Quinto & Kring Talk Trek/Heroes Connection + Abrams Talks Fringe/Trek Science | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Quinto & Kring Talk Trek/Heroes Connection + Abrams Talks Fringe/Trek Science September 5, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Abrams,Fringe,Sci-Fi,ST09 Cast , trackback

Zachary Quinto, Star Trek’s new Spock, is now back to his day job, as one of the main villains on NBC’s Heroes. In a couple of new interviews Quinto and Heroes creator Tim Kring talk about Heroes connection to Trek and in another new interview Star Trek director JJ Abrams talks Trek and Fringe science.

 

 

Quinto on the Spock/Sylar spectrum [from BuddyTV]

Quinto was asked about his upcoming role as Spock in J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek, and the actor revealed that he sees several similar traits when playing the logical Vulcan and the sociopath villain. “There are elements of the characters that echo each other, but from opposite ends of the spectrum,” Quinto said. He added that they both have “a stillness and a rich internal point of view that informs the way they behave.”


Zachary Quinto at “Heroes” press conference August 21, in Beverly Hills
(WireImage).

Kring on Heroes/Lost/Trek connection [from Orlando Sentinal TV Blog]

"Heroes" creator Tim Kring said the "Lost" connection was helpful in getting Quinto the Spock role.
Kring said the "Lost" people — who did the new "Star Trek" movie — are fans of his and vice versa. That’s how conversations about Quinto playing Spock came up, Kring said. "It happened on a human level with friendships," Kring said.

Kring on Mr. Sulu’s superpower [from BuddyTV]

Another big question is what power Kaito Nakamura [played by Star Trek's George Takei] had, and the fact that a deleted scene on the Heroes season 2 DVD revealed he has the ability to see all the variables of a situation and predict an inevitable outcome, such as analyzing the stock market to earn money. Kring said they intentionally revealed this on the DVD for hardcore fans, though he set no time table for when people who only watch the show on TV might get to learn of Kaito’s power

Season premiere for Heroes is Monday Sept. 22. More info at nbc.com/heroes. Here is the promo.


 

Abrams on Fringe & Trek science
Of course the other big genre show premiere with a Trek connection is next week’s debut of Fringe, created by the team behind the new Star Trek movie, JJ Abrams, Roberto Orci, and Alex Kurtzman. In an interview with Wired, Abrams talked about the difference between science fiction and science fact on both Fringe and Star Trek.

Though you could say it’s science fiction, the weird thing about Fringe is that a lot of the stuff is at least in the realm of possibility. It’s not sci-fi — it’s just sci. When Star Trek came out and they had their communicators, that was a cool dream. Now, in our pockets, we all have communicators. We read a week ago that invisibility is coming. You go, ‘They cracked invisibility.’ There’s stuff you wouldn’t think in a million years is possible, and it’s happening every day.

We’re living in an incredibly advanced period of scientific achievement, almost uncontrollably so, and that keeps pushing our almost quaint version of what science fiction is to a different place.

Fringe, created by JJ Abrams, Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, premieres next Tuesday on Fox. Here is a new promo video featuring clips and some chat with JJ Abrams.

 

 


 

Comments

1. Can't Wait for Labor Day 2009 - September 5, 2008

Can’t wait for Heroes to return and hopefully it will get rid of the bad taste that it left behind from last season.

2. Commodore Redshirt - September 5, 2008

Zachary Quinto is going to be a huge star. He just seems to be getting the right breaks and in his interviews he seems to come across as a genuine and nice person.

3. Trekkie16 - September 5, 2008

I have met ZQ twice and he was very friendly and nice on both occasions, He seems very genuine and down to earth. Let’s hope fame doesn’t ruin him. Of course as a Vulcan, he is probably immune to the pitfalls of Hollywood.

4. Chris Doohan - September 5, 2008

I can’t see anyone else as Spock. Perfect casting!!! (thanks to J.J. Abrams, Alyssa Weisberg and April Webster).

He does SUCH a great job as Spock. Also, like Leonard, he likes his crossword puzzles.

5. Einstein Jones - September 5, 2008

I think Quinto was a great choice for Spock. I’m excited to see what he does with it, and they do with the movie overall.

Cell phones aren’t nearly as advanced as a communicator, and our “invisibility” is primitive, but I get what JJ is saying. But we’re much farther from Fringe technologies than we think we are.

6. OneBuckFilms - September 5, 2008

1 – I’ve seen the Season 3 premiere (Comic-Con), and I think they are back on track.

