20 Minutes of Star Trek Previewed In UK [UPDATED] | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

20 Minutes of Star Trek Previewed In UK [UPDATED] November 11, 2008

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Spoilers,Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback

As reported last month, JJ Abrams is doing a ‘road show’ to promote the Star Trek film to people in the press, publicity and distribution. His first stop was today in London, where he was joined by Simon Pegg. They showed off the new trailer as well as four scenes from the film. The first reports are online now. [UPDATE: more reports online plus one sent in directly to TrekMovie] Details and many many spoilers below.


The Four scenes were:

Right now there are three detailed descriptions online:

UPDATE: 2 more:

UPDATE: Report sent in to TrekMovie
In addition, TrekMovie.com reader ‘GhostFace’ was also in attendance and adds the following details to the above reports.

On the trailer:

Bar scene:

McCoy sneaks Kirk onto Enterprise

Kirk meets Scotty and elder Spock

Romulan drilling rig


1. James - November 11, 2008


This just appeared on BBC – rushed here to confirm it!


2. jim - November 11, 2008

I looks awesome!

3. tribble farmer - November 11, 2008

I can’t WAIT.

4. garen - November 11, 2008

not reading the spoilers.

5. garen - November 11, 2008

also…i think the BBC link is broken

6. bill hiro - November 11, 2008

So, Chekov and Kirk serving under “first captain of the ship” Pike on the Enterprise.

Sounds like the supreme court has been working overtime legislating from the bench.

7. Chaya - November 11, 2008

I couldn’t resist the spoilers

8. Joseph Coatar - November 11, 2008

Let the shitstorm begin, ladies and gentlemen this is the flashpoint

9. Kevin - November 11, 2008

Damn the 5 month wait!

10. JeffreyNdallas@yahoo.com - November 11, 2008

Ok, do not read the descriptions if you do not want to be spoiled! It is pretty informative and makes perfect sense with the pictures that we have all seen.

That is all.

11. captain_paxo - November 11, 2008

Sounds pretty ruddy cool but some of the Pike stuff sounds a bit iffy canon-wise, as does the pre-academy Sulu Uhura stuff. I work about 3 mins from that cinema – SO frustrating!

12. sean - November 11, 2008

I didn’t want to read…but I felt compelled! Sounds like good stuff, though some seems too convenient, in terms of how they all come together. Still, good story and I won’t care.

13. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

Good god, forget canon entirely…. unless…

what if all of this is changed retroactively by old Spock? is the TOS we know… a “Repaired” and altered timeline from what we will see?

Trying hard to resit spoilage so that I will have SOME surprises… but it’s so hard to know it’s RIGHT THERE!!!!!!

14. dalek - November 11, 2008

For the bbc link remove the html code on the end of it, it should work if you copy and paste this:


15. Izbot - November 11, 2008

Okay, I’ve officially read too much! But I’m even more enthusiastic than ever, now!

16. CarlG - November 11, 2008

I’m having mostly positive reactions to the scenes.

The McCoy scene sounds VERY promising, but the bar fight thing sounds a bit sleazy.
Original flavour Spock scenes automatically win. :)
The Romulan drill scene sounds epically kick-a**.
And you-know-who saying “live long and prosper”! Awesome.
Is it May yet? Please??

17. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Bend over and grab the ankles, kids, ’cause we are about to take it up the rear with this one.

18. DavidJ - November 11, 2008

I only read the first couple scenes, but it all sounded FANTASTIC to me (a diehard TOS fan btw).

The interactions between Pike and Kirk are great, and the characterization of the young Kirk sounds pretty dead-on to me too.

19. Mark Anton - November 11, 2008

Nobody seems to comment about what the exterior of the Enterprise looks like. I get the impression that it wasn’t seen in the clips, but nobody flat out says that in the reviews. I’m hoping the Enterprise looks a lot like the TOS model, although I’m sure it will be souped up a bit.

20. Harry Dog - November 11, 2008

Just read this on Auntie’s website. Really want to see the trailer now. NOW!

21. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

why is everyone getting to see this movie but me???

first kevin smith, now the brits… this ain’t right. and it certainly isnt *proper*. please keep it in your pants, sir JJ. although you wield gigabytes of mac book. massive terraquads.



22. Brian - November 11, 2008

The two most obvious things that stand out are Chekov on Pike’s Enterprise and the fact that Kirk and gang are going to see Romulans, which would seem to negate “Balance of Terror”.

That being said, this will probably all make sense when we see everything in context.

23. Chancellor Jake - November 11, 2008

Now, that I’ve read all the spoilers… I kind of wish that I hadn’t. Still, based on these clips I think that this film is going to be totally awesome. A huge departure from the assumed backstory that we’ve created, but I’m not really upset about that.
I’ve no doubt that they wailing and gnashing of teeth from the canon-ites will begin shortly. Should be equally entertaining…

24. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

I can’t think of any context that would make any of that nonsense fit.

25. Cheve - November 11, 2008

We have the same event tomorrow in Spain.

So, I’m not going to read it untill tomorrow.

26. Desertrat - November 11, 2008

I want..
I need..

27. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Kirk not even in the Academy while Uhura is already a commissioned officer? For that matter, Uhura and Chekov serving under Pike? And when was Kirk ever described as a troublemaker at the Academy? Everything we’ve been told says just the opposite (“stack of books with legs”, “grim”).

I find it hard to believe these clowns have ever even SEEN Star Trek, let alone are avid fans. A ten year old knows the backstory better than these guys.

28. Blowback - November 11, 2008

I don’t mind a little rule bending but keep in mind that certain descriptions may be somewhat mis-stated depending on the reporters knowledge of “canon.”

29. Chris Pike - November 11, 2008

Romulans (Nero?) at Kirk’s birth?! Maybe that was the start of the alternate timeline deviation?…fascinating

30. Ran - November 11, 2008

Please tell me that in the last scene, Kirk wakes up and says “It was..a dream…..oh my!”

31. captain_paxo - November 11, 2008

The thing about canon is that as Trek fans we’re used to it being violated. It’s irritating, but we live with it. But with so much talent, money and time being thrown at this movie, you kind of expect the timeline (who did what when) canon stuff to be spot on.

32. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

This isn’t a reporter mistaking a phaser for a tricorder. This is taking the established history, putting it in a blender, producing a slimy gray ooze and calling it a banana smoothie.

This isn’t “honoring canon”, it’s mindless pandering by a couple of hacks who haven’t got a frelling clue what they’re doing.

33. Kirokwannabe - November 11, 2008

#29, yup, sure sounds like Nero has tried to kill Kirk at various points in the timeline.

Can’t wait to see this! Slavish devotion to “Canon” be damned. I want a good, exciting story that involves the characters we old TOS fans love. Sounds like we are going to get what we want.

May is too far away!

34. sb - November 11, 2008


Um… you *do* know this is a Star Trek time travel story, right? And that events, as events in all Star Trek time travel stories do, become changed, right? And that almost certainly the film will end, as all Star Trek time travel stories do, with the timeline as we know it being restored, right?

I mean, you’ve watched Star Trek a couple of times… right?

35. Thascales - November 11, 2008

‘Scotty explains that his experimental beaming worked on fruit but he said “didn’t turn out so well for Admiral Archer’s beagle”‘

So hold on… Scotty dematerialised Porthos?!


36. Pat Payne - November 11, 2008

Two things about clip 1:

“She orders a round, including a fire tea, Budweiser classics and some Cardassian sunrises.” (to find out who “she” is, read the damn spoiler. Nyaaaaah.)

First, hasn’t it been pretty much established that Kirk’s a Michelob man? (STIV) — Violation of canon right there! Sacrelige! My childhood’s been r***d! They changed it, now it sucks! Damn JJ Abrams! Grrrrrrr! :P :D ;)

Second (and actually seriously): I’d thought that first contact with the Cardassians wasn’t till after the TOS timeframe. Though it’s a great namedrop nonetheless.

