As for comparisons between appearances at Comic Con and success:

I don’t know about everyone else, but my first exposure to Iron Man wasn’t even from Comic Con. The first images/trailer I saw for the movie were actually from the Super Bowl ads. That doesn’t mean that having the trailer at Comic Con didn’t help Iron Man, but if the F/X for the Star Trek trailer weren’t ready, it’s probably better that they wait until they can show some pretty cool stuff with the next trailer.

Say what you want about Star Trek not being about F/X, but I think that for the casual movie-goer, showing a cool trailer a few months from now with great f/x shots is going to be more effective than showing a ho-hum trailer with no f/x at Comic Con.

Just my two cents… :)

89. Einstein Jones - July 27, 2008

SDCC will never break a big time movie like Star Trek. It’s ability to enhance the ticket sales is at best unprovable, and mostly dubious. I haven’t been to San Diego for five years, and I saw Ironman (loved it) and 300 (hated it), etc, etc.

I’m sure some goodwill would have been accomplished if JJ had run around giving friendly Vulcan neck pinches and buttons and crap, but the fact of the matter is, the Comic Con people are going to see these movies anyway, no matter how badly their little hearts have been broken by these “hideous slights.”

Fans who act like their Khan-ish wrath will actually hurt and/or scar Paramount and those associated with Trek are merely engaging in fantasies of grandeur. They lash out at those who feed them their Trek because none of it is under their control, and they feel a sense of entitlement and ownership because of their support. In fact, they are powerless, and rightly so. They are Captain Pike, after the accident.

I hope that the majority of the complainers here are kids, and just have some growing up to do.

More Hugs, More Kisses

90. Trek Nerd Central - July 27, 2008

Re #88 et al.

I’m with you. I don’t see what the big to-do is. In my opinion, hype is just that, hype, and early buzz can be wrong no matter which way it swings.

91. krikzil - July 27, 2008

Loving the drama and the cheap shots simply because you hold a different opinion. (Uh, who’s being childish?) To simply state that some of us feel Paramount missed the boat by not doing a panel at CC isn’t engaging in fantasies or delusions of fan grandeur.

There is marketing for fans and marketing for general audiences. CC has crossed over and does play it’s part whether you accept that or not. Personally, I feel that CC has become a circus, too freaking huge and no longer attend regularly but I’m not so arrogant to dismiss it outright because I no longer enjoy it, however.

Obviously the major mainstream marketing isn’t going to start until a few months before a film’s release — we all know the public has a short attention span and can burn out. However, marketing to us geeks and genre fans is a smart move and there’s really no shelf-life. The endless debating on this site and others proves that. ;) It exists on 2 planes –what we (fans) are aware of and what they (regular folks) are aware of, however, good buzz can and does make it’s way beyond us fans and that is a good thing. Then a movie becomes a must-see event or at least interesting to the crowds on date night.

92. Stefanbkk - July 27, 2008

Long time reader, infrequent poster….

I might get shot out of a photon tube for saying this, but here goes…

ENOUGH ALREADY, GUYS!

I don’t know about you, but I’m rather enjoying the fact that I’ll be able to walk into the theater next May and see a film that has not been ruined for me. It’s been a long time. This reminds me of that feeling I had as a kid, walking into Star Wars for the first time with absolutely no idea what to expect. In fact, I remember people walking out of the movie after the first twenty minutes of the droids bitching and moaning on Tatooine. How could they have known what was coming? I remember seeing those same people after the movie and saying to them… “Big mistake… go back and see the whole thing.”

Call me crazy, call me kooky… call me… irresponsible, but I’m looooving that JJ and company are keeping us in the dark. It makes the anticipation all the more delicious.

And as for “buzz”?…. Buzz, Schmuzz…. I could give a fat rat’s about buzz. I’m completely confident that the right amount of information will be released at the right time to sufficiently wet our appetities.

So let’s give it a rest.. Relax… Relish in the fact that when you walk into the cinema next May, you’ll have that same wide-eyed, kid-on-christmas-morning-feeling that we used to have…. before the internet took all the fun away from the movies.

I am now officially stepping down from my soapbox and donning my flame repellant underwear as I’m sure I’m gonna catch an earful for this little diatribe. :-)

93. Michael Adams - July 27, 2008

Xai? I think what you are saying is that it’s still just too early for a trailer, But all this insult this and insult that is tired, I thought I said outrageous stuff, but if what Hall says puts you off personally well then I’ll just keep on truckin’. and try to do the same. Somebody said I was too emotional about all this. If somebody wants to say B.S. on excuses that’s fine, but if you say, “ouch that hurts my feelings,” you wont like the new movie. After the thing comes out I think we should all get together and have a party- you, Michael Hall, Harry Balz, British Naval Dude, CmdR, and the rest of us and love it because we will. Then toast Anthony, and wish him all the luck for our forum er party will be over. Paramount will not make another Star Trek movie.