7. OneBuckFilms - September 5, 2008

4 – Does he hide anything in his Tricorder for between takes?

8. JWW - September 5, 2008

did zach get eyebrow implants?

those can’t be real, they look like two shatner toupes stuck on his head….

abrams cant tell the difference between a cel phone and a 23rd century ‘fleet issue subspace radio communicator?

hmmm…. i wonder if the ones in his movie will look like iphones and play mp3′s?

hey, why not, eh?

9. Izbot - September 5, 2008

UGH! More Non-news!! I’m boycotting this site until etc etc etc!

;) I’m kidding. I just wanted to mock the haters before they got the chance.

10. Beam Me Up - September 5, 2008

YES! ANOTHER Quinto story! Keep em coming Trek Movie!

11. K. M. Kirby, esq. - September 5, 2008

As much as the new marvels of science, like email & message boards, provide such service and pleasure to the masses; it’s still all too connected to the whole idea of personal computation devices and password-protected accounts. In the future of fringe science, it might be better if future generations could use electronic communication without necessarily ever having to actually see, or have contact with, a computer. Just a public keyboard and a screen: give it your I’D (card swipe or thumb print or iris scan) and up comes your forum list & personal contacts.

No kid should have to start out by getting forced into computers, just so email can be made available. Surely, there must be a market for such child-friendly forum access, without the spectre of cyber-science lurking nearby? Bluetooth message pads may be the big invention of the next decade.

12. Viking - September 5, 2008

Zach just doesn’t look right to me without the Kolchak hat and birth control glasses……LOL

13. captain_neill - September 5, 2008

Although Leonard Nimoy will always be the only Spock.

I honestly believe Quinto will do a good job honouring the character

14. steve623 - September 5, 2008

“birth control glasses” – that is effin’ brilliant.

He looks like he’s been going to James Cawley’s hairdresser.

Thank you. Thankyouverymuch.

15. Viking - September 5, 2008

#13, Nimoy himself seems to think that Quinto has that intangible to allow him to carry the torch. If he passes muster with the grandaddy of Vulcans, I’ll accept it as Gospel.

16. Viking - September 5, 2008

#14 – birth control glasses – that’s what they issued us in basic training. They’re cheap, indestructible, but you ain’t gettin’ laid wearing them. LOL

17. Energize - September 5, 2008

We need more pics of Quinto’s hat.

18. girl6 - September 5, 2008

That pic of ZQ is so Nimoy 70′s sideburns. I saw them together at the LV con. They even walk alike.

*sigh*

So hot…

19. Energize - September 5, 2008

He kind of looks like a young Elvis.

20. Thomas - September 5, 2008

19. He does, but a smidge more hirsute.

21. Izbot - September 5, 2008

18. girl6 –
“That pic of ZQ is so Nimoy 70’s sideburns. ”

I’ll never forget I found a celebrity gossip magazine at my packrat great-grandmother’s house from 1966 that a one-page pictorial titled “Leonard Nimoy Attends a Love-In”! His eyebrows were only half-there thanks to his Star Trek duties and his Spock-cut was parted on the side, he was wearing a tight-fitting black turtleneck and holding a hi-ball! Just awesome!

22. Curt - September 5, 2008

Personal opinion… Harve Bennett should be doing the Star Trek movie.

23. FishDS9 - September 5, 2008

I wonder if Chris Pine stole Quinto’s bike on set?

24. Izbot - September 5, 2008

22. Curt –
“Personal opinion… Harve Bennett should be doing the Star Trek movie.”

Just a followup: Harve Bennett ‘did’ Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

I think we’ll do just fine.

25. Curt - September 5, 2008

Bennett also did Star Trek II, III, and IV.

26. Curt - September 5, 2008

A followup… where would Star Trek be without Star Trek II, TWOK?

27. girl6 - September 5, 2008

21 Izbot

Share the love, baby! Scan that puppy.

I like the picture of him sitting on the couch in his house with his arm around his daughter and a cigarette like three inches from her face.

Those were the days.

You can see it on maidenwine.com

28. The Underpants Monster - September 5, 2008

From the moment I heard Quinto was playing Spock, I knew the movie would be good. Even if I knew the rest of it was going to suck, that performance would carry the film and make it worth seeing.

That seems like an odd power for Kaito – how come he was so clueless about Hiro if he could see outcomes and stuff? Maybe it’s like Sarek, and his logic is uncertain where his son is concerned.

