Star Trek Trailer By Christmas + more from Orci & Kurtzman | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek Trailer By Christmas + more from Orci & Kurtzman September 24, 2008

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

With Fringe and their new movie Eagle Eye, the Star Trek co-writing team are everywhere these days promoting their new projects. In a couple of new interviews Trek comes up with some news on the trailer, the themes of the film and even some talk about the TrekMovie community.

 

Trek trailer before Christmas
Last month TrekMovie reported that the first theatrical trailer for Star Trek would be out by the end of the year, and Orci confirmed this in the final part of his and Kurtzman’s interview with IESB saying he "thinks" the trailer should be out "before Christmas." But Kurtzman noted that "they are still debating the date." The pair dismissed rumors that the Trek trailer would be attached to their film Eagle Eye (opening this weekend) as well as the rumor that the Transformers 2 trailer would be held all the way until next May’s release of Star Trek.

Orci also talked about common themes between Eagle Eye and their other projects.

Orci: …a lot of our work has the theme of what is the balance between technology and humanity. Fringe in a way is about that, Transformers in a way is about that, Star Trek is about that, so that theme keeps bringing us back.

Trek is about family  + TrekMovie.com community funky?
The pair also talked to the Hollywood Reporter about their various prjects and of course Trek came up as well (and Bob also talked about his time chatting here on TrekMovie.com)

THR: With "Transformers," your emotional through-line was "a boy and his car," and with "M:I-3" it was "Marriage: Impossible." What was your mantra for "Trek"?

Orci: For "Trek," it’s how a family comes together. And then more specifically, the story of two brothers, Kirk and Spock. It’s the first time Alex and I got to really write about our friendship, in a way. So that was a big inspiration for us — the coming together of opposites in a partnership that takes you to places you can’t even believe. I mean, that’s us.

THR: Have you had any funky interactions with Trekkies since you got this job?

Orci: Only online. And not funky. You know: passionate, informed (laughs), emotional. Nothing that’s made us uncomfortable. But someone on one of the chat boards mentioned that it looks like I was gaining a little weight and I should stay off the doughnuts. So that’s the only thing that I’ve had to contend with. But you know, that’s the price.

Note: the ‘Orci gaining weight’ comment came from Janice a month ago in another Orci/Kurtzman article, thanks Janice.

Orci on the partnership
Orci and Kurtzman have an enduring Hollywood partnership going back to their beginnings as screenwriters. Bob even calls Alex ‘his first wife.’ In yet another interview with Extra, Orci talks about why the relationship works.

Extra: What do you think has made your writing partnership with Kurtzman so successful?

Orci: Well, we met in high school and we said, ‘Hey, let’s team up.’ We both realized we were really big fans of movies. When I met Alex, I found out that he had lived in México City where I was born and he remembered a lot of the places I remembered. We had a lot in common. We hit it off immediately. It was like we formed a band and stayed together. And I’ve anointed him as an honorary Hispanic.

Extra: Is there a leader in your band or do you switch off?

Orci: It depends on the day. Sometimes one of us has writer’s block and the other one gets him through it. As long as we both don’t have writer’s block on the same day, we’re usually okay.

More from the pair at IESB, THR and Extra.

 

Comments

1. Terpor - September 24, 2008

i hjope that trailer shows us the new Enterprise with she’s new crew :)

2. Jackson Roykirk - September 24, 2008

That sounds like a nice christmas present.

3. SPB - September 24, 2008

They really should release the trailer around Thanksgiving…

…seeing as how that’s almost 6 whole months before the May release date. Thanksgiving weekend is traditionally a HUGE box-office weekend for the public (especially families), even moreso than Christmas or New Year’s weekends. They really should consider attaching the TREK trailer to any of the following:

MADAGASCAR 2 (CGI cartoon)

QUANTUM OF SOLACE (new Bond)

BOLT (CGI Disney)

TWILIGHT (teen vampires)

THE ROAD (adult sci-fi)

FOUR CHRISTMAS (new Vince Vaughn X-mas comedy)

ANY of these would do nicely, if Paramount is hoping to get the general public interested in a new STAR TREK. They have to stop dragging their feet. Non-Trekkie Joe Schmoe needs to start going, “Oooooooh!”, like, YESTERDAY for this new TREK. QUANTUM OF SOLACE seems like the best, logical bet to attach the trailer onto. Here’s hoping.

4. tribble farmer - September 24, 2008

Hopefully the trailer has some nice shots of the ship. And of Karl Urban.

5. I am not Herbert - September 24, 2008

“For “Trek,” it’s how a family comes together. And then more specifically, the story of two brothers, Kirk and Spock.”

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me,
Shall be my brother”

Long Live Star Trek!

6. Prologic9 - September 24, 2008

Oh wow, a May release is going to be promoted during the holidays. Who could have guessed.

7. Commodore Lurker - September 24, 2008

Mr. Orci:
Harlen Ellison personally told me a gret way to avoid writer’s block: that is “never burn out the idea. Always leave something stuck in your mind for tomorrow.” He told me that in 1976 and it has never failed.

8. Jordan - September 24, 2008

Finally some news about the trailer! Can’t wait to see something! It’s been frickin eons…

9. Commodore Lurker - September 24, 2008

Re: #7, of course he forgot to tell me that you spell it ‘great’ not gret.

10. 750 Mang - September 24, 2008

“Spock, transmit now.”

11. Energize - September 24, 2008

Lol, the doughnut got mentioned

12. Michael Adams - September 24, 2008

We will not see the Enterprise in the trailer.

13. SirMartman - September 24, 2008

The first theatrical trailer for Star Trek due by Xmass or soon after,,,

This is the news Ive been waiting for,,

*smiles*

( Tomorrow would be a nice date too !!,,hint hint)

14. Brian - September 24, 2008

The complete lack of anything new is starting to grate. Give us a cool publicity still of the cast or perhaps Nimoy as Spock…but give us something!

15. McCoy - September 24, 2008

DUH.

I *think* the trailer will be out before Christmas too.

But I guarantee it will be released before 2020.

16. Trek Nerd Central - September 24, 2008

Exccceeeellllent news. But what I want to know is:

What meaneth “informed (laughs)”? Does he mean we’re all such nerds we can quote stardates in our sleep? That we’ll debate costume arcana until we’re blue (or command gold) in our collective Trekkie face? That we’ll get tied up in a debate over those stupid bweeping bridge noises? That this all makes us some how. . . FUNNY?

Hmmmm. . .he couldn’t mean that. . .

;)

(and I never did memorize the stardates!)

17. M33 - September 24, 2008

Alex & Bob, If You Are Listening… loved your work on Jack of All Trades! Great show!

18. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 24, 2008

I said the donut comment. It’s funny how you cats remember things.

OrcSter never took it too seriously. Good to see.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

19. CmdrR - September 24, 2008

Mr. Orci, any chance the trailer could run about 2 hours 30 minutes?

20. Izbot - September 24, 2008

14. Brian –
“The complete lack of anything new is starting to grate. Give us a cool publicity still of the cast or perhaps Nimoy as Spock…but give us something!”

No, what really grates is cookie-cutter responses like yours to every article here. “Nothing new” – check. “Gimme a cast photo” – check. “Gimme a trailer” – oh, I guess that’s being covered in this article.

You forgot the ubiquitous “just show us the damn ship already!” as well as “I pay your salary, you owe me!”

21. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 24, 2008

Will the Star Trek trailer be a double-wide? Thats what we call comfort AND modern convenience. King of the lot.

uh huh uh huh. trailer parks are kewl.

THE WOMEN!!

=h=

22. Orb of the Emissary - September 24, 2008

I can’t wait for the movie! With each new interview my anticipation for it grows and grows! :-)

23. Negotiator - September 24, 2008

WTF! Finally some real news. Orci is Mexican!
Who knew!

24. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

by: TrekMovie.com Staff (?)
Why a link to the Janice post?