94. Xai - July 27, 2008

#93 Michael Adams,
I didn’t like what Hall said in #50. I felt he was insulting Bob Orci directly (Bob was posting a few messages at that time) and calling him a liar. It was insulting to him and I felt emabarrased and insulted as a poster here. But enough of that. Posts like that are eventually caught by Anthony and he’ll deal with it.

The movie will come out fine.

95. Xai - July 27, 2008

Stefanbbk..

glad you spoke up.

96. Mike - July 27, 2008

God, the whining is tiresome. JJ and staff deserve “Good Samaritan” props for paying any attention at all to the drama queens and their ridiculous demands. He’s definitely a nicer person than I am.

97. Buckaroohawk - July 27, 2008

I think Paramount played the ComiCon card perfectly. Trek apparently didn’t have a tremendous presence there, but look at all the buzz and speculation that was generated anyway.

Why spend all that extra money when they can downplay Trek at the con and let us do all the work for them?

The lack of Trek presence caused as much of a stir as any Trek panel or movie trailer premiere would have. A brilliant, and likely cost-effective, marketing move, that is.

98. DaveM - July 27, 2008

#97 – That is the most interesting and intelligent take on the marketing of this picture that I think I have seen posted anywhere. You are exactly right (in my opinion). The lack of a real perceived presence did indeed generate the all important “buss” that everyone is in a frenzy over.

It wouldn’t suprise me in the least to find out after the film opens that this was actually a part of the marketing plan. People are talking and they are talking about the Trek film even more now then previously.

Any press at this point in time is good press, even if its only mentioning how nothing about Trek was revealed at Comic Con.

Good insight into this one. Kudos!

99. MattTheTrekkie (trekkie1415) - July 27, 2008

yeah… I rarely post… I know

But I had a cool thought!

What if J.J. and crew did to Star Trek what Nolan and crew did with The Dark Knight? I watched a whole lot of clips and TV spots (I love spoilers too much o_o) and read a lot of rumors and still when I watched the movie, I had no CLUE what was going on!

He does need this quiet-hush-hush secrecy for now, but it would be totally cool if later they could pull trailers, TV spots and clips together that totally throw us off!

Nothing I saw previous to The Dark Knight gave anything away.
It was awesome.

100. Benjamin Sisko - July 28, 2008

Guys from Terminator Salvation crew are pretty smart. They promoting movie all the time, with informations, photos from set, and clips.

On the other hand, Abrams & Co. are too “Lost-stylish” with all that secrecy, and that is bad for movie. ST XI isn’t Lost.

101. Stefanbkk - July 28, 2008

Keep one thing in mind, guys….

In days of yore.. the only way to get any… and I mean ANY information about a Trek movie was from good old STARLOG Magazine. And what did that amount to? Sometimes nothing more than some grainy photos and a couple of vague quotes.

DeForest Kelly once said in an interview that Star Trek’s success stemmed from the fact that it was made up of “a lot of great little moments”. He said that was people remember most about Trek. Now I don’t know about you guys, but had I been given advanced knowledge or “spoilers” (gee, wonder where THAT name came from) about Trek films of the past, I doubt the following “moments” would have been half as njoyable and/or memorable for me:

Kirk and Scotty’s beauty tour of Enterprise’s new exterior in ST:TMP.
The Kobyashi Maru snafu in the opening of TWOK
Spock’s death…and life… and for that matter, the death of the Enterprise.
Kirk’s “Here it comes.” and “I don’t like to lose.”
David Marcus’ sacrifice.
Carol Marcus’ “Can I cook, or can’t I?”
Spock: “Jim… be careful” McCoy: “WE will!”
Kirk: “He’ll die! Scotty: “Sir, he’s dead already.”

the list goes on ad infintium…

Now I’d be willing to wager 10,000 quatloos that if any of those movies containing all those wonderful moments was released today,… six months before we’d be finding scripts online, bootlegged copies of the roughcut of the film, and photos galor of every ship, every set, every tribble, every ear mold, blah blah blah blah….

I’m glad I got to be surprised by those moments… I’d feel really ripped off if someone, by trying to leak us some “goodies”, deprived me of this movie’s share of “Star Trek moments”

Wouldnt’ you??????

102. » Blog Archive » Abrams Explains Lack of Trek at Comic Con - July 28, 2008

[...] • You can find more from Abrams and his team on Star Trek (including a video of the Comic Con panel) at TrekMovie. [...]

103. Holger - July 28, 2008

36: I am well aware of how Paramount sees this movie and I’m also aware that complaining in this forum won’t reschedule the next trailer.
But I have to say that I disapprove of your ‘get over it- accept the hard facts’ imperatives. This is a forum of Trek fans and we can express our opinions on the hard facts here, even if that doesn’t change anything about them. You will probably say that you are expressing your opinion, too, but your opinion is about what opinions or attitudes others should have according to you. And to this I have to reply: I’ll get over what I want to get over! If you heartily approve of Paramount politics and anything else related to the movie, then that’s perfectly all right with me. But I won’t have anyone tell me how I should or shouldn’t evaluate this stuff.