Oh, and her quip? Ouch. I never thought I’d hear somethng like that in Trek, particularly from HER…

Other than that, the spoilers are setting my mind at ease…mostly.

37. Hans - November 11, 2008

I wish people would stop dictating their personal canon as gospel, decrying what JJ and co are doing. Get over yourselves, you don’t have to watch this film if it doesnt fit into your warped little world.

38. bill murray - November 11, 2008

yeah, this is gonna blow because of canon inconsistnecies. just like WOK sux because chekov wasn’t in space seed. oh, wait.

39. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Y’know, it’s precisely this sort of Mongolian clusterphuque that got Roddenberry to come out of retirement and produce TNG, to keep Paramount from making an unholy mess of the whole thing.

40. ety3 - November 11, 2008

With Nero’s time traveling, the canon we know is up in the air because his actions can change everything.

And I would guess there won’t be a reset button at the end of this film.

41. Pat Payne - November 11, 2008

From Ghostface’s report, I’m wondering if they dusted off the Phase II design for the Big E…

42. charliebob - November 11, 2008

Read and assimilated…
These scenes sound awesome beyond belief. I really cannot wait for this movie. It really sounds like the kind of movie that will leave behind the Geek stereotype that seems to surround star trek these days. And all this without really destroying any of the cannon built up over the decades!
Abrahms, if this movie is as good as it seems, you will be a God among men!

43. Brian - November 11, 2008


I hear what you’re saying, I just think it might be best to have a look at the whole thing before condemning it.

I agree that Kirk’s backstory is being altered considerably and that there’s a Top Gun “Maverick” thing going on(including the daddy issues), but if it’s written well they might be able to pull it off.

I’m going into the film with as much of an open mind as possible.

44. BrandonR - November 11, 2008


I’m so glad “Enterprise” is getting a nod.

45. Cap'n Calhoun - November 11, 2008

> Scotty explains that his experimental beaming worked on fruit but he said “didn’t turn out so well for Admiral Archer’s beagle”

That is so wrong…

46. DavidJ - November 11, 2008

I think a lot of fans take the TOS timeline WAY too seriously. I’ve been a TOS fan forever, but I couldn’t care less when Checkov joined the Enterprise. Or when everyone first saw the Romulans.

I just want to see the Enterprise crew going on exciting adventures, exploring the unknown, and getting in fights with the bad guys dammit.

I mean, you think fans back in 1966 really gave a crap about the timeline? They just wanted to watch a fun adventure show. It’s too bad today’s fans can’t be the same way. Now all they seem to care about is the stupid “continuity”.

47. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Now I’m worried.

Sorry to be a nerd but…

Kirk only met Pike once “when he was promoted to Fleet Captain.”

The gag with Kirk grabbing Uhura’s breast sounds awful, and has been done in a hundred movies before.

Kirk running around the ship with his tounge swelling and his hands blowing up like balloons hardly sounds like it could have been in TWOK.

Did we not watch the Original Series episodes before we put pen to paper?

The smartest thing Harve Bennett did before he came up with the story for TWOK was to watch all 79 episodes. Seems like the new gang might have skipped a step.

48. cpelc - November 11, 2008

So the ice planet is not an ice planet at all….but simply the ice cap that is often seen on Vulcan?

49. mgoodr00 - November 11, 2008

It seems that Nero’s interference has extremely messed up the timeline.

Kirk appears to have never served on the Farragut.

Why are Sulu and Uhura at the shipyards in Iowa? Have they already been assigned to the Enterprise?

If they are cadets why aren’t they in San Fransisco?

Is Spock the first officer under Pike?

Kirk promoted to first officer after just graduating from the academy?

Nero’s interference changes the timeline just like the events of First Contact altered the course of starfleet history.

50. Stanky McFibberich - November 11, 2008

I know I should reserve judgement until I have seen it, but what the heck….canon or not, it just sounds horrible.

51. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

“Personal canon?” Hardly, Buckwheat.

“Who Mourns For Adonais?” – It’s established that Chekov is 22 years old.

Two years previously, we’re talking “Where No Man Has Gone Before” period, which would put Chekov in either his junior or senior year at the Academy.

When Pike transferred command to Kirk (which “The Menagerie” established is where the two met, not after a bar room brawl), Chekov would, at best, be a freshman at Starfleet Command.

And it only gets worse from there, kiddies.

52. Hanabi - November 11, 2008

Kirk grabbing Uhura’s breasts? Sounds like Kirk is more of a sex pest in this one.

The canon seems to be off with when all of the TOS crew joined Starfleet and became active crew members. However, I can live with that if the story is good.

53. OneBuckFilms - November 11, 2008

> Kirk not even in the Academy while Uhura is already a commissioned officer?

Certainly interesting. She could be serving under Pike.

> For that matter, Uhura and Chekov serving under Pike?

That doesn’t bother me. Kirk stated that he met Pike when he was promoted to Fleet Captain. That would leave Spock in command of the Enterprise until a replacement can be found: And it becomes Kirk.

> Everything we’ve been told says just the opposite (”stack of books with legs”, “grim”).

That was from a stint as an Academy instructor, where he meets Gary Mitchell.

I have to admit though, it is certainly playing hard and fast with Canon. Romulan drill on Vulcan, anyone?

At this point, it’ll be interesting to see how this turns out.

BTW, one of these “clowns”, Roberto Orci, is very much a Trek fan.

I would definately place this as a Reboot, but it still looks very interesting, and a lot of fun.

54. James - November 11, 2008


Enterprise built in Iowa?! NOOOO!

Actually, this does have some premise. The Titanic was built in Dublin, but it said ‘Liverpool’ on the stern, ‘cos that’s where it was commissioned. Enterprise could have been built in Iowa and commissioned in San Fransisco.

Uhura and Chekov serving under Pike?! NOOOO!

Actually, this has some premise as well. What is the length of time between ‘The Cage’ and the Enterprise’s launch? It is feasible that Uhura and Chekov were reassigned and then returned to the Enterprise at Kirk’s behest when he was given command.

Kirk sounding like a rebel at the Academy?! NOOOO!

What, not canon? You don’t think it fits in with the character he later becomes perfectly? The Captain who disobeys orders and does what he thinks best? The Captain who continually flouted time-travel rules? Kirk’s a maverick, plain and simple. This fits with the character, which is more important than fitting with a couple of lines of dialogue.

LOL! Redshirt! Wonder if he has the Grim Reaper walking behind him!

Ah, canon. My old favourite chestnut. But remember – it’s like history, it’s open to interpretation.

55. commander K, USS Sovereign - November 11, 2008

Can anyone tell me where else they are doing these press meetings?

56. Jim Smith - November 11, 2008

11 – Captain Paxo

Me too.

57. Pat Payne - November 11, 2008

# 54: not to mention two words about Kirk acting like a rebel: Kobayashi Maru.

58. Marc - November 11, 2008

Saw the footage this morning – the film looks incredible. Some amazing action including Sulu in a sword fight with some Romulan bad guy. The scenes we saw had a frentic pace, a real urgence about them. We’re in for a real treat with this movie

59. Alex - November 11, 2008

I love the Archer part. :)

Apart from that, I really want to see the Enterprise now!!!

60. Sam Belil - November 11, 2008

Guys one and for ALL — this is A COMPLETE OVERHAUL/REBOOT of the TOS Timline as we know it!!! Lets get over it, try to move on — and pray and hope that his movie will KNOCK US ON OUR A—ES!!!!

61. Jim Smith - November 11, 2008

I mean, I work about three minutes from that cinema. I have no strong ‘canon’ opinion.

62. Hans - November 11, 2008

@ 39 – roddenberry was sidelined for TWOK and the best of TNG, so please.