Kirk STII:

A doctor (editor) should know the dangers of opening old wounds.

25. Tox Uthat - September 24, 2008

#17

Jack of All Trades is one of my all-time favorites.

26. The Enterprise - September 24, 2008

Will there be any sneak previews this year?

27. Brian - September 24, 2008

#20-

Actually that was the first time I ever said anything like that, but thanks for your unsolicited observation.

I just think it’s odd that we haven’t seen anything else for a film that’s been in the can for months and is a major tentpole release for the studio.

28. Closettrekker - September 24, 2008

Around Christmas, just as I have speculated all along…It never made since to me (from a mainstream marketing perspective) for them to do it any sooner…at least once the release date was switched to May. I have said all along that I believe there will be an aggressive marketing campaign, beginning with a full trailer in December. Sounds like they (TPTB) agree.

29. Daniel Broadway - September 24, 2008

Yay. I love trailers.

30. Thehaggard - September 24, 2008

Wait…

There’s a new Trek movie coming out? back to Kirk and Spock? Aren’t the actors getting a bit old for that?

I mean… yeah… I remember a RUMOR that some big new up and coming dude in Hollywood was thinking about working on a re-boot of Trek…

But it has been so LONG since that rumor was bandied about, with no EVIDENCE lately of such… well… I thought it was all dead.

But seriously folks….

I am not sure I want to see the BIG E in the trailer… leave that for the big Trekie E-gasim in May when I see it for REAL.

I remember going to ST:TMP as a high-schooler and nearly crying when the inspection pod gave the Big E that slow reveal through the dry dock structures. THAT was the pay off to all the fans that waited and campaigned and supported. All we got in the Trailers before that was Klingon ships and faces with MINOR portions of the Big E details up close.

I say, foreplay makes the night last longer. I don’t want no Quick E.

31. Closettrekker - September 24, 2008

#27—Why is it odd, when the release date is still 8 mos. away?

Abrams is only going to give away so much to begin with, so would it not make sense to withhold it and hit the market hard with a shorter, more aggressive campaign…like one which doesn’t begin until December? As someone who deals in marketing each and every week, I believe it does, and I’ll tell you why.

It’s pure “attention-span psychology”. The average moviegoer (a more than substantial portion of the target audience) will only maintain interest in something like this for a brief amount of time. No matter how initially impressive it is, interest will wane. The goal is for the marketing campaign to “peak” at the right time, and that’s about 8 months away.

32. The Enterprise - September 24, 2008

Star Trek – the Orgasm. Coming to your theater next summer.

33. Mark - September 24, 2008

The Road was a great book…

34. DATA_KILLED_SPOT! - September 24, 2008

HERE IT IS FOLKS: THE NEW ENTERPRISE:

http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg178/judexavier/STXINCC-17013View.jpg

35. The Enterprise - September 24, 2008

Why does the Enterprise have rudders?

36. Capt. Fred - September 24, 2008

#34
IT’S A FAAAAAAAAYYYKAH

37. OM - September 24, 2008

…Yeah, you can tell from the so-called “teaser” trailer that the nacelle struts are slanted as in TMP.

Still, I wouldn’t mind finding this mesh somewhere….

38. DJT - September 24, 2008

Honorary hispanic – haha, funny.

That weight comment was so wrong.

Orci and Kurtzman rock.

39. The Enterprise - September 24, 2008

Enteprise looks like the Goodyear Blimp

40. Daniel Broadway - September 24, 2008

#37, How can you tell that the struts are slanted in the teaser? It never shows the secondary hull or nacelle pylons.

Man, that was nerdy, someone help me.

41. Trek Nerd Central - September 24, 2008

#33. Yes it was! I hope the movie doesn’t completely screw it up.

Everyone on this board who hasn’t read it: Read it now.

42. falcon thinks bulbous is a funny word - September 24, 2008

#34: That’s an awful lot of extrapolation from a few shots from a teaser trailer. I personally don’t think it’ll look like that. The nacelles are too bulbous.

My personal take: It’ll look almost (I’d say at least 80%) like the TV Enterprise.

43. Balok - September 24, 2008

If they show the outside of the E, I hope it’s at a far enough distance away from being able to see if they changed anything. I fear that they will make the new E look like it had a few doughnuts.

44. AJ - September 24, 2008

Psyched. Hope it leaks soon! Aggggh!

45. Balok - September 24, 2008

#42, nothing less than 100% on the outside, thank you!

46. Spectre_7 - September 24, 2008

Yes we’re definately a funky bunch. Also, the Enterprise runs on funk, so make sure to cause a funk-core breach!

It would be cool if at one point in the movie, they refered to the ship as the big “E”.

She’ll no doubt look almost just like the TOS model, except as if the TOS production crew had a bunch more money to work with.

47. danpaine - September 24, 2008

#33 – just finished reading The Road last week; I agree. Immersive book. Excellent,

48. lodownX - September 24, 2008

#2… what would have been a nice Christmas present … The Original release date. only 8 months to go!

49. SPB - September 24, 2008

#34 –

Fake or not, those are INCREDIBLY convincing. Looks very close to the Enterprise in the teaser trailer. Color me intrigued!

50. The Underpants Monster - September 24, 2008

I hope it’s out at Thanksgiving. I always go to the movies on Thanksgiving.

51. Thomas Jensen - September 24, 2008

It’s cool reading about how these two formed the writing friendship/partership. It all makes perfect sense. And also, it makes sense that they are writing about their relationship as well.

Very sneaky putting some relational reality into your movie, guys…

52. THX-1138 The Fandom Menace - September 24, 2008

This is important:

If I recall, the comment about Orci’s weight refered to Doritos not doughnuts.

THIS IS A DISASTER!

53. Xai - September 24, 2008

#31 Closet is essentially correct. I am “in” advertising and yes attention spans are short. You can’t start too early, otherwise the public loses attention and you have to beg, borrow and steal to get it back..if at all.

A december release makes a great deal of sense. I’d add an “expanded” teaser or ad push during the Super Bowl as well as some non-traditional ad partnering with …say… Apple. I’d buy up ad space on Yahoo’s main page with dynamic ads. Imagine seeing the Yahoo or Google masthead in a black background with the iconic “warp-effect” starscape whizzing past. The ads will need to be a blend of the old icons with a new look or twist. I think you’ll be seeing a lot of the fleet chevron in coming months. As we get close to the opening date, I would not be surprised to see several newspapers “go black” with their mastheads surrounded by streaking stars.
The auto industry is sagging, but Lincoln is already featuring “starship” TV ads. A lot of technology firms would love to hitch their star to this. Think of the way Denny Crane holds a cell-phone. Watch for a possible Verison spot.

Can you hear me now, Captain?

54. SPOCKBOY - September 24, 2008

#34
That was obviously a great deal of work.
WELL DONE!

:-)

55. SPOCKBOY - September 24, 2008

But I HOPE that isn’t the new Enterprise ;)

56. Energize - September 24, 2008

Bob, what was more fun to work on Star Trek or Transformers?

57. beemeup - September 24, 2008

transformers was darn stupid! I hope star trek is VERY different from that style.. I hated it!

58. JROD - September 24, 2008

#57, It’s not their fault Transformers was so dumb it’s a Michael Bay flick what else do you expect?

59. cellojammer - September 24, 2008

#34

Whoever did that…nice extrapolation from the trailer! But I hope it’s just speculation. I can live with everything except those nacelles. Yuck. Still, it’s nice work.

60. SPOCKBOY - September 24, 2008

#57
I have to agree.
The first scene where the “large alien transforming robot from another planet” decides that his first mission is to try and help some teenage guy get laid… was the moment where all credibility went out the window for me.

I have a feeling however that Star Trek will be much better.
There is a GREAT deal of fantastic material out there to draw from.
Transformers? not so much.

peace :-)

61. barrydancer - September 24, 2008

Two brothers? No love for Leonard H. McCoy?