29. Capt Mike Of the Terran Empire - September 5, 2008

Hey. ZQ will do a great job as Spock. Id Mr Nimoy likes his performence then im good as well.#14. Cawley. Or Ah Elvis has left the building.Long live the empire!!!

30. JP - September 5, 2008

lol, #3

31. Izbot - September 5, 2008

25. Curt –
“Bennett also did Star Trek II, III, and IV.”

Mmmmmmmmmyeah but he also did STV.

27. girl6 –
“21 Izbot
Share the love, baby! Scan that puppy.”

Oy, if only I could’ve anticipated the coming of scanners and internets back when I found it in 1985 I would’ve held onto it… Alas, it belongs to the ages now (that and the landfill, I fear).

32. Izbot - September 5, 2008

31. Izbot – September 5, 2008
25. Curt -
“Bennett also did Star Trek II, III, and IV.”

Seriously, I’m not trying to be snarky, Bennett was responsible for some solid, solid material. But one of, I think, the *best* decisions regarding the new movie is the almost complete lack of production alumni. I honestly think that DS9, VOY and ENT could’ve benefitted greatly had they not used a lot of the same folks in key positions. Dennis Madalone? A joke. Michael Westmore? Phoning it in since the 2nd season of TNG. Mike Okuda? Love him but the different series coulda used some new approaches. I won’t even start with how tired we all were of Berman and Braga. And, sorry to say, Michael Piller should never have written “Insurrection”.

New blood’s what we need. A new approach, new perspective. That will enrich the Trek experience, broaden it, bring it back to life.

Well it can’t hurt.

33. Energize - September 5, 2008

Actually, Bennet wanted out of Trek V when he read Shatner’s script. He said that the audience wouldn’t get the story, and he wanted to be let go.

Also, Leonard and Bennet were at odds with each other during Trek IV.

34. JL - September 5, 2008

For the actual Rob Salem phoner audio, head over to http://www.hardcorenerdity.com.

35. Can't Wait for Labor Day 2009 - September 5, 2008

My girlfriend is not a Star Trek fan but the min I told her that Quinto was going to be in the movie she got curious about the movie. She is a big Heroes fan and Quinto fan. She is stil not sure about it but im pretty sure next may she is going to be seeing “Star Trek” in the theathers. Like any good boyfriend I have been telling more and more about it. So far I have only gotten her to watch part of an episode and that was “Devil in the Dark.”

36. steve623 - September 5, 2008

“Leonard Nimoy Attends a Love-In”

I think I’ve found the title for my novel.

37. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 5, 2008

Yes, but does he sound like Spock?

38. Brett Campbell - September 6, 2008

I don’t know much about Mr. Nimoy and love-ins, but I remember seeing him on Rowan & Martin’s “Laugh-In!”

39. Commodore Redshirt - September 6, 2008

RE: 4. Chris Doohan
“Also, like Leonard, he (ZQ) likes his crossword puzzles.”

Hmmm, I’m thinking they should both be into sudoku as it is far more of a “logic” style puzzle! ;-]

40. Bugs Nixon - September 6, 2008

That Fringe trailer gives me a Torchwood vibe…

JJ – please dont make me pick sides.

41. Sci-Fi Bri - September 6, 2008

blah blah blah blah … shouldn’t we have the Star Trek trailer yet?

42. AJ - September 6, 2008

Hurray, Izbot for sussing out in few words the Trouble with Trek.

STV is indeed a “you’re fired” offense. And Mr. Bennett even had screentime as Admiral Bob.

Then again, hindsight is 20/20. If the same crew did seven successful seasons of TNG, of course they should come back for DS9, VOY, etc.

What VOY did was say “let’s take everything they like about Trek: Klingons, Romulans, the Dominion, the Federation and Starfleet, and remove it from the show!” And it sucked wind. Only 4th season ENT had a clue what was wrong, but by then it was too late.

43. Izbot - September 6, 2008

41. Sci-Fi Bri –
“blah blah blah blah … shouldn’t we have the Star Trek trailer yet?”

HA HA HA! Oh, that’s so funny! Didn’t I already address this in post #9?

44. Gary Seven - September 6, 2008

Abrams said:
“Though you could say it’s science fiction, the weird thing about Fringe is that a lot of the stuff is at least in the realm of possibility. It’s not sci-fi — it’s just sci.”