63. Marc - November 11, 2008


Is Spock the first officer under Pike? YES

Kirk promoted to first officer after just graduating from the academy? I THINK IT’S SET A WHILE LATER – I’M NOT SURE, JJ MENTIONED POSSIBLY SET ‘YEARS’ AFTER THE IOWA SCENES. NOT 100% SURE ABOUT THIS THOUGH

and Nimoy’s Spock has come back in time from Post Star Trek VI. NOT Nemesis.

64. Prologic9 - November 11, 2008

I’m not reading the spoilers either and I hope this site has a policy of not letting the talkbacks discuss spoilers for the film in off-topic articles.

65. JL - November 11, 2008

“I find it hard to believe these clowns have ever even SEEN Star Trek, let alone are avid fans. A ten year old knows the backstory better than these guys.”

oh, yeah, THAT makes a whole lot of sense.

a couple of things out of place or non-canon and people make statements like this. blows my mind.

the people who put this movie together have a better understanding of Trek than the a-holes who drove it into the ground sine Next Generation, IMO. they’ve already demonstrated this, movie sight-unseen.

66. DavidJ - November 11, 2008


I don’t know, Abrams version of a young Kirk certainly sounds truer to the Kirk of TOS than “Stack of books with legs”. That NEVER sounded right to me. Canon or no.

I mean, the guy cheated on the Kobiyashi Maru, and he tried to seduce every alien woman he met on TOS! He may have grown and matured enough to become a Starship captain, but he clearly used to be a bit of a jock and a rebel as a kid.

67. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

What hell happened to Number One? Or Doctor Boyce? Or Lt. Tyler?

Avid fans, my hairy white ass….

68. Daniel Broadway - November 11, 2008

I bet the Enterprise is being constructed in San Fran, the reporter was just probably confused and said Iowa.

69. Marc - November 11, 2008

It was Iowa. I assure you. You’ll see this in the trailer too

70. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

I do have MULTIPLE problems… the humor sounds a bit too slapstick or sleazy, but we’ll see…

Admiral ARCHER, but no Robert April? Not even Gary Mitchell? I at least hope his name is mentioned.

I’m excited and terrified at the same time. Kirk is way too much a hot dog here… sounds like the Han Solo comments are really true, which is just sad. Let Kirk be Kirk, not somebody else.

So much yet to learn, so I’ll stay reserved… but…
JJ could have just signed his own execution orders. Or, he’ll be promoted to king of all that is known.

71. JL - November 11, 2008

“yeah, this is gonna blow because of canon inconsistnecies. just like WOK sux because chekov wasn’t in space seed…”


72. Al - November 11, 2008

White haired spock – cool

73. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

So much for the San Francisco Fleet Yards, either orbital or on the ground.

Or did San Francisco at some point move to somewhere outside Des Moines?

74. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

@69 Marc, hows the big E looking??

75. That One Guy - November 11, 2008

Oh crap….. HIT THE DECK!

These threads have a tendency not to end well at all. I think I’m going to stay out of this one.

Except for the following:
I’m a bit nervous, but cautiously optimistic.

I came in to the Trek Franchise with Voyager, back when I was only 6, so I have somewhat a unique perspective. I personally liked it. Most people did not. That’s because it was not made for hardcore TOS fans. It was meant for another generation. I.E. Me.

XI is meant for another generation, not us.

76. Gavvo - November 11, 2008

If the Romulans are aggressive, I wonder how the klingons will be

Are there Klingons in this? Will they be ridgeless? I certainly hope they respect the whole ‘augment virus’ story in Enterprise

77. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

I don’t even see Han Solo being this much of a loose cannon.

78. Hans - November 11, 2008

Robert April is NOT canon, @ 70, so who cares?

79. JL - November 11, 2008


“I think a lot of fans take the TOS timeline WAY too seriously. I’ve been a TOS fan forever, but I couldn’t care less when Checkov joined the Enterprise. Or when everyone first saw the Romulans.”

“I just want to see the Enterprise crew going on exciting adventures, exploring the unknown, and getting in fights with the bad guys dammit.”


80. gatetrek - November 11, 2008

Admiral Archer – at least they’re keeping with some continuity!

81. Marc - November 11, 2008

Didn’t see to much of the Enterprise from exterior shots
Interior looked amazing, very bright, just like in the pics

The scenes they showed were really complete considering it’s not out until May

82. That One Guy - November 11, 2008

Where a ship is built and where it is actually COMMISSIONED are two very different things.

83. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

If Spock succeeds in his mission, wouldn’t the logical thing to do be a preemptive attack on young Nero to reset the timeline? Once one accepts the feasibility of time travel, and we all have, then no attack or timeline change is permanent.

Relax kids. April and Stanky’s baboon asses are getting all pink and swollen for no good reason.

All this stuff sounds great. it’s pretty clear that the characterizations of young Kirk are influenced by Diane Carey’s BEST DESTINY. If anyone on this board really thinks that ‘books’ as we know them will be stacked in front of any Starfleet cadet in 200 years, or that a “grim” young Kirk will make an exciting commercial movie, they’re on crack.

84. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

One of the things that has enabled Star Trek to last as long as it has, and spawned as many different versions as it has, is that’s had a fairly consistent history and backstory (no, it’s not perfect, but compared to a lot of other shows, it’s almost a court transcript).

This films attempts to throw all that out.

Why give a rip about when Chekov joined the crew or when Kirk went to the Academy?

Well, if Star Trek doesn’t give a rip, why should any of us give a rip about Star Trek?

It’s pretty damn difficult to be a self-respecting fan of a show, or franchise, that doesn’t even take its own history seriously.

85. mgoodr00 - November 11, 2008

What is the evidence that Spock goes back in time between Star Trek VI and the TNG era? Most all who have seen the footage say that Spock looks older with white hair … like Sarek in TNG

From the description of Nero’s ship I think maybe they are from Daniels time or shortly before. They have a time ship that didn’t exist until what the 29th century

86. Peter N - November 11, 2008

That can’t be the same Archer (would have to look at the In A Mirror, Darkly Archer biography to find his dates, but I am pretty sure he was no longer alive by the time of TOS) – although perhaps being a beagle owner runs in the family!

87. HeIsLegend - November 11, 2008


What is meant by the distinction between Spock coming from post-The Undiscovered Country & post-Nemesis

88. AdamTrek - November 11, 2008


It sound like elder Spock is older than that (STVI).

89. StarTrekkie - November 11, 2008

Everyone’s crying about canon, are their any specific issues being broken? Maybe I’m not the TOS geek I thought I was but I’m not spotting any major issues. What’s the deal with you all? Please, be SPECIFIC, and explain the violations.

90. Norman - November 11, 2008

no Harry Mudd???

what the…?

91. cpelc - November 11, 2008

well if kirk’s dad died in a different way…then young kirk would be different. He might have originally been more studious…but not now. That changes things.

Oh and don’t you wish they would’ve left the orbital sky diving scene in generations now? Would be an excellent example of Kirk trying to recapture his youth.

92. Marc - November 11, 2008

What is the evidence that Spock goes back in time between Star Trek VI and the TNG era? Most all who have seen the footage say that Spock looks older with white hair … like Sarek in TNG

JJ said it was after Star TreK VI.
Nimoy looks older, his hair is dark but with some grey/silver in there.
Nimoy doesn’t appear in the trailer though (not that i can remember)
Don’t know what Sarek looked like in TNG, sorry.

93. KirkPicard Forever! - November 11, 2008

Hey MARC, you mention that older Spock is from Post-Star Trek VI but not Post-Nemesis? Can you explain more than that, and how do you know that for sure? If that is true, why does Spock have “white hair” according to the report? Shouldn’t he just have his dark hair still? Thanks, and sorry for all the questions but as you can tell, the appearance of older Spock will be my favorite part of the film!

94. Marc - November 11, 2008

87 – I wasn’t sure if the Nimoy Spock in the film had come back in time from after Nemesis or Undiscovered Country. JJ said Undiscovered Country when i asked.

95. KirkPicard Forever! - November 11, 2008

Sorry MARC, I now see that you have answered my questions just before I posted them!