62. Jay - September 24, 2008

Really before Christmas?!? I was expecting it in a couple days with Eagle Eye. Please, for the love of god, don’t let it be with Day the Earth Stood Still. It think it should be with Quantum of Solace, as the first tv ad for that film and the first trailer for the last Bond film both debuted with Abrams projects (one with Fringe, the other with M:i:III is a number of markets), so that could and should be done as a thank you.

63. Daniel Broadway - September 24, 2008

#43 “I fear that they will make the new E look like it had a few doughnuts.”

Why do you think the Enterprise is going to look like Bob Orci? I kid, Bob, I did.

64. boborci - September 24, 2008

52

True – but I couldn’t help a rewrite…

65. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

60. SPOCKBOY – September 24, 2008

“The first scene where the “large alien transforming robot from another planet” decides that his first mission is to try and help some teenage guy get laid… was the moment where all credibility went out the window for me.”

What? ARE YOU BLIND! You did’nt see that thang?
Even I was rooting for Shilo to bag that one.
Far more than I ever expeced from Transformers.

But then I expected moe from Dark Knight.

I went to see Helboy2 right after Dark Knight. Hellboy2 was much, much more entertaining. Except for the microphone that kept getting in the shot. How did that hapen? Did anyone else see that? Must have been in 12 shots!?!.

66. The REAL Redjac - September 24, 2008

#34 — I don’t know…I am not convinced it is or is not the design. I still have serious reservations about those engines though. If the actual ship in the film looks like that…I just don’t know.

Too clunky.

67. SPB - September 24, 2008

So, Mr. Orci…

…is #34 hot or cold? Or can you comment? :)

68. Anthony Pascale - September 24, 2008

Vreenak can confirm that 34 is fan made and not official artwork from the movie.

And I do not like people posting things here and claiming they are ‘from the movie’

69. P. Technobabble - September 24, 2008

Gee, with so many people yelling and screaming and jumping up and down for a new picture, a trailer, a shot of the Enterprise… all I can say is, “Hey, what do you guys plan on doing for the sequel??? C’mon, I wanna hear something, a brief synopsis, a theme, central character, something!!!!”

…sorry, got carried away…

70. Splurch - September 24, 2008

A new trailer is welcome news, however I wish that the interviewer would have asked if we might see some of the cast or the ship in the new trailer. Given J.J.’s feelings on spoilers, etc. I don’t believe that it will show too much this far before the release date.

It would be great if Anthony could interview J.J., Orci, and Kurtzman. and allow us fans to submit questions to be included.

71. Xai - September 24, 2008

The #34 Ship shows up as “conjectured” at Ex Astris Scientia and the attribute it to a fan artist who posted it to TrekBBS

72. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

68. Anthony Pascale –

And I do not like people posting things here and claiming they are ‘from the movie’

I hear that! ; )

Respectfully

73. Kirk's Girdle - September 24, 2008

That was, in fact, an extrapolation from the trailer. I remember when it was first posted. It sure does resemble the Koerner Enterprise, which I believe is the property of Paramount Pictures.

74. Jeffries Tuber - September 24, 2008

Glad to hear this. The fan design is a little cartoony.

The word that I remember from previous posts on uniforms, the bridge and so forth is “functional.” So I imagine any revisions will have to do with practical issues. The TOS deflector dish doesn’t make sense, defense-wise, and the TMP revision was logical. Triangles are more stable than rectangles, for example, so the TMP pylons and primary hull ‘neck’ revisions were logical.

Placing the bridge at the center of a bullseye in the most exposed surface of the ship never really made sense, but it’s a movie!

HOLY SHIT! I’m watching Palin with Katie Couric–she has very distinct Vulcan ears. She’s a Hockey Vulcan!

75. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

72. Kirk’s Girdle – September 24, 2008

“which I believe is the property of Paramount Pictures.”

Definately a Koerner.

Property of P. P. ?

I don’t think so.

76. The REAL Redjac - September 24, 2008

Oh thank the supreme being for VREENAK!!!!

But, both this design and the “Koenerprise” are too chunky…that’s just my opinion.

I happen to like streamlined and graceful.

You just can’t beat the original Enterprise…that design still looks great, I don’t care what anybody says.

Redjac

77. The Underpants Monster - September 24, 2008

You down with P.P.P.?

78. Xai - September 24, 2008

It was attributed to judexavier on ExAstris Scientia.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/schematics/constitution-reimagined.jpg

79. The REAL Redjac - September 24, 2008

Broken link, Xai…

80. Izbot - September 24, 2008

74. Jeffries Tuber – September 24, 2008
“I’m watching Palin with Katie Couric–she has very distinct Vulcan ears. She’s a Hockey Vulcan!”

More like a Romulan — but I digress! No politics here, I know, I know!

57. beemeup –
“transformers was darn stupid! I hope star trek is VERY different from that style.. I hated it!”

Transformers was for a different audience. It was based on a line of toys and a cartoon. And it was directed by Michael Bay. I don’t think we have anything to fear. The same team is doing Fringe and it bears no resemblance at all to Transformers. These guys are versatile.

81. Izbot - September 24, 2008

79. The REAL Redjac –
“Broken link, Xai…”

Wasn’t that the title of a DS9 episode?

82. Plum - September 24, 2008

Orci; And I’ve anointed him as an honorary Hispanic.

.. if it involves techila, I’m in.

83. krikzil - September 24, 2008

What does Paramount have coming out before the end of the year? The only one I can think of is that Brad Pitt film “Curious Case of Benjamin Button”.

84. Biodredd - September 24, 2008

#27 – “I just think it’s odd that we haven’t seen anything else for a film that’s been in the can for months and is a major tentpole release for the studio.”

Where did you get the impression the film was in the can? Its still roughly two weeks before they lock the print down in its final edit and they are waiting for SFX shots and the scoring. Traditionally, a film is ONLY In the can when all the work is complete. This is far from being in the can at this point.

For the rest…. Paramount only has any kind of say on which film a trailer is attached to is if it is their film OR they have spent a small forture to arrange the attachment of the trailer on another film. If Paramount does the “typical” thing, the trailer will just be sent out to theaters and the theaters will decide which films it will go on the front of.

Most film trailers are NOT attached to the film when it arrives at the theater. Its a rarity most of the time unless the film coming out and the film being advertsied have a big following. 96% of the time, most trailer placement is decided by the movie theater not the studio.

And just so I can have my moment… TOLDJA! When the release date was pushed back I was the first to tell you all the trailer would not be out until the holidays (Chirstmas was specifically mentioned). Nine years of working in promotions allowed me to accurately predict this.

Yes, I am quit pleased with myself. :)

85. krikzil - September 24, 2008

While theaters do get to pick which trailers to show, studios DO attach specific trailers to specific movies and most theaters run them that way because they are a pain to remove from the print. I’ve gone to see a movie I had NO interest in simply because I knew a trailer was attached to it.

86. Capt Mike from the Terran Empire - September 24, 2008

HHey Orci. Don’t worry about the Donuts. it’s a Homer Simpson Thing. He must be your Hero. I suspect that the Trailer Will be released on the movie The day the earth Stood still. That would be the perfect movie to release it to.

87. Capt Mike from the Terran Empire - September 24, 2008

Hey Orci and Kurtzman. You should do a Trek Movie on The Terran empire. Now that would be Kool.

88. Buckaroohawk - September 24, 2008

The image posted by Data Killed Spot (#34) is a speculative fan design based on the glipses of the Enterprise we saw in the film teaser from this summer. It was designed by judexavier and posted first on the website http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org.

On the website, it is explained that judexavier tailored the design on the parts of the ship we can clealry see in the teaser, mainly the top and front of the saucer, and the warp engines. The rest of the design is sheer conjecture, as are the markings on the ship.