My understanding is that science fiction is that it’s about making stories based on speculations about the application of science, reasonably projected into the future. Things that are not based in scientific plausibility, but are “cool,” are deemed “science fantasy” (like Lord of the Rings, etc.). That has been the big difference between the two, and I’m not splitting hairs- it’s a well-known difference. But it seems Abrams did not know the definition of science fiction. What concerns me is that he didn’t know that Star Trek IS science fiction, not just a cool fantasy that is completely disconnected from science.

45. Closettrekker - September 6, 2008

#44—LOTR is not “science fantasy” to me…It is simply “fantasy”. Star Wars, for example, is “science fantasy”.

Star Trek has elements of “science fiction”, but also elements of “science fantasy”. ST requires a certain degree of suspension of disbelief which precludes it from being firmly in the category of science fiction, IMO.

“The Transporter”, for example, is not a likely progression of science as we know it, and was never intended to be. It was a storytelling problem-solving device that is as “science fantasy” as it gets. The same can be said for “Warp Drive”. Those elements require a suspension of disbelief, and therefore do not translate into real “science fiction”, of which 2001:ASO is a much better example.

” What concerns me is that he didn’t know that Star Trek IS science fiction, not just a cool fantasy that is completely disconnected from science.”

I didn’t get that at all. I interpreted his statement as citing a specific example of an element of Star Trek technology which is very much science fiction—the communicator. Now obviously, we do not actually have “communicators” in our pockets. We have cell phones, which do not yet do what the TOS communicators are capable of. However, they could certainly be an “ancestor” to the device that the TOS characters made famous.
With that said, there are certain elements of Trek which are disconnected from science for the purpose of good storytelling…I would descibe Star Trek as part “science fiction”, and part “science fantasy”.

46. Izbot - September 6, 2008

I just recalled another article from either that celeb magazine with the “Leonard Nimoy Attends a Love-In” pictorial or another one I found at the same time. An interview titled, “What Liberace Looks for in a Girl”. I’m serious. I think it was in Celebrity Confidential or something similar. Had a nice accompanying studio portrait of Liberace in a tux at a piano. Guess he didn’t start dressing as ‘flamboyantly’ as we remember till some time later.

47. Closettrekker - September 6, 2008

#46—“What Liberace Looks for in a Girl”.

Boy parts?

48. Trek Nerd Central - September 6, 2008

I’d call “Lost” “speculative fiction,” a wide umbrella that includes hard science fiction, science “fantasy” and softer, more philosophical or mind-bending corners of the genre.

Personally, I just like a good story that challenges me to see understand humanity or question reality in a new way. It could be set in the present or the future or long, long ago — or even some trippy combination of all three. It could involve technical wizardry or not; supernatural forces or not; aliens or not.

But if it makes me say “Huh?”, “Wow!,” “What if?” and “Holy Crap!” all at the same time, I’m there. That’s MY definition of the genre.

49. Gary Seven - September 6, 2008

#45- I did not include Star Wars as science fantasy because I did not want to get into one of those endless debates about Star Wars versus Star Trek. Nor will I get into any extended debate on this topic, and this will be my last post on this subject.
I think Star Trek is much more science fiction than science fantasy, and Trek’s attempts to be based in science are the basis for that. Roddenberry hired scientists from the Rand Corporation in creating Star Trek to be plausible, and Trek has hired NASA scientists for its movies, and continues to do so even on the upcoming Star Trek movie. Of course if you look you will find elements that approach fantasy in Trek, but the overall emphasis is on science fiction, not science fantasy.

Wikipedia has an explanation which is congruent with my statements:

Hyperspace, time machines and scientists are conventions of science fiction; flying carpets, magical amulets and wizards are tropes of fantasy. This is an accident of the historical development of the genre. In some cases they have overlapped: teleportation by matter-transmitter-beam is science fiction, teleportation by incantation is fantasy. A hand-held cloaking device that confers invisibility is science fiction; a hand-held Ring of Power that confers invisibility is fantasy. Mind-to-mind communication can be “psionics”, or it can be an ancient elvish art. What matters is not the effect itself (generally scientifically impossible, though not always believed to be so by the authors) but the wider universe it is intended to evoke. If it is one of space travel and proton-pistols, it gets classified as “science fiction”, and the appropriate terms (cloaking device, matter-transmitter) are used; if it is one of castles, sailing ships and swords, it gets classified as “fantasy”, and we instead speak of magic rings and travel by enchantment. In short, science fiction uses technology to explain impossible phenomena while fantasy employs magic. For the most part, SF will attempt to explain its effects using known physical laws or reasonable extensions of them. Science Fantasy will generally ignore physical laws (i.e., magic) or invent its own structure of laws which have no necessary connection to known laws.