96. Marc - November 11, 2008

Spock has dark hair with some silver in there. I managed to ask JJ about this and he said he is from a post Star Trek VI world.

There is a scene with Spock where he tells Young Kirk that he has to take command of the ship from Young Spock. He also says ”Live long and prosper”

97. McCoy - November 11, 2008

One of the things I really hated about the Star Wars prequels was how the characters came together. It looks like we have that going here. They come together “too conveniently .” It’s like they write down all the characters they plan to use and mix them around making sure we have one in each scene—whether it makes sense or not.

Of course, all that may be fine and dandy for an audience less familiar with the series.

98. JL - November 11, 2008

Belly-achers read #46 by DavidJ
and (to quote a favorite sci-fi film starring Schwartzenegger) relax, you’ll live longer.

99. Reign1701A - November 11, 2008

1. I would’ve liked Robert April as the first captain of the Enterprise as established by TAS. But that’s not really canon so I can deal with it.

2. I don’t like that Kirk and Sulu are seeing Romulans as “Balance of Terror” was the first time anyone has ever seen a Romulan. However, the creative team said repeatedly that they viewed this episode and it served as an inspiration, so clearly this is intentional and not an oversight. This solidifies the notion that Nero has screwed up the timeline.

3. I really hope that was an error in saying the Enterprise was constructed in Iowa. I mean, c’mon. I don’t buy this one though, because if you look at the teaser trailer carefully there is a city skyline in the background.

4. I do not like the fact that Kirk goes straight from being a cadet to running around on the Enterprise. What happened to the Farragut? Serving under Captain Garrovick? Again, this is probably due to Nero’s interference, and I’ll just have to deal.

5. However, I’m greatly encouraged that the majority of these websites seemed to be enthused about the scenes and how the actors played the roles. Ultimately, as long this movie tells a good story, canon can be damned. However it’s a tough pill to swallow when you’ve grown up on 40+ years worth of established canon (I’m 23, but have seen all of Trek).

100. Buckaroohawk - November 11, 2008

Canon. Shmanon.

These descriptions sound very exciting, and I’m looking forward to seeing Trek born again. I’m tired of all the “they’re changing everything” whining and crying. If the ridiculous adherence to previous canon is all you care about, watch TOS and the TOS-based movies on DVD to your heart’s content.

And enough with the “it’s a time travel story, so all will be put back as we know it by the end” theories. If you honestly believe that, you’re deluding yourself. This is NEW Trek, based on the original series, keeping what the filmmakers thought were the best aspects of those concepts to tell a new story. They’re making a new history, a new “canon,” if you will. That is just the way it is going to be.

For me, I want to see a ripping good adventure story. I want to see concepts I’ve never even imagined could be done in Trek. I want to be amazed by what I’m seeing and hearing. I want to see Trek pushed to its dynamic limits. I no longer care about canon. I just want to see a good Star Trek movie.

And, no…the two are NOT inextricably bound together. I love the fact that these characters have had histories we believed we knew so well. It made them feel that much more real to us. But if Trek has to shed that aspect in order to become something new, I’m willing to accept it, as long as I’m told a good story.

If you can’t accept that just about everything you thought you knew about TOS Trek is about to change, then save your money and stay home. There are plenty of previous canon TV shows, movies, books, etc. to keep you satisfied. I’ll be in the theaters in May 2009 to see if this new direction works for me.

Star Trek Lives!

101. Panty Logic - November 11, 2008

So no footage of the new Enterprise? :-(

102. Daoud - November 11, 2008

It’s all fittable into canon… because Nero’s changed the timeline. What we can do for *fun* (as we’ve been doing since 1966) is take the inconsistencies and enjoy working them out.

In this case, it’s finding the parallel event from the ur-Star Trek timeline to the neo- (or nero-)Star Trek timeline.

Chekov’s age yes is in the early 2nd season ep WMFA? set at 22 (perhaps just before he’s 23). If he went to SFA at 16, and he’s a 3-yr wonder, he’s an Ensign on the Enterprise at 19, 4 years before WMFA? That works out okay.

ur-Kirk we know went to Starfleet young. But here, he’s been fatherless a long while, and became quite a rebel. This is neo-Kirk. Instead of going to the academy at 17, he’s waited until age 24. This means he never was an instructor, hence no Gary Mitchell. Instead of Gary being his friend, perhaps Gary gets assigned to the Enterprise. This is going to be messy for sure! I’ll be interested to see how we know ur-Spock travels back in time and knows that the timeline has been changed.

Thank God, at least McCoy seems to be EXACTLY right… and Scotty… and even Sulu sounds fine.

Then again, knowing JJ… a lot of this footage could be total B.S. It’s just like JJ to have created a whole “fake” story… Just to get everyone riled up. But then again, it would be expensive, so I guess this is all “fo real”.

103. HeIsLegend - November 11, 2008


Thanks for the answer….I’m curious…if its just after The Undiscovered Country why would they have had the problem with Shatner’s Kirk being dead??

104. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#32—-“This is taking the established history, putting it in a blender, producing a slimy gray ooze and calling it a banana smoothie.

This isn’t “honoring canon”, it’s mindless pandering by a couple of hacks who haven’t got a frelling clue what they’re doing.”

You seem to forget that the potential for “alternate timelines” in the ST Universe caused by interference from the future is itself ‘canon’, and has been since 1967.

As long as the changes in the backstories with which we are more familiar are caused by changes to the timeline, they are indeed “honoring canon”.

From what I read above, it appears as if the Romulan interference takes place very early on, setting a very different chain of events in motion.

The Romulan incursion and their “appearance” in “Balance Of Terror” may be a bit less surprising this time around, and some of the background information we learn in “WNMHGB”, “Obsession”, “The Conscience Of The King”, and “Court-Martial” may turn out a bit different. However, if the different timeline is a result of Romulan interference, it does not violate ‘canon’. Acknowledging the potential for alternate timelines is in keeping with ‘canon’.

Furthermore, we do not even know if the events we see depicted in this movie will be permanent, or an alternate timeline that is changed again before the story’s end.

105. Panty Logic - November 11, 2008

Sorry, my bad; I didn’t read the review properly. So there is a brief shot of the new Enterprise?

106. Marc - November 11, 2008

103 good point, we may have a while to wait for that answer.
All I can say is, the 20 mins I saw was amazing, so action packed.

107. Marc - November 11, 2008

105 – Yes there are some exterior shots of the Enterprise. It looks like it did in the TOS and the movies I – VI.

108. TOG - November 11, 2008

When you see Canon concerns mentioned – just skip the entry.

What if the Federation has cloaking tech or Hyper drive that could take the Enterprise all the way to Alderon or Atlantis! Lol

I thinks it’s going to rock!!

109. DavidJ - November 11, 2008


Yeah, Nimoy today looks considerably older than he did even in TUC (it’s been 17 years, after all). I’d have a hard time buying that this takes place only after that movie. Plus I think Abrams already said elder Spock comes from the TNG era.

110. JL - November 11, 2008


Very well put.

I think you speak for a lot of people, fans and non-fans.

And THAT is why they put this movie together the way they did: to please people who want an entertaining movie.

111. McCoy - November 11, 2008

If this movie is about youth, action and sex in space, rather than the wonder of space travel with “friends”, I can see myself totally letting a new generation have this movie. I’ll stay home and protect my memories.


112. Panty Logic - November 11, 2008

So, the Enterprise is a mash-up between TOS ship and the re-fit? Cool. I so want this film to be great but I have nagging doubts. I’m trying to be open-minded and non-judgmental, but have been watching TOS and I’m worried about what will be done to the Star Trek I know and love…

113. Laura - November 11, 2008

Okay, I’ve followed the links and read all the detailed descriptions of the scenes. Swell. They’ve managed to work in every possible Trek cliche under the sun while leaving out the one thing that may have made Kirk the person he is: Tarsus IV. I’m usually not hung up about Trek canon. Sulu being apparently older than Kirk doesn’t bother me, the ship being built on Earth doesn’t bother me, nor do any of the other relatively minor things. If something needs to be changed to add depth to a character, then fine. Change it. But this?