104. Gatortrek - July 28, 2008

#103 Evaluations should be based on what is true, not on what you think is true. Opinions are fine, but let us not confuse them with the truth. I doubt anyone truly knows what “Paramount” is thinking. Sure all of us fans would have loved some footage, but to say they missed the boat is not based on any discernable truth just myth making about Comic-Con. BTW, millions of Star Trek fans and Sci-fi fans have never been to Comic-Con or ever plan on going to Comic-con, so what is shown there has no influence on our decision making. There is already plenty of “buzz” about the movie and it will be widely attended the first weekend ir-regardless of what happens at one convention. Back in the beginning of Star Trek when there were no conventions and a letter writing campaign saved Trek from having just one season, I was privileged to have been a soldier in the fight. but back then there wasn’t all this whining and complaing like you see now. Back then i was proud to be numbered amongst the Trek Fans now it is just embarrassing to come here and see the immaturity of the posters and the constant bickering back and forth. Well, now I’ve gone and done it and become part of the problem, but at least I can wait for a trailer and the movie without getting blown out of shape that i didn’t get to see it when “i” wanted to see it. Why not just enjoy what is at the convention and not complain about what isn’t there???

105. star trackie - July 28, 2008

So Bob, looks like you guys had some goodies up your sleeve after all. That’s cool.

Of course, like you said, it was Fringe’s moment in the spotlight, to talk Trek wouldn’t have been appropriate. Darn shame there wasn’t a Trek panel for those goodies.

Oh well, like they say, it’s the thought that counts.

106. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - July 28, 2008

I am so proud of myself.

I haven’t whined once.

107. Dennis Bailey - July 28, 2008

#101: “Keep one thing in mind, guys….

In days of yore.. the only way to get any… and I mean ANY information about a Trek movie was from good old STARLOG Magazine. And what did that amount to? Sometimes nothing more than some grainy photos and a couple of vague quotes.”

God, yes.

I remember trying to imagine what the new Bridge for “Star Trek: Phase II” was going to look like, based on a small Starlog photo showing the *outer*scaffolding* of the set. And IIRC the first “photo” of the new Enterprise exterior was actually a small picture of an electronic toy version that would be marketed with the film’s release (there had previously been some production art in the magazine by Mike Minor, of course).

My discovery of Weekly Variety in 1981 was a godsend. Okay, so Montalban is in this – now we know for sure who the villain is. But who the hell are Kirstie Alley and Merritt Buttrick????

The Age of the Dinosaurs. LOL

108. TREKS in SCI-FI Podcast » Blog Archive » Podcast #184 - “First Contact” - July 28, 2008

[...] is also a new voicemail number for the show.  It is:  206-202-1548.  Then I play a snippet of a Comic Con panel featuring JJ Abrams talking about the new “Star Trek” movie and how happy is with it.  JJ seems to really [...]

109. Benjamin Sisko - July 28, 2008

Is there any Pakled on this site?

110. Devon - July 28, 2008

“from what I understand Comic Con helped make Star Wars all those years ago and really if you get down to it,”

I don’t even think Comic Con was really that big at the time. I don’t recall anything like this. I figured Star Wars got big because of trailers, commercials, marketing and hype. Silly me.

111. Einstein Jones - July 28, 2008

A couple of (hopefully) quick points:

Comic Con might help small movies, but the BLOCKBUSTERS are going to be blockbusters no matter what. The Internet has thousands of times more impact than any convention. The vast majority of the people who attend the conventions will see those movies anyway.

Lastly, I am not telling the “whiners’ that they shouldn’t be feeling the way they are, or that they have no right to their opinions. What I’m decrying is the whining itself, the silly petulance displayed by some here, not to mention outright rage. Nobody likes listening to a whiner, even in cyberspace.

I’ll defend to the death your right to whine, but that doesn’t mean I must suffer it in silence.

112. Cervantes - July 29, 2008

#111 Einstein Jones

‘I’ll defend to the death your right to whine, but that doesn’t mean I must suffer it in silence.”

Sounds reasonable to me, lol.

113. Holger - July 29, 2008

104: Well, fact is that we have been shown nothing so far except the short teaser, and that it does not seem we will see anything anytime soon, probably nothing until December. My evaluation of this is: I don’t like it, I believe the fans should get something sooner, and I think this is bad PR policy.
If you think that’s immature, well ok, then I am immature in your eyes.

What I find annoying is a bunch of posts on this forum which are written in the spirit of: Now listen to me, all you little socially retarded Trek nerds, here come I, the tough realist, explaining the hard facts of real life to you, so stop whining and face my truth.

114. D. McCoy - July 31, 2008

Interesting how they say “we are on schedule as if it were Dec.” but do not have a trailer—where ‘Watchmen’ has a mega-cool trailer and it’s not scheduled until March of next year.

Also interesting that they make it sound like it’s a trailer or nothing…if he was really anxious to show us “stuff” it doesn’t have to be a trailer. Drawings or photos of the big E or cast in uniforms would suffice for now. (No, IMO, the images that were released were not enough).

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