50. closettrekker - September 6, 2008

#49—”Science Fantasy will generally ignore physical laws (i.e., magic) or invent its own structure of laws which have no necessary connection to known laws.”

Which is precisely what Star Trek did with the element of “transporter beams”…but anyway…

Wikipedia is a source of imprecise information that practically anyone may edit. That definition you presented is probably posted there by some 20 year old college student who enjoys science fiction. The author of that entry (whoever that is) is entitled to his interpretation, as are you, as am I, and as is JJ Abrams.

Ultimately, what science fiction means to me may be different from what it means to you. If you walk into a video store and visit the sci-fi section, you will likely find movies which you feel do not belong there, as I do. The questions for me are always, “how much suspension of disbelief does this require of me?”, and “is this based upon the progression of science we know?”, or “does it require that we throw out certain scientific laws?”.

I also believe that Star Trek has more elements of sci-fi than science fantasy. My point was simply that it certainly has elements of both.

” I did not include Star Wars as science fantasy because I did not want to get into one of those endless debates about Star Wars versus Star Trek. Nor will I get into any extended debate on this topic…”

Nor do I wish to debate ST vs SW. That was not the point. I simply presented you with an alternate perspective. LOTR is “fantasy”. SW is “science fantasy”.

Star Trek is closer to science fiction, but has major elements of science fantasy as well.

And I still don’t see how you determine that Abrams doesn’t see Trek as science fiction.

51. inm - September 6, 2008

Nimoy and the Love-in…

http://www.instantkatra.net/nimoy_clippings/nimoy_1967_08_aug_tvmovie.jpg
http://www.instantkatra.net/nimoy_clippings/nimoy_1967_08_aug_tvmovie2.jpg
..etc. till…
http://www.instantkatra.net/nimoy_clippings/nimoy_1967_08_aug_tvmovie5.jpg

Enjoy.

52. Izbot - September 6, 2008

51. inm -

You found it!! So great that these historical documents have been preserved for future historians!

53. Gary Seven - September 6, 2008

Hey Closet,

Upon rereading Abram’s statement, I think I may have misinterpreted it. Upon a second reading, he seems to me to be saying Star Trek is science fiction, and “Fringe” is almost just science. I think his emphasis on how “cool” and far away Trek’s ideas were gave me the feeling he was calling it fantasy. But now I don’t think he was doing that. But it did give me the feeling was deemphasizing the scientific basis behind Star Trek. I don’t know if he meant to do that, but that was the feeling I got.

Star Trek tries to be more scientifically accurate than most sci-fi shows. I think we may agree on that. By the way, the transporter does have some scientific basis:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/breakthrough-brings-star-trek-teleport-a-step-closer-451673.html
(Link has full article)

Data ‘Teleportation’ Uses Star Trek Technews.independent.co.uk — Physicists have teleported data a whopping 89 miles (from the Canary Island of La Palma to the island of Tenerife), which is 10 times further than the old record using “quantum entanglement” — the technology used in Star Trek teleporters. “Beam me up, Scotty!”

54. closettrekker - September 6, 2008

#53—I did see that article. I don’t think that even the teleportation of matter is that much of a stretch. It is doing the same with genetic material as complex as a living being which creates a problem. The extreme temperatures required to break down such matter into subatomic particles would be far too destructive for those particles to ever be reordered back into the same complex structure. I think you would be hard pressed to find a scientist who would disagree. We all know why it was incorporated into Star Trek.
And yes, we certainly can agree that Star Trek generally does a good job basing its technology upon the reasonable progression of known science. But “transporters” and “warp drive” are elements for which we just have to suspend our natural tendancy toward disbelief in favor of good storytelling devices.

Someone once suggested to me that Star Trek is “soft sci-fi”, while something like “2001″ or “Alien” is better classified as “hard sci-fi”. That seems reasonable to me.

55. inm - September 7, 2008

izbot – if interested for more, drop me a mail. a.q at gmx. net :)

56. Anthony Thompson - September 7, 2008

Where’s his hat???

57. Harry Ballz - September 7, 2008

#54

Closettrekker, if Star Trek is considered “soft sci-fi” then I guess in ST:TMP the Enterprise entering V’Ger wouldn’t be classified as penetration?

58. Closettrekker - September 7, 2008

#57—”softcore sci-fi”, Harry?

59. Harry Ballz - September 7, 2008

#58

Hardcore sci-fi, Closettrekker?

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