As my husband just said: “Sounds to me like they’re just going to go with the daredevil, playboy, rule-breaking rebellious Kirk and not balance any of it with the other facets of the character. Screw that… That would be like portraying Bruce Wayne as a shallow guy who just gets weird thrills out of dressing up like a bat and clobbering criminals, while leaving out the death of his parents.”

Exactly. We wanted to be excited about this film. I wanted to take our ten-year-old daughter and get her excited about Trek the same way my older siblings got me excited. But if this is going to be one long, ridiculous cliche, I guess I’ll pass. We all love “Galaxy Quest,” primarily because while it cracks jokes about the fans’ desperate clinging to canon, it also respects the fans’ devotion. Despite his protestations to the contrary, it sounds to me like Abrams and Co. have made a shallow, more overtly snarky “Galaxy Quest II,” now with 100% more Leonard Nimoy. How sad.

114. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

That’s like saying it looks like a ’57 Packard and a ’95 Corvette.

They’re not honoring canon, they’re destroying it.

115. barrydancer - November 11, 2008

89 StarTrekkie:

A few things. It looks that now Kirk goes straight aboard Enterprise after the Academy, where it was established in TOS that he served aboard Republic and Farragut before taking command of Enterprise.

Additionally, Uhura, Sulu, etc. are serving as Pike’s bridge crew rather than Number One, Jose Tyler, et. al., as seen the The Menagerie and The Cage.

Uhura speaks 3 dialects of Romulan, and Kirk and others have significant contact with Romulans, yet in Balance of Terror no has ever seen a Romulan.

116. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

hurry up next year already :))

117. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

can a cannon cannon cannonise canons?

118. CmdrR - November 11, 2008

Exactly what’s the point of a 20 minute preview? I mean — 20 minutes is certainly more than a taste. Thanks, JJ. Thanks a s#$%load. PLEASE don’t talk about security ever again. Some of us would like a few surprises for our 10 bucks.

I doubt I’ll be able to avoid learning more about the movie than I want to know before I see it — not with 6 months still to go.

Sorry to be snotty, but after such a long drought, now we’re getting too much without actually gettting the pay-off of a great film… at least not yet.

119. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

with all the the talk of this canon, i will hope its in the movie, does or kirk or spock get shot from this canon???

120. DennyC - November 11, 2008

Has it occurred to anyone that Kirk may have met Pike much earlier than he let on in “The Menagerie” (i.e., maybe it was a SECRET because of the circumstances).

If you will recall, at the end of Menagerie, Kirk addresses Pike by his first name, and sounds as though he is talkiing to a friend. Certainly not like someone he only met once and briefly.

At any rate, The Menagerie royally screwed canon anyway. The Commodore states that Pike is about the same age as Kirk, which totally destroys the notion that Kirk is the youngest ship captain ever. If Pike is about the same age as Kirk at the time of that episode, he must have been in his 20s when he commanded the Enterprise.

Why worry so much about adhering to “canon” when the canon itself is horrendously inconsistent and full of holes and has been from the VERY beginning?

121. JL - November 11, 2008

Marc, a couple of things come to mind and since you’ve seen the footage maybe you would elaborate…

During the beaming sequences, what did the beam look like? What did it sound like? Was it closer to TOS than the films or the other series’?

What did the phasers look like? Any scene with a communicator? Were these shown at all?

And finally, you say that the E looks like it did in TOS and the first few films – – so they didn’t alter it in any way that you could see? If so, that is just SHOCKING to me!


122. R.I.P Star Trek Cannon - November 11, 2008

R.I.P Star Trek Cannon………….

123. jim - November 11, 2008

CmdrR @ 119

You can’t be mad at JJ because you clicked on the link!

124. Hans - November 11, 2008

They never promised that this film would adhere 100% to throwaway lines spoken once in a random episode, or fanon whipped up by people with too much time on their hands. This is a reboot, but given the insanity portrayed by trek fans I can totally understand why they don’t just come out and say it. Why don’t you log off this site, put your TOS VHS on and just enjoy the 40 year old episodes you so treasure?

125. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#37, #65: Its not “personal” canon. it’s canon. Everyone else is in accord. you don’t have to be on board, but it shows how JJ and co don’t give a crap about what is ON THE SHOWS and IN THE MOVIES.
#51. Intelligently and wisely spoken.

Why not just make everything up? get rid of some characters (Nurse chapel, janice rand). change stuff (never saw romulans to a movie all abotu seeign the romulans years before “balance of terror”. I hope JJ redoes star wars after this. then godfather. then Casablanca. He can remake/reboot/rewrite everything! heck, he can even kill off some of the star trek characters if he wants, who cares about what was in the tv shows and movies, lets just keep numbers 37 and 65 happy!!

Maybe, maybe we can even have star wars meets star trek! that’s QUITE PLAUSIBLE, beam down to the LOST island, beam up a few HEROS and just cross all time lines. after all, at the end, we can just say “TIME TRAVEL”.

126. Jeff Bond - November 11, 2008

Oh my god, they ruined continuity!!! Yawwwwwwn…

For people who have actually seen footage from the movie, the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive. Wow, they dared to change some things on a musty 40 year old franchise, heresy!

127. Marc - November 11, 2008

During the beaming sequences, what did the beam look like? What did it sound like? Was it closer to TOS than the films or the other series’? IT LOOKED NEW AND COOL – More squigilly if that makes any sense. Louder also.

What did the phasers look like? Any scene with a communicator? Were these shown at all? They had some guns, not phasers as such

And finally, you say that the E looks like it did in TOS and the first few films – – so they didn’t alter it in any way that you could see? If so, that is just SHOCKING to me! I ONLY SAW BRIEF GLIMPSES – DON’T HOLD ME TO THAT, IT LOOKED COOL AND MORE SFX WITHIN IT, BUT IT’S NOT BEEN RE-VAMPED AS SUCH. YOU’LL SEE A SHOT OF IT BEING BUILT IN THE NEW TRAILER

128. Dom - November 11, 2008

The info sounds great! I strongly doubt they’ll completely wipe the timeline of this film at the end. The last thing you’d do is spend two hours setting up a cast and their universe to launch a ‘reinvigorated’ franchise, only to erase it all at the end!

This is a new Star Trek, guys! Get used to it and move on!

PS May the Reset Switch (=lazy storytelling) burn in Gehenna!

129. Hans - November 11, 2008

118- is it me, or are you coming to a site about a film that has posted every single spoiler as and when it has appeared and complaining about being spoiled? WTF

130. CashCrowe - November 11, 2008

I just hope Vulcan survives. Other than that, this sounds great!

131. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008


Two designs that bear very little resemblence to each other counts as “unaltered?”


132. Izbot - November 11, 2008

So happy Archer is referenced (I’m assuming the beagle mentioned isn’t Porthos given the relatively short lifespans of dogs).

133. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

CAN JJ GO BACK TO 2004 and make an alternate timeline where BUSH (with Romulan help, of course) stole the election?

134. LCDR Arch - November 11, 2008

Cannon alert–
Kirk drives a corvette with a stick shift?

Remember Kirk driving the 1930 car with a clutch in Piece of the Action?

I think it was established Kirk is more of a full automatic kind of driver…

135. Hans - November 11, 2008

125- Get your old TOS VHS out and log off this site then.

136. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#132: No, it was Porthos’ brother, D’Artagnan. Porthos was killed trying to bite the archbishop.

137. Iowagirl - November 11, 2008

..or that a “grim” young Kirk will make an exciting commercial movie, they’re on crack.