I’ve been wondering how close judexavier’s design might be to the actual ship we’ll see in the movie. Overall I like it, but those warp engines (especially the nacelles) seem a bit oversized. They looked big in the teaser as well, but they could be offset by a larger secondary hull. Hopefully, we’ll get a better look in the upcoming trailer (pretty please!).

89. Captain Robert April - September 24, 2008

Time for the obligatory mini-rant.

SHOW US THE DAMN SHIP ALREADY!!

90. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

HERE! HERE!

91. The Enterprise - September 24, 2008

Transformers was good. Ever see the cartoon? It’s not that good.

92. Bob Tompkins - September 24, 2008

What would you do for an early screening of Star Trek’s answer print? Keep it clean, family site.

93. Joel - September 24, 2008

Hope they put the trailer with Bond rather than something like the Day the Earth Stood Still. Star Trek could use a large audience seeing the trailer that opening weekend.

94. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

Bring back TOS E!

I really think we are going to see that ship, somewhere in the new flick.

95. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

92. Bob Tompkins

I would spend a year in seclusion. With my only outside world contact being through TrekMovie.com.

96. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 24, 2008

88. Buckaroohawk

Are we going to see an early ST-0 E from you soon?

97. Rastaman - September 24, 2008

“thinks the trailer should be out be Christmas”

whatever … I’m tired of waiting. Frankly, I’m starting to lose interest in this project …

NOT!!!

98. Balok - September 25, 2008

hmmmm #34, looks like where they are going based on trailer… spoiling a thing of beauty… Kind of reminds me of the hack job they did to the Excelsior with the Ent-B. Pure crap…

99. cellojammer - September 25, 2008

98.

Different strokes, I guess. I thought the Ent-B was an improvement on the Excelsior (which never did much for me).

Just my 2 cents. Probably not even worth that.

100. rehabilitated hitch1969© - September 25, 2008

OrcSter.

Usually I am no Matt Parkman. But listen man, when I get with a chick, semi; even full time with helping her tend to the child o mine loins….

Dont even stress over UN donut. I find my supermodel self @ 300 pounds. LIKE SHATNER
\
of course the chicks still love me.

=h=

101. Anthony Thompson - September 25, 2008

He mentioned the “weight post”, but he didn’t mention the “man-love” post here recently. Now THAT one was scary! : )

102. Cheve - September 25, 2008

I was just thinking…

Bob, Having been born in Mexico, you probably speak fluent Spanish…

Have you ever heard of the wonderfull Spanish conventions?

How can the modest and newly born Spanish fanclub contact you (just in case)?

junta@clubstartrek.es

103. King Anthony - September 25, 2008

62-

Quantum of Solace.
The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Hits in waiting.

Debut with QOS? You’re going to wish STXI had debuted with Daniel Craig in the lead before it’s all over, and at Christmas.

Just wait…

104. commander K, USS Sovereign - September 25, 2008

“thinks”, “debating the date”.

Don’t be to optimistic for December just yet!

105. star trackie - September 25, 2008

If they want more bang for the buck, they would be well served to get it out in front of the new Bond film this November.

But frankly, I really don’t know enought about theaters to know how it is determined what trailer plays before each feature. I’ve seen the same movie two days in a row and have seen different trailers each time.

But IF the studio has some control over what trailers the theater owners attach to the films, they really should get Trek attached to Bond to insure maximum exposure. Bond is going to be huge and it would be a crying shame for Trek to not take advantage of that, if possible.

106. Biodredd - September 25, 2008

#85 – “While theaters do get to pick which trailers to show, studios DO attach specific trailers to specific movies and most theaters run them that way because they are a pain to remove from the print. I’ve gone to see a movie I had NO interest in simply because I knew a trailer was attached to it.”

They are hardly a pain to remove as they are at the head of the first reel. A cut with a splicer and the trailer is removed. The job takes less then 30 seconds to cut and remove the attached trailer. In a digital cinema, the process is even simpler.

The theater is only required to play the “attached” trailer due to an clause in their agreement… in most cases the trailer is only required to remain on the front of the film for two to three weeks. Then the theater can remove it at their discretion.

And as a number of film goers can attest, the studios do NOT always include the “attached” trailers on the front of ALL prints sent out by the studios. Sometimes the trailers are only attached in the seven major markets… sometimes only the first 2000 prints…. sometimes its random… sometimes its on all of them.

107. Lyle - September 25, 2008

Mmmmm, Donuts…

108. krikzil - September 25, 2008

Biodredd — well, all I can say is that 1) my stepfather’s last job in the movie industry was working on release prints (previously he was a negative cutter) and 2) a friend who owns a theatre, and both state trailers are attached to certain films. Whether a theatre removes it after the contractual 2-3 weeks is irrelevant.

109. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#103—”You’re going to wish STXI had debuted with Daniel Craig in the lead before it’s all over, and at Christmas.

Just wait…”

Dismissing the possibility that you are clairvoyant, what is the basis for that prediction? Is there some logic behind that assertion, or is it “just a hunch”?

Do you have some reason as to why Pine would be so awful?

110. AJ - September 25, 2008

Trailers attached to films have become irrelevant. Give me Quicktime HD, and I’m a happy camper.

111. AdamTrek - September 25, 2008

#110

Yeah the internet does make a difference in movie advertisements, but the traditional trailer still sees mass attention at the beginning of a film.

It’s still worth the money to attach a trailer to every event film between now and then, not to mention every Paramount film till and through the run of Star Trek. Money well spent.

112. Biodredd - September 25, 2008

#108 – “well, all I can say is that 1) my stepfather’s last job in the movie industry was working on release prints (previously he was a negative cutter) and 2) a friend who owns a theatre, and both state trailers are attached to certain films. Whether a theatre removes it after the contractual 2-3 weeks is irrelevant.”

Let me help you with this… what is irrelevent is this… the statement was made that its difficult to remove these trailers from the front of a film. The truth is that its not. Its a simple cut and splice to remove it… a 30 second procedure.

I’ve worked in the theaters for over ten years doing every job in the building. Negeative cutters make the final cut long before the film reaches the theater in any form. Some attached trailers are under no obligation to be run at all and can be removed easily.

We frequently removed them if there was no promise to run them in order to promote more deserving films that we thought would do better boxoffice. Not all films coming out in the next 8 months will have trailers attached to certain films or any films at all. You should ask your friend who owns the theater if this is a true statement. If he does own a theater, his answer will confirm what I’ve just told you.

Most trailers are distributed seperately from any film at all. In the case of a trailer on film, they arrive in a box with enough trailers to cover 75% of the screens in the location. A 12 screen theater would get 9 trailers.

In the case of digital cinemas, they are distributed on digital media and can be plugged into as many digital projectors as the system supports.

Again, not difficult at all to remove or change.

That was the point of the original post.

113. Biodredd - September 25, 2008

#111 = “It’s still worth the money to attach a trailer to every event film between now and then, not to mention every Paramount film till and through the run of Star Trek. Money well spent.”

No, its not money well spent. Its money wasted.

Star Trek is part of the culture. There are not too many people today who have not heard of Star Trek. Its has brand recognition and major media exposure even when nothing exciting is happening in film or television. Producing tens of thousands of trailers to attach to the front of each and every film released between now and May is insane and would crush the marketing budget for the film.

People going to see a love story are not going to be all geeked up about the Star Trek trailer on the front of that film. People going to see Ben Stiller’s latest farce are not going to get all thrilled over a Trek trailer. The trailers have to be targeted to their audience.

Quantum of Solstice is a great choice. Many people who go into a Bond film are going to be thrilled to check out a new Trek film when it opens. In fact, some Bond fans who have never seen Trek, may be encouraged to go see it because of this strategy. The Mysterious Case of Benjamin Button is also a good choice because its a sci-fi/fantasy tale which has a good cross over customer base.