I think your estimation is right, but I for one always liked the idea of a “grim” young Kirk, and I still think that sticking to the perception and the image people have of their heroes is one of the cornerstones of a successful brand. Just messing up with established traits in order to supply a want certainly would sell, but it would also thin down the soup and it wouldn’t be ST I’d like to watch.

I’m with you, Captain.

138. Marc - November 11, 2008

Something else I just remebered – Mc Coy says a few good lines

1. he is promoted to Chief Medical Officer (by Spock I think) during an attack, he is told ”your now chief medical…” to which he replies ”Tell me something I don’t know”

2. In a more comical scene with Kirk, he says the classic ”Good God man!”

139. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#135. I can’t. It’s in the nexus. But you and I can go back in the nexus to grab my VHS and “make a difference!”

140. JL - November 11, 2008

Thanks, Marc

141. Bob, the Evil Klingon Frontline Leader - November 11, 2008

Everytime I read someone exlaiming “canon!” I just picture former Indianapolis Colts coach Jim Mora ranting away somewhere with a laptop.

142. Jorg Sacul - November 11, 2008

“Scotty explains that his experimental beaming worked on fruit but he said “didn’t turn out so well for Admiral Archer’s beagle” ..”

Oh sure, it’s always the beagle who gets it… typical!

143. sean - November 11, 2008


Pfft, what kind of revisionist history is that? Rodenberry’s (god bless ’em) heavy-handedness caused his role to be reduced on TOS, the films & TNG. TNG crawled it’s way out of a long, dark tunnel once Gene took a back seat to new writers and Rick Berman (and let me tell you, I’m loathe to give RB that credit after what he did to later Treks, but there was a time where he clearly ‘got it’). I love Roddenberry for what he created, but what made Trek great was his knack for finding excellent collaborators (Gene Coon, Bob Justman, Harve Bennett, Rick Berman).

144. Gary Seven of Nine - November 11, 2008

67. Captain Robert April – November 11, 2008

What hell happened to Number One? Or Doctor Boyce? Or Lt. Tyler?

Avid fans, my hairy white ass….


Because this is a movie about a different Enterprise crew: The one that served after Pike, not the one that was written-off the ship because NBC wanted a re-write of the pilot.

Besides, how do we know that they are completely out of the film?

PS – I’m an avid fan, but I also understand that Trek has to change in order to be relevant (especially to a new audience).

145. Lancelot Narayan - November 11, 2008

#117 – Love it!

146. JL - November 11, 2008

“1. he is promoted to Chief Medical Officer (by Spock I think) during an attack, he is told ”your now chief medical…” to which he replies ”Tell me something I don’t know”

“2. In a more comical scene with Kirk, he says the classic ”Good God man!”

These are also awesome bits. Thanks again, Marc!

147. JL - November 11, 2008

I just hope Kirk doesn’t say one of his dumbest lines ever:

“I’ll need all the speed you can muster, mister.”

148. Lioncourt - November 11, 2008

The uproar from a few of you over supposed canon inconsistencies, based on four scenes taken out of context and probably not even shown in the same order as they appear in the film is pathetic. I think a lot of you *want* this film to be awful. It all sounds fantastic to me, and I’m looking forward to it. It also strikes me that it’s TNG fans who mostly have the canon craziness, and TNG has been pretty offensive to canon as well. Relax people. Give the film a chance.

149. dalek - November 11, 2008

If the timeline is altered, im not really bothered about obvious discrepencies in canon.

Two things matter to me about this movie:
a) No reset button ending. Its a Berman/Braga thing to show you a great adventure then press the big reset button at the end that no one remembers. I consider that cheating the audience.

b) The events of this movie change history in such a way, Kirk never dies on Veridian 3. It’s tough enough already going back watching a young Kirk knowing what happens to him in later life.

150. barrydancer - November 11, 2008

135 Hans:

Dude, be nice. Star Trek has lasted as long as it has because of passionate fans. A lot of posters here, myself included, are understandably cautious about the new film. A lot of people are understandably optimistic. But it doesn’t help any of us for you or anyone else to say if you don’t agree with my views you should pack up and go home.

151. Mark Lynch - November 11, 2008

I almost went and read all this and just about managed to stop myself. I would love to see more images, especially the big E.

But if I read these (and other) spoilers then it will totally ruin the movie for me.
Which means I can’t even read this thread…. damn!

Still, guess it will be worth it. I hope.

152. ucdom - November 11, 2008

Does anyone know if there was original music????

153. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

Look, the Canon that we’ve accumulated in 40+ years of Trek, the snippets of detail from Kirk’s life, Spock’s service with Pike, perhaps even the Farragut, all created the milquetoast future of the UFP that leads to Nero to travel back in time.

With due respect to the Right Wing Canonistas on this site, the timeline now loops backward, at least to Kirk’s birth and George’s death, before moving forward again. Cry yourselves out, take a nap, and then accept that JJ&KO were a little truthy about this not being a reboot. It’s pretty clear that this move at least is a reboot with a new operating system. Whether Spock does in fact travel in time to stop Nero before Nero sets out to kill George and destroy Vulcan, who knows?

But to state that this movie doesn’t respect canon is silly. If Kirk hadn’t seen genocide on Tarsus IV, been a bookworm, served aboard the Farragut, etc., Nero wouldn’t have set out to reset the timeline.

Also, the notion that the UFP and RSA were at war, but no one ever saw the face of a Romulan is plain stupid. Destroy one ship and there will frozen Romulans floating in space. Given the sensitive Human-Vulcan politics of the nascent UFP depicted in ENT, that Starfleet would keep their pointed ears Top Secret is most logical.

The GOOD WILL HUNTING spin on Kirk, being an Iowa townie-genius, is kinda cool.

154. Devon - November 11, 2008

“114. Captain Robert April – November 11, 2008

They’re not honoring canon, they’re destroying it.”

I don’t think I can believe you now since you deviated from your schedule of repeating this same crap every 30 minutes.

Scenes sound excellent! Bring it on!

155. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

also, in addition to what is mentioned by #115 above..

TOS cites Chekov as being 22, and Kirk at 34… not exactly matching academy ages. Kirk also cites in Generations how young Chekov was when he served.

McCoy being promoted to CMO negates the existence of Dr Mark Piper, the first CMO to serve under Kirk

Kirk clearly states in TOS that he only met Pike once before, when Pike was promoted to Fleet Captain. Pikes Crew onboard the ship had none of the officers under Kirk short of Spock.

I’m excited and terrified at the same time.

156. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#149 Dalek, can you clarify a little bit what you mean by
“The events of this movie change history in such a way, Kirk never dies on Veridian 3. It’s tough enough already going back watching a young Kirk knowing what happens to him in later life.”

157. Marc - November 11, 2008

No probs JL

Checkov had some great lines also.

At the end of the first scene where Kirk turns up to join Starfleet he’s riding a futurisitic bike, some guy comments ”Nice ride” Kirk gets up, tosses him the keys and just says ”It’s yours”

Oh and the fight in the bar at the start is pretty violent. Kirk gets punched in the face several times. This is 12a/PG-13 terriotory for sure.

158. Sallah - November 11, 2008

I’m betting the death of Kirk’s father in a different way is way the alterations to the timeline begin..

159. Marc - November 11, 2008

152. ucdom – There was a score, I didn’r recognise it. It may have been original as opposed to a temp track. JJ said the film is almost complete.

Cameron Crowe has seen the film and loved it, he praised Eric Bana

160. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Y’know, maybe they should just go all the way and turn Kirk’s brother Sam into his sister Samantha and really up the sexiness. And maybe have a little girl-girl action going on between Uhura and Rand, that’ll bring in the little mouthbreathers.

And how much ya wanna bet that the Enterprise has a couple hundred of those pop-up turrets like the Kelvin?

When do Starbuck and Apollo show up?

161. Dave - November 11, 2008

Admiral Archer? Ugh, does that mean Enterprise is now canon? Damn…

162. Sam Belil - November 11, 2008

Like I said in my prior posts regarding “Doomed Pike” — in this alternate timeline, he will meet a fate other than being blasted by delta rays on a Class J Starship — this trailer alone should tell us that canon has been violated in MORE WAYS that one …
1-Sulu, Uhura, Chekov under Pike?
2-No Number 1
3-No Dr. Boyce
4-No Tango?????
REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT, REBOOT. And thats okay. Just make it a GREAT REBOOT!!!!

163. konar - November 11, 2008

Wow — I’ve only had time to read the description at Empire so far, but from what I can see EVERYTHING that is described is completely true to character — if not cannon — and already sounds like it could be some of the best Trek that has ever been (IMO).

In that particular write up, with the lines that are either transcribed or paraphrased, you can really see how the story is coming out of the essence of the each character… I especially liked the idea of the challenge issued by Pike to Kirk, and his response to it. What a great addition to the story!

164. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#115—-The possibility and existence of alternate timelines in the Star Trek Universe is itself ‘canon’ (and has been since 1967), therefore any changes to the backstories with which we are familiar (assuming they are a result of an altered timeline) cannot be considered violations of ‘canon’.

We know certain things took place in the characters’ backstories from episodes like “WNMHGB”, “Obsession”, “The Conscience Of The King”, and “Court-Martial”.

Some of these events may not unfold as they did before due to Romulan interference.

It appears that things which may be perceived as canon violations on the surface will be canonically explained, as promised to us by Bob Orci.

I see no problem with that. And the early reviews of the footage are terrific. Even the guy who said he went into it wanting to write something terrible about it because it was Star Trek had to give it thumbs up.

When you can get 400 reporters to create thunderous applause after 20 minutes of footage, it is hard to imagine that this isn’t a winner.

165. Dr. Image - November 11, 2008

Oh boy, this is either going to be utterly awesome or suck beyond comprehension. There will be no middle ground.

It’s amazing that so many Trek fans have this vile reaction when canon is mentioned. Isn’t that what has made Trek such a rich universe over all these years? The extensive historical timeline that’s been maintained over DECADES? If it’s so unimportant, why even bother getting Nimoy??
If JJ is “honoring canon,” I’m anxious to see to what degree, because it seems to be much less than many anticipated. (Case in point- the “iBridge.”)

166. Brett Campbell - November 11, 2008

McCoy “smuggles” Kirk on board the Enterprise? I dunno about that …

167. Glacevert - November 11, 2008

Poor Captain Robert April, he’s must be having a seizure by now. The next post will be JJ raped his childhood. It’s a movie, it’s a reboot, get over it.

168. Flake - November 11, 2008

I can’t resist spoilers! Argh! Oh well.

Personally I don’t care about canon issues, I feel this is a reboot anyway and that is ok with me.

It appears to have got positive reviews everywhere, looks like its going to go well and the last thing Abrams was worried about is alienating a small percentage of diehards.

169. Marc - November 11, 2008

It’s not a re-boot. JJ says it’s a ”re-invigoration ”

170. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008


Good point ;)

I’m wondering now if Nimoy changeseverything, and the TOS timeline we know is a “corrected, altered” timeline, and some of the things that take place in this film aren’t outed by the end

In any case, all of us, purists and non, are going to be ripping out thier hair before may. The theatres are going to be filled with bald people. (insert Deltan joke here…)

171. StarTrekkie - November 11, 2008

Am I the only one disturbed by the Uhura sex they’re throwing in? It just seems so unnecessary and of bad taste.

172. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#165—The scriptwriters have handed JJ Abrams a huge canon loophole, since the possibility and existence of alternate timelines as a result of interference from the future has itself been canon for over 4 decades.

Just about anything and everything can been explained away by Romulan interference with the timeline 4 days before Kirk was even born.

The important thing to me is the reaction everyone who saw the footage apparently had. It seems to be universal praise. That’s good, IMO.

My number one goal in seeing a movie is to be entertained.

173. AJ - November 11, 2008

That Guardian review isn’t too forgiving.

It called Yelchin’s performance “rubbish.”

It also said Nimoy was somewhat wooden next to the younger guys.

174. Xai - November 11, 2008

Captain Robert April.

I read your comments above and while I disagree with your opinion of what’s been reported, that’s the way it is.

I do think you have stooped extremely low in your profanity-laced tirades. There was no reason for it.

175. harris250 - November 11, 2008

Humpty Dumty sat on a wall. Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the kings horses and all the kings men couldn’t put Humpty back together again….

176. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

Is Humpty dumpty in this? He was on the Farragut, wasn’t he?

177. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#173—He also said that he went into it hoping to “give it a kick right in the dilithium crystals”, yet couldn’t. He had to admit it looked good.

Another review (I forget which one it was) said that the room erupted in “thunderous applause” after seeing the footage.

178. OM - November 11, 2008

‘Ok, do not read the descriptions if you do not want to be spoiled’

…Better still, don’t read this thread and/or whine about the spoilers. The rest of us don’t want to hear the whining of spoiler challenged weenies.

179. Sam Belil - November 11, 2008

#165- I believe that JJ is doing a lot more than “honing canon”. I mean we have seen more than enough snippets of evidence to at least suspect that. This 20 minute footage certainly confirms that (as well as the EW Article). “Casino Royale” was a SMASHING success — yet it was also the MOST different of Bond films. I really believe that this will at least be the MOST different of ST TOS/Films period. AND CLEARLY we are looking at a REVAMPED universe/timeline — to think that opposite would be naive on our parts. #165 also totally agree with your statement:

“Oh boy, this is either going to be utterly awesome or suck beyond comprehension. There will be no middle ground”
This movie wil either AWSOME or AWFUL!!!!!

180. Mark - November 11, 2008

Boy, some fans just won’t be happy. All of the people who reviewed the 20 minutes shown spoke GLOWINGLY about what they saw. I say “Excellent!” I’ve got an engagement May 8th in the evening, but I will try to make it earlier in the day, or on Saturday if I have to. Live long and prosper!

181. Enterprise Fan - November 11, 2008

“Admiral Archer’s beagle”!!!

An Enterprise reference – hooray!

I believe that according to the Defiant’s biography from “In a Mirror, Darkly,” Archer dies in 2245, shortly after presiding over the commissioning of the NCC-1701. He was 133, so Scotty’s statement is definitely within canon; for all we know, Archer could have been cloning Porthos all those years – he certainly was attached to him enough!

Too bad there isn’t a Bakula cameo – that would really take the cake.

182. DJ Koloth - November 11, 2008

Well, doesn’t sound bad to me!

In fact, the film DOESN’T have to explain anything about the time line… Actually, I would prefer if it didn’t address the inconsistencies at all and left it up to us to figure it out. If it’s a good story, I can look at the film and say, “Okay, this jerk Nero went back in time to kill Kirk around the time of his birth and failed. What he did do was to mess up history, resulting in the events of this movie.” No April, no crew of the Enterprise before Kirk & Co.

No problem.

Look at what this does for JJ & Co. The slate is much cleaner than before. Also, it looks like this film may skim over Kirk’s time at the academy (it would seem to take a few years to graduate), which could be revisited at a later date (with plenty of time for Carol Marcus, Gary Mitchell, etc.).

Or not.

I’ll judge this movie when it comes out (on opening night, of course)…so far though, it looks promising.

183. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#176—In the other timeline, yes.

After the Romulan interference 4 days before he was born, anything could have happened. There is obviously something which changed the path to his destiny.

“The Conscience Of The King”, “Obsession”, “Court-Martial”….the events we knew of his previous backstory may be irrelevant to this timeline, since they may not occur at all now.

184. Gary the Gorn - November 11, 2008

Sounds like a great movie.

Has anyone on this site ever kissed a girl? Get out of your mother’s basement and live life. The movie sounds fun.

Keep up the great work J.J. I appreciate you breathing some fresh air into a close to dead franchise. I’ve been to every Star Trek movie in the theatre and the last couple just seemed like an episode of TNG.