Adding the trailer to Herbie Goes to the North Pole would not be a good choice. The cross over market from a film like this (if it even existed) would be very low and not worth the investment of the additional trailers. Adding a trailer to a film like Disaster Movie would also not be a great idea as the film has the word DOG written all over it weeks before it premiered.

Contrary to public opinion, the placing of trailers on select films is a real crap-shoot. Its going to get to a point where folks here are going to have to trust that the marketing people at Paramount (who have been doing this job for years) have a real clue and and not screwing over the beloved Trek franchise.

The strategy differs to some small extent on each individual film, but over all, its all the same and it generally works without fail.

Finally, no matter how well promoted a film is… a bomb is a bomb and it will be reflected in the first weekends boxoffice take. Word spreads quickly and ticket sales drop if a film stinks. The best promotion is word of mouth. Deliver a good film and the audience will be there to see it whether a trailer ever appeared on Galaxy Quest IV or not.

114. krikzil - September 25, 2008

Biodredd — “Negeative cutters make the final cut long before the film reaches the theater in any form. ”

Uh, I clearly said that was his previous job and that his final one was working on release prints — 2 entirely different things.

MY point was that trailers are attached to prints. I didn’t say ALL of them. And my threatre owning friend said to me that he does consider removing them a pain. Apparently the two of you disagree.

But as AJ pointed out, thank goodness for the Internet — it makes it less relevant these days.

115. krikzil - September 25, 2008

“Finally, no matter how well promoted a film is… a bomb is a bomb and it will be reflected in the first weekends boxoffice take. ”

So true. But sadly, some films that actually are good but don’t pull the numbers that first weekend can be considered bombs too and aren’t given a chance. It’s one of the things that worry me about the new Trek film — they spent so much that it has to make an enormous sum to be considered successful. I’m old enough to remember the days when movies played for a year in theaters.

116. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

Was this film shot on digital or…? boborci?

Any use of IMAX for the practical Enterprise shots?

117. sean - September 25, 2008

#65

Are you serious? I was SO disappointed with Hellboy 2. It seemed to suffer from a serious lack of focus. And the laughs were so forced, especially in comparison to the first. I thought the TDK was leaps and bounds beyond that.

118. Biodredd - September 25, 2008

#114 – “MY point was that trailers are attached to prints. I didn’t say ALL of them. And my threatre owning friend said to me that he does consider removing them a pain. Apparently the two of you disagree.”

I can see where someone who owns their own theater (I am assuming only a few screens compared to a megaplex) could consider it to be a troublesome task if they are the manager, projectionist and cashier. If I had to cover a few positions like that and then had bank runs, inventory and stock re-orders to worry about, I’d probably consider it to be a pain as well.

#115 – “So true. But sadly, some films that actually are good but don’t pull the numbers that first weekend can be considered bombs too and aren’t given a chance. It’s one of the things that worry me about the new Trek film — they spent so much that it has to make an enormous sum to be considered successful. I’m old enough to remember the days when movies played for a year in theaters.”

I have to agree with you as far as good films that don’t pull the numbers go. Part of that may have been poor distribution (not enough prints to open nation wide) like “The Kite Runner” which was an excellent film that deserved a much bigger audience.

I may be remembering this incorrectly… but there was a formula that was mostly true in terms of what a film had to earn back to be considered profitable. Its was the marketing budget + the films budget = point where film makes a profit. Originally this was considered to be the magic formula. In a lot of cases the marketing budget was as big as the films production budget, so a film had to make what it cost to produce times two in order to be considered a hit and show a profit.

With the Trek budget hovering between $125 and $150 million dollars, I just can’t even begin to see Paramount spending that kind of cash on advertising. I can easily see how they could spend $50 to $75 mil in promoting the film worldwide, but more then that would be amazingly wasteful.

So in my humble estimation, the film will have to make roughly $225 million dollars to be considered a success at the boxoffice. Based on how well The Dark Knight did (and a film’s boxoffice like this one is a rarity), it will probably take Trek between ten and 14 days to reach this milestone, provided the story draws the eyeballs into the theaters.

119. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 25, 2008

117. sean

Sorry, It was the consensus of me and two of my (40 something) friends.
All veteran sci-fi movie goers. Hellboys 2 was more “entertaining”
than Dark Knight.

I am still waiting for the perfect Sci-Fi movie. Spider-Man 2 came closest in my opinion.

.

120. M33 - September 25, 2008

Perfect Sci-Fi? 2001: A Space Odyssey! Metropolis (1927)! They were fantastic! The monolith from 2001 was the coolest plot device ever. And Metropolis is the mother of all science-fiction films.

121. Will H. - September 25, 2008

So looks like they’ll have the entire movie done before christmass but theyre not even sure if they can get us a trailer for a complete movie by then? That’s big of them.

122. Boborci - September 25, 2008

121. I’m just not arguing with Paramount’s marketing schedule, nor have I bothered to memorize it.

123. DJ Koloth - September 25, 2008

121, I’m sure that they’re just covering the bases by NOT promising anything. If a trailer is promised and not delivered then it’s going to be a big moan and groan fest…at least on the major Trek sites.

My guess is that there WILL be a Trek trailer around the end of the year. I bet you’ll see it at trekmovie.com too.

124. M33 - September 25, 2008

Boborci, loved your and Alex’s work on Jack of all Trades. I hope you guys enjoyed making it as much as my wife and I enjoyed watching it.

125. M33 - September 25, 2008

You know, even if the Original Series is rebooted, it still doesn’t prevent the Doomsday Machine from entering the galaxy, or the Kelvans from coming, or the Immunity Syndrome space amoeba from appearing, or Jack the Ripper from continuing his killing spree, and of course Khan & Company is still floating around in the Botany Bay. Some points to contend with, or maybe even sequel-worthy or new television series re-creation ideas?

126. M33 - September 25, 2008

Hey, even doesn’t nix V’Ger or the ST4 Probe!

127. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

M33, I’ve been giving this some thought, too.

What are the most indispensable events of TOS in terms of continuity [not canon]?

The Organian Peace Treaty is the only thing I can think of, really. But they would probably not contend with that until after a dedicated Klingon movie.

A “Space Seed” remake is possible, but I can’t imagine that KO & JJ would set themselves up for such a backlash.

128. Viking - September 25, 2008

Yo, Hitch, you and Bob both need to ‘just say no’ to that second plate o’ hot wings. LOL

129. M33 - September 25, 2008

127 – I agree. Another “Wrath of Khan” would be boring. Brannon Braga ran that concept to the ground. Looking at the Chronology, most events of TOS are disposable, or entirely ignorable given no influence from Kirk & Crew. Given the implications of how much the original series universe will be shaken up by the interference from Nero, most things are mutable, whereas the points I mentioned before are fixed and have nothing to do with the internal events occurring in the galaxy. So, it will be interesting to see if any of this was discussed or well-thought-out by the creative team of the new movie. If it ever gets to the point of getting us back to the new rebooted 24th century, the Borg will still be on their way as established in season two of Enterprise.

130. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

M33,

Isn’t there a historical moment in JOURNEY TO BABEL? I recall, but I could be wrong, that this marks the final peace accords between Andorians and Tellarites. Isn’t there also a Spock-Sarek angle to this story–that they hadn’t spoken in a very long time?

So that’s two and a half peace treaties that are ‘lines in the temporal sand.’ And future movies would have to take place before or after.

131. M33 - September 25, 2008

Even the Organian Peace Treaty won’t be established, since the situations of how and why that treaty was enforced will be altered as well by the interference of Nero. That’s what’s so great about this new movie is that it will basically stay the same, but so many things can be altered to make way for an entire new universe to unfold. It’s as drastic as TNG’s Yesterday’s Enterprise, which both Alex and Bob have clearly stated that they watched many times during the writing of this movie. The pieces are all there to see what they have created and its really rather genius!

132. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

M33, And the death of Kirk’s brother in “Operation: Annihilate.”

133. M33 - September 25, 2008

Journey to Babel was about Coridan’s entering into the Federation. Tellarites and Andorians were of the first to join the Federation in post-Enterprise years. Yes, Spock and Sarek did not speak for many years, but again, this all can be altered by Nero. Nero is this rogue element that total alters nearly everything. Remember, it has been made clear that these events take place BEFORE the original series. We really have no idea at when Nero enters, but depends on when that is, it can change much that we all have known as “historical” Star Trek events.

134. M33 - September 25, 2008

Yep. George Kirk can live on as well. (but did he live on in ST5? then again, I choose to view ST5 as one big dream of Kirk’s while he slept. that movie just defies reason. going to the center of the galaxy in only a few hours? please…)

135. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

M33, Right, none of these things are established at the beginning of the five year mission–peace treaties, Sarek and Spock reuniting, Sam Kirk’s death by pancake, etc. But they do occur in some form.

So the question I’m asking is, when do future movies take place within the five year mission? Practically speaking, the Organian Peace Treaty is the only thing that’s relevant. Either the Klingon sequel takes place before or after–within the TOS three year cycle, or after.

136. M33 - September 25, 2008

Pancake! LOL! Even the Remastering couldn’t fix that…

A very good question… Bryan Burk stated that as soon as they came up with the first movie, they immediately knew what the sequel was. (I think) Mrs. Nichols accidentally let slip that the movie ends with the beginning of the five-year mission. So, presumably, this is where the next movie occurs. As to what.. hell, I’d love to see another Doomsday Machine! Then again, that is my nostalgia that is speaking. I’m sure whatever they’ve come up with must rock (wow, that sounds juvenile).

137. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

M33,

If Nero just goes back to Kirk’s childhood and kills him, and Spock is meditating in the 24th Century, senses a disturbance, and goes back to save young Kirk, then Nero could jump again to disturb another event in Kirk’s life. Call it the QUANTUM LEAP model.

Or Spock senses the disturbance and takes a tour through Kirk’s and his own life to figure out what happened… until he gradually makes it to San Francisco and runs in to his younger self. See, if Nero’s brilliant, he does something to the timeline that’s very subtle and not easily ‘fixed’ like killing young Kirk. This creates a mystery for elder Spock and results in what I call the IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE model.

Someone somewhere mentioned seeing ‘battleship’ dressing for the Enterprise, introducing the idea that the Federation was militarized and that the long path to peace in the 23/24th centuries instead became a long war. If this totally unconfirmed idea is true, then it supports the WONDERFUL LIFE model… and yes, the Organians would never have stopped to study us.

Then again, who knows? But it’s fun to speculate.

138. M33 - September 25, 2008

A good theory! I have been wondering how they could reconcile Nero going back and affecting things, and then Spock in an altered timeline building a timeship to go back (maybe its engine is the same one Janeway used, or not).

The other thing I point out is that if Janeway hadn’t gone back in time to bring Voyager home, Nero would have never been able to alter the timeline. the 25th century existed just fine before Janeway went back. But because she became Admiral, and sent Picard and Crew to Romulus (Nemesis), she subsequently altered the chain of events that allowed Nero to build his time ship and alter the past. Oh, Janeway… you bane of banes. A fictional-Star-Trek-Universe explanation to it all. No economics involved. : )

139. Jeffries Tuber - September 25, 2008

Why does everything always have to be Jane’s way? Jeeeez. Gosh.

I missed the final episodes of VOYAGER, so I don’t really understand. But I think it’s well established that time travel is possible by many means in the ST universe, so I don’t see why Jane’s way has to be Nero’s way.

140. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 25, 2008

137. Jeffries Tuber – September 25, 2008
M33,

“If Nero just goes back to Kirk’s childhood and kills him, and Spock is meditating in the 24th Century, senses a disturbance, and goes back to save young Kirk,”

Is everyone still stuck on my plot synopsis from months ago? HA HA!

Bob already said we would be pleassantly surprised by Spock appearing throughout the new movie. As if he is the REAL main character. Not bookends to the story.

Correct Bob?

141. Phoenix - September 25, 2008

given the coming depression, or fears thereof, i dont think thanksgiving weekends gonna be as big as y’all think…

142. M33 - September 25, 2008

Oh, humbug! This recession stuff is just tiresome!

143. Anthony Pascale - September 25, 2008

RE: Jack of all Trades
That show is fantastically fun

144. M33 - September 25, 2008

140. Never read your synopsis. An interesting idea, but I still reserve judgment on how it will all play out.

145. M33 - September 25, 2008

143. I KNOW!!!

146. M33 - September 25, 2008

It was like Cheech & Chong’s The Corsican Brothers, except on TV and no weed. Bruce Campbell is great. Brisco Country was great too!

147. Kirk's Girdle - September 25, 2008

#75

Koerner’s Enterprise was featured in last year’s “Ships of the Line” catalogue, which is why I figured it might be the property of Paramount Pictures (i.e they paid him to use it). It was only a guess, however, since I don’t know how Paramount actually works a deal like that.

148. Viking - September 25, 2008

M33 – I got your back on that Doomsday Machine Part Deux. I always had the idea that there actually WAS more than one roaming around off the rim off the galaxy. Or even better, an ‘adversary’ DM – built by the opposite side to complete the M.A.D. equation, until something tipped the balance (e.g., one went rogue or malfunctioned, or some lunatic on one side decided to ‘push the button’). Maybe after both went beserk and destroyed every planet in the other’s region of space, they had no one left to throw down with except each other, and proceeded to engage in an intergalactic dogfight all the way to our door, where both saw us as fresh meat.

149. Kirk's Girdle - September 25, 2008

Catalogue?
Make that “calendar”.

150. Kirk's Girdle - September 25, 2008

Peter David’s “Vendetta” featured a nastier DD with crystal spikes all over it that was being used by a mystery woman to attack the Borg.

151. Bob Orci's Girdle - September 25, 2008

Hmmm, just trying on a different handle. >B-D

152. Movie Trailer - September 25, 2008

The only sure way that the trailer is seen is to watch whatever Paramount film is opening in December or thereabouts. It may be “out there” in December but that doesn’t mean an exhibitor is obliged to show it. In years past, I’ve noticed this to be true because there are many, many trailers out there and thats the only way I’ve known for sure to see it with a film in the production family.

153. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#125—-I do not believe it is necessary to rehash old plots.

We should not assume that potential sequels have to overlap or supplant events we have already seen, or that the extent of a potential altered timeline will result in different outcomes to events we have already seen brought to a conclusion.

It could very well be that, by the time the start of the 5 year mission is ultimately depicted, the resulting “altered timeline” will ebtail only the most minute changes in detail (perhaps even only asthetic changes).

To me, it seems logical to conclude that all of this depends upon how successful (or how unsuccessful) Nimoy’s Spock is in preventing a destructive alteration to the timeline we know.

Potential sequels could just as easily take place after the final episode of TOS (since there is no indication that the 3 seaons of TOS represents the whole of the 5 year mission), and/or within the 7.5 years (according to the dialogue in those two films) in between TMP and TWOK.

#137—I think it would be more palatable to me if Spock (who is presumably still on Romulus) gets wind of Nero’s plan to disrupt the past, and Spock’s counterplan (and his own time travel) is either preemptive or simultaneous. This would prevent any debate over whether Spock would have even known that “his timeline” had been disrupted.

I think that if a young Kirk were killed in the past, prior to Spock getting involved, that would be the first problem people would have with the story.

If that were the case, Spock would never have known Jim Kirk, and his life and career would unlikely have even led him to be who he has become in the 24th Century (if he were even still alive despite the changes in the past).

I would much rather see Spock receive information from one of his Romulan dissident allies about Nero’s plan beforehand, than see him have a “Guinan-like” moment— ala “Yesterday’s Enterprise”.