Joker didn’t look like the Joker from the Superfriends cartoon and I thought he really made the last Batman Movie a lot of fun.

I think Star Trek is in excellent hands. Thanks for taking on this project.

185. boborci - November 11, 2008



186. McCoy - November 11, 2008

We live in a time where we know modern filmmakers have “hurt” (for lack of a better word) how we feel about past characters. (Star Wars prequels; Wild, Wild West; Starskey & Hutch; Bionic Woman; ).

The question is, will this Star Trek do that? And until the movie comes out, all we have is speculation. After today, I’m leaning towards rental, not DVD shelf.

187. ~~TARA~~ - November 11, 2008

#185 Bob-

I’m glad to hear that. I have to say after reading these reports I am extremely excited. Is it May yet??

188. Anthony Pascale - November 11, 2008

I think some people need to calm down and especially not get personal, especially Robert April, who gets a warning. Dont try and get around our language filters using creative spelling.

And people try and make your points without having to make 10 posts that say the same thing over and over, especially replying to your own posts in a row.

189. Comic Book Guy - November 11, 2008

Some of us prefer to spend our days in our mother’s basements.

Quit being mean “Gary the Gorn”.

I’m going to logoff my computer and build my AMC Star Trek “Bird of Prey” model.

190. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

UK press is decidedly nasty. Like ‘crabs in a bucket,’ they pull anyone down who nearly succeeds in making it out. So the fact that these reviews are roundly great is extraordinary. Koenig’s performance was always craptastic, so the new kid, a serious actor by any standards, has a unique balancing act.

169. Marc – November 11, 2008

Re-Invigoration comes from a cup of coffee or a Chinese foot massage. This is a reboot, straight up. The genius [for Hollywood, not science fiction as a whole] is that they’ve rebooted without trashing the past. James Bond has the benefit of implied succession–one 007 dies, a new one takes his #. BATTLESTAR GALACTICA rebooted with total disrespect to the original, and it worked out well. But this reboot seems like it’s been very reverential.

As for raped childhoods, my childhood was not as invested in the Space Fantasy Known As STAR WARS. It was always based on magic and myth, rather than science and a rigorous sense of history like STAR TREK.

191. OneBuckFilms - November 11, 2008

165 – The continuity within the series went only as far as keeping basic things straight during the Original Series.

At first, it was the United Earth Space Probe Agency, then it was Starfleet.

At one point, Kirk was a serious bookworm, the next he was brawling with another Cadet at the Academy.

If the series had so many inconsistencies,then telling the tale from scratch might be the way to go.

I believe that this may be effectively a reboot, but with enough reverence to the Original Series and it’s characters to work.

If this DOES turn out to fit in with the Original Series canon, even if altered by Romulans interfering with things, then I’d be delighted.

This may not be the case, however, considering that the Enterprise is now being built in Iowa (though it was never actually established on screen that the Enterprise was built in San Francisco), and Kirk meets Pike in a bar (when he was promoted to “Fleet Captain” according to dialogue in The Menagerie, which may have occurred before he was a Cadet).

The year of the Enterprise being built was never established on screen, and it is possible that Robert April was on the Enterprise before Kirk’s Academy stint, then Chris Pike commanded her while Kirk was at the Academy as a Fleet Capatin, with Kirk taking over and meeting the crew over the course of the movie.

Also is the Enterprise being Built or substantially refitted and overhauled in Iowa?

192. Chris Pike - November 11, 2008

170 no, Shat-joke!

193. JL - November 11, 2008

“My number one goal in seeing a movie is to be entertained.”


me too!

194. Wayne - November 11, 2008

Capt. April, get over yourself.

You ask if we’ve gone insane. May I point out that you’re the one ranting about how this movie destroys Trek, based only on second-hand reports of a preview, which for all we know may have large portions of it end up on the cutting-room floor.

I, as a huge, long-time Trek fan, cannot wait.

195. Johnny Ice - November 11, 2008

#Enterprise looks ‘just fine,’ shaped mostly like the TOS ship with TMP level of details (including torpedo launchers), except for the oversized nacelles#
How does the neck look like? Is as thin and weak as in TOS and TOS movies or is little thicker and more solid smilier to Enterprise C neck?

196. sean - November 11, 2008


Talk about reading with an agenda! The Guardian writer was clearly IMPRESSED. He even said he went in wanting to dislike it but was won over.

197. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

Ok, I am convinced, I want to see the trailer on Friday. Just bought my tickets for Quantum of Sominex (spelling intended) for Friday as soon as I can get to the theater after work.

198. JL - November 11, 2008

“Quantum of Sominex”


199. Schultz - November 11, 2008

I love the Scotty-Archer thing. Great! ;D

It all sounds really good. Can’t wait!

200. mark - November 11, 2008

to bob, alex, jj and all the girls and boys of cast and crew congrats guys

201. The Underpants Monster - November 11, 2008


Sounds more and more like the Romulans are some kind of renegade group. And Pike is quite the pivotal character, isn’t he?

The more I hear, the more eager I am to see Urban’s McCoy.

202. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - November 11, 2008

Sounds promising for sure

203. AJ - November 11, 2008

I’ve just perused the links, and I am laughing my ass off. Admiral Archer’s beagle and 47, plus what look like some great pieces of larger plot elements. Kirk relieving Spock as Captain of the Enterprise?

Cannot wait for this one!

204. jobryant - November 11, 2008

After reading these spoilers, here is what I see happening on May 9th 2009

The end credits roll to standing ovations
Audiences (TOS fans, TNG fans, and non-Trekkies) walk out of the theaters pumped
½ of them turn right back around and buy tickets to the next available show
Critical acclaim
Oscar buzz
Paramount instantly green lights two sequels
Being a Star Trek fan instantly becomes cool
Trekkies name JJ Abrams the new messiah

70 people go home, crawl into the fetal position, and cry themselves to sleep because Gary Mitchell was not in the movie

205. EnsignJulka - November 11, 2008

I want to see this trailer and I want to see it NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!

206. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

I have to say that I would be happier if Chekov was left out of it.

I can buy that Nero’s attack on the USS Kelvin 4 days before Kirk was to be born altered many events and delayed Kirk’s entry into SFA, but he still has to be 12 years older than Chekov. I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around how Chekov could be there even as late as the early 2260’s.

I suppose that, since Kirk’s rise through the ranks of Starfleet is quite different this time around, Pike could be in command of the Enterprise even later than he was in the previous timeline. Whereas Chekov first came aboard during Kirk’s command (sometime prior to the events of “Space Seed”) in the timeline we know, he may have come aboard while Pike is still in command this time around.

The other, easier explanation is that Chekov’s age in TOS is disregarded altogether.

It may be a little too convenient that Uhura, Sulu, Chekov, Scotty, and McCoy are aboard Pike’s Enterprise…but that is forgivable if this movie is as great as those reporters who gave those reviews seem to think it may be…at least in my opinion.

207. Weerd1 - November 11, 2008

This just ruined every bit of excitement I had for this film. I understand updating the look of the tech, and I can see where they have created a new timeline. However, the creators have been telling me all along this falls in line with TOS and would show us how that series came to be. This is a REBOOT, regardless of whatever story element you have to make it “fit,” it’s a complete reboot. I wanted to see how the Enterprise crew came together. I wanted to see a young James T. Kirk, the “stack of books with legs” who joined the academy at 17 and had to learn to loosen up. I wanted to see how TOS came to be. This movie may be great, but it is not how TOS came to be. It is how TOS has been changed into something new.

I don’t think I need something new. I think TOS would work just fine. What a shame these professional writers weren’t able to come up with a story to please everyone. What a shame, like B&B in the first three season of Enterprise, they decided to make it easier on themselves and ignore more than 40 years of story.

I do hope the film is enjoyable, but I have a tough time now believing it will be “Star Trek.”

208. JL - November