But those are just my thoughts…

154. krikzil - September 25, 2008

“I can see where someone who owns their own theater (I am assuming only a few screens compared to a megaplex) could consider it to be a troublesome task if they are the manager, projectionist and cashier. If I had to cover a few positions like that and then had bank runs, inventory and stock re-orders to worry about, I’d probably consider it to be a pain as well.”

Yes, it’s a 4-plex (but up from the 2 screens when his dad had it). My friend and his brother work their butts off. Given what the studio takes in those first weeks, the profit margin is so small. (He does well with film festivals though that appeal to certain moviegoers.)

“…like “The Kite Runner” which was an excellent film that deserved a much bigger audience.”

That was a very good film.

“I may be remembering this incorrectly… so a film had to make what it cost to produce times two in order to be considered a hit and show a profit…..So in my humble estimation, the film will have to make roughly $225 million dollars to be considered a success at the boxoffice. Based on how well The Dark Knight did (and a film’s boxoffice like this one is a rarity), it will probably take Trek between ten and 14 days to reach this milestone, provided the story draws the eyeballs into the theaters.”

I’ve heard estimates of $150-160 mil for the budget so times 2 and we are into it needing to earn $300 million for break even which as you say is Dark Knight rarified territory. I’m a diehard Trek fan of over 30+ years but I’m just not convinced that’s possible no matter how excellent the film may be. I’m hoping the publicity folks are successful in appealing to mainstream America that doesn’t have/never had had Trek on its radar. I wish it had more than that 1 week to lead the BO but it’s got Wolvering the week before and then Angels & Demons the next followed by the new Terminator film.

155. King Anthony - September 25, 2008

109-

It’s the same intuition that guessed you’d be the one to question my statement. I never miss. I never lose. It’s a keen sensory insight into people and their psyche that enables my “clairvoyance”–as you’ll find out next year. That, and I’ve been in the entertainment biz, and have many family members and friends in that corrupt profession for many years. I’m currently in the process of getting my upcoming novels made into feature films and, well, never mind. Just have some Rom Ale and read on…

Simple: You don’t put such an ambitious undertaking in the hands of a virtual unknown. This ain’t the Blair Witch Project, or a commercial for Abercrombie & Fitch. This is a known quantity, deserving someone equally known in the lead in order to get those skittish general audiences to ignore the stigma associated with Trek and get their butts in the seats in order to make this movie viable. Dan Craig made it known he’d would’ve liked the role, but no….Ok, fine. Come next year, watch and see what happens…

Quinto. Greenwood. Ryder. Ok. Eric Bana. Ben Cross, etc. Are you kidding me? If you’re going to make this an event. spend some money and get Hugo Weaving for Sarek and Russ Crowe for–gak–Nero.

Nero. My God. Why not Tiberius? Longinus? Maximus? Timeship. This is the most Next Gen-sounding trash I’ve ever heard in my life, and that’s not going to work in Kirk’s Era. That movie’s going to hit that historically documented glass ceiling of about 150+ million that’s that.

In closing, a little trip into the universe I inhabit and which is about to give birth to a new legend:. Nightspeed: Darkness Rising.

Ciao.

156. King Anthony - September 25, 2008

154-

Tiur insights [your grasp of reality] serves you well. There’s no way in the Nine circles of Hades that movie’s going to gross that amaount, especially not with Wolverine debuting so soon after. Those adamantium clwas are going to rip Trek to pieces.

157. M33 - September 25, 2008

closettrekker – I agree with your perspectives. It will ultimately depend on how much they choose to reboot the series. If it is drastic, then the points I made about extra-galactic incursions will have to be dealt with. Or it could be just as subtle like Tasha Yar’s romular daughter was. I wonder how far thought out this was with the new creative team.

158. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#155—”It’s the same intuition that guessed you’d be the one to question my statement.”

Not very impressive, especially since I warned you in advance that it would happen…

“You don’t put such an ambitious undertaking in the hands of a virtual unknown.”

You mean like Coppola with “Patton”, or George Lucas (whose only previous film of note was “American Graffitti”) with “Star Wars” ? That’s just to name a couple.

And since when is JJ Abrams a virtual unknown? If that’s your impression of him, you aren’t paying attention to the entertainment industry very well for someone who claims to have inside knowledge of the business…how about a television show which (whether you personally appreciate it or not) has had some of the highest ever viewer ratings even amongst today’s satellite and digital cable driven homes which offer hundreds of channels worth of programming from which to choose? How about another which has already settled into good ratings? How about two films which have already showed high box-office grosses?

“Nero. My God. Why not Tiberius? Longinus? Maximus? Timeship. This is the most Next Gen-sounding trash I’ve ever heard in my life, and that’s not going to work in Kirk’s Era. ”

That’s perfectly in line with the TOS-style representation of the Romulans…

Praetor? Centurion? Romulus? Remus? Empire? Senate?

Those are not TNG-related terms which are descriptive of the Romulans…that is straight from TOS, and the name “Nero” fits perfectly in line with that. Who knows what character trait(s) Bana’s character might display which make that name even more appropriate? For all we know, he might even be patricidal…who knows?

#156—”There’s no way in the Nine circles of Hades that movie’s going to gross that amaount, especially not with Wolverine debuting so soon after.”

I thought you were never wrong…What happened?

“Wolverine” will be a week old at the box-office on May 8th, as its premeire is May 1st, if I am not mistaken. :)

“Those adamantium clwas are going to rip Trek to pieces.”

Nope. “Wolverine” will rule the first weekend in May, and Abrams’ “Star Trek” should take over the following week…Neither will dominate more than a single weekend, IMO, and that is all which is expected of a Summer blockbuster.

159. M33 - September 25, 2008

I agree with closettrekker on the Romulan thing. The fact that they are even called “Romulans” was cheesy to begin with. But it goes just in line with that cheese by choosing the name “Nero”. Heck, it could even be a nickname, or black ops name. We can only speculate.

160. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#157—”I wonder how far thought out this was with the new creative team.”

Given Orci’s devout fan status/credibility, I am confident that it was very well thought out.

Regardless of how significant the timeline changes end up being, the potential for disruption in the timeline we know, IMO, should provide the “jeopardy” required for a story in which we otherwise would already know the ending (unlike Lucas’ SW prequel trilogy), and still allows for a great opprotunity to tell an origin story about the beloved TOS-era characters.

I like the approach.

161. M33 - September 25, 2008

It will be a fun ride, for sure!

162. Gigastazio - September 25, 2008

You know, technically, next week would be considered “by Christmas.”

163. King Anthony - September 25, 2008

158-

It never fails.

Thank you for unwittingly proving my point. You just proved why that movie will ultimately fail after that rather lengthy sermon to the choir. I know when Wolverine debuts. That wasn’t my intent. You are. You never even saw it coming, and you fell right into it.

A moment. I like a good debate. but, any good debater knows when to call it quits, and you should. You’re no match for me. These shadow plays are pointless; and if you haven’t figured out why, then that only further proves my prediction on why thisz movie will fail.

Anyway, uhm, why should you be the self-aqppointed defender of the faith here? What’s this to you? What’s your material self-interest in this?Shouldn’t that be Orci or Kurtzman’s task? They can speak for themselves; and ostensibly, their work, and defend it if need be. I know they post here, so…Well?

That novie will fail. Why? Easy. Look in the mirror…

Exactly.

164. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 25, 2008

Guys we should not be questioning the logic of our writers, yet, wait untill we have heard a little more about the plot. So far all we have are a bunch of unconnected observations and half quotes.

They’ll be plenty of time for bashing once we know more. And belive me,
I will be just as vocal as anyone else, if this flick falls short in any way.
But I got to admit, what I’ve been hearing makes me a bit nervous.

Mostly the ‘Time Ship’, geezz, and the “Romulan Pirates’ quote from a
few weeks back. Yikes!!

165. Denise de Arman - September 25, 2008

ka#163- Was your last post suppose to make any sense at all? If so, what cereal do we buy to find the decoder ring for said post?

166. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#163—You’ve yet to debate me on anything…I haven’t seen any debate.

You make remarks, I shoot them down, and you never give your contentions any support whatsoever aside from baseless conjecture and run-around talk.

“Saying” that you win a debate doesn’t mean anything…

“That novie will fail. Why? Easy. Look in the mirror…

Exactly.”

Yeah..That’s substantive. My 10 year old isn’t even that immature..

“Anyway, uhm, why should you be the self-aqppointed defender of the faith here? What’s this to you? What’s your material self-interest in this?Shouldn’t that be Orci or Kurtzman’s task?”

Why shouldn’t I post what I believe to be true?

Why are you here? Why would you spend your time posting about a movie you obviously care very little about and think very little of?

Personally, I gain nothing but the diversion of an entertaining discussion that is far less serious than what I otherwise deal with on an everyday basis with my business.

I read and post on this site in between conference calls, lunch meetings, employee evaluations, managerial directives, spreadsheets, accounts payable and receivable, marketing meetings, travel plans, creative brainstorming sessions, etc., etc..

I also like to go to NFL football games, coach one of my sons’ teams, promote and attend art shows, get together with friends from the Marine Corps, and take my wife out to dinner.

This is but one of the many diversions I enjoy….

Let me know if you can think of a substantive argument. It sure is alot more fun to be challenged.

Where is Iowagirl? Shatner Fan 2000?

This guy is a poor substitute.

167. Closettrekker - September 25, 2008

#165—Hey Denise! Vacationing from 69 Forward?

168. M33 - September 25, 2008

I certainly don’t question the writer’s logic. I would just love to have been in that room when they discussed at great lengths about what is and is not canon, and the ramifications on the ST universe from their rebooting. Hell, I can not wait for this movie! But I must.

169. M33 - September 25, 2008

oops, that should have been >writers’<

170. TrekMadeMeWonder - September 26, 2008

166. Closettrekker

Its just his opinion, Closettrekker.

171. Cervantes - September 26, 2008

148 Viking

Really nice idea about an ‘additional’ wandering Doomsday Machine being still out there as some kind of balance of power from a previous age….

If this ‘other’ one had had been developed with some kind of intuitive, in-built ‘safeguard’ that stopped it from ‘easily’ being destroyed from the inside by Starships or other threatening weaponry just being lobbed into it’s huge ‘maw’, then it would be a serious threat indeed…. I’d love to see this old favourite menace re-done in a big budget way onscreen (In a way far surpassing CBS Digital’s one of course, okay as that was)

172. Scott - September 26, 2008

What have they done thats any good?
Please tell me.
Transformers was crap.
It was a big Independence Day General Motors Fest!
The allspark Dude!
Can’t wait to see what mythology gets
hacked up by these two again.

173. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#172—What had Harve Bennett done prior to TWOK?

The Bionic Woman?
A few episodes of “The Six Million Dollar Man”?

The “Rich Man, Poor Man” mini-series?

Transformers was exactly what it was supposed to be, as was MI3.

I think “Fringe” is pretty good, and although I’ve never seen it, alot of people like “Alias” (for which they did 33 episodes).

What mythology have they hacked up before?

That of a 1980′s cartoon based upon a toy? Please.

174. lwr - September 26, 2008

can i ask a question…

does it cost money to place a trailer in a theater?

if not, then what is the delay.
get the the thing done and circulated.

geeze.

175. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#174—The reason for the delay is the goal of peaking overall interest outside of the established fanbase when it counts most…the week of its release. The hype machine will start up in December, then escalate from there—ultimately peaking interest when it counts.

176. krikzil - September 26, 2008

“Transformers was exactly what it was supposed to be…”

Closettrekker– I went to see it with a group of 8 year olds for a b-day party and fully expected to want to blow my brains out during it. ;) However, I actually really enjoyed it. Kudos to the writers for that!

Heh, btw — how are things in Houston? My friend is back in her house and was so lucky. Just a little water incursion and some missing roof tiles. Hope you didn’t have too much damage to home or business.

177. JL - September 26, 2008

“You’re no match for me.” etc etc

Whoa man, you should relax. Have a drink.

178. Biodredd - September 26, 2008

#174 – “does it cost money to place a trailer in a theater?”

There are a number of ways to answer this question… between the editing, processing, making thousands of copies for distribution and the shipping to the individual theaters… yes, it costs a lot of money to put trailers in the theater.

It costs nothing to have them run on the beginning of the film.

179. Jeffries Tuber - September 26, 2008

Okay, have we rebooted?

The love that goes in to many of these posts is wasted on the format. I really wish we could create threads on topics–rather than having random disjointed conversations.

When all is said and done in June 2009, after we’ve all seen the movie a few times, we will look back and realize that this long delay was like the difference between the dance of seven veils and a trashy girl flashing her assets.

They have us so teased up that they could show us the font on a Tricorder and it would generate 150 posts.

So let’s be cool. Engage in lively debates. Don’t take anything personally under any circumstances.

Unless someone calls you ‘Diane Warren,’ that’s beyond the pale.

180. JL - September 26, 2008

“…like the difference between the dance of seven veils and a trashy girl flashing her assets.”

Wait, which one am I supposed to not like?

I kinda dig trashy girls flashing their assets.

181. Denise de Arman - September 26, 2008

Closet#167- Hi Poopey – did you get power back in all the right places? Last word you were working out those rippling muscles lifting everything the old-fashioned way. Did all the guys in the warehouse get a free spa coupon from you afterwards?

182. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#176—Thanks for asking. We still do not have power restored in our facility in Houston, but my home in Katy is fine. I’m glad your friend made out okay.

#181—No, but I bought them all pizza and room temperature bottled water (best I could do under the circumstances of half the city powerless). It was rough though without cargo-lifts or pallet-jacks, etc. I’m sure that they were somewhat thankful that there was still work. Many people lost alot of income during the bulk of the outtage, with businesses being completely shut down and all.

And unfortunately, it has been at least a decade since my muscles did any rippling…lol. In fact, my wife says everything has fallen from my shoulders to my stomach area. But it’s not all bad. She says that she enjoys the pillow-like feature that wasn’t there before. She is probably trying to make me feel better…

:)

183. Closettrekker - September 26, 2008

#177—I think he might have had a few too many last night!

184. James - September 26, 2008

I wonder if Orci is a Krispy Kreme or Dunkin donuts man?
:D

Not that long to wait for the trailer then thank god!!

185. The Vulcanista - September 26, 2008

#182 Closet! Baby! I’m way behind on my thread-readin’!

Glad to hear that you made it through to the other side of the storm and that things aren’t too terrible for you!

And if Mrs. Closettrekker says she enjoys that pillow-like feature, why not just relax and take her at her word? }:-)

186. Matias 47 - September 28, 2008

Re: Box Office

The way a film becomes profitable these days is a little more complicated than it used to be. The rule of thumb about doubling the production budget to encompass the hype machine is roughly accurate for middle-budget movies. In the case of the bigger budget ones it tends to 50 to 75% of the production number. So let’s say the new film needs to make $300 mil to break even in Paramount’s accounting. This is what needs to happen: Domestic box should at least equal the production budget then if the foreign box hits between $125 to $150 mil the studio will be happy.

Let’s take X-Men 3 as an example. The production budget was $210 mil. Domestically, it pulled down $234 mil while the foreign receipts came in at $224. Overall, this is not much of a profit. Why then is Wolverine coming out?

Answer: DVD sales. New media. Merchandising. It’s more difficult to find DVD sales numbers than box office, but according to my wife (who works for Warner in DVD production/sales) the studios make 3 times the amount of profit on any given movie from DVD sales than from box office. Otherwise they wouldn’t continue to make Resident Evil movies — whose box office numbers are weak at best.

That’s why the writers went on strike and the actors still haven’t agreed to a new contract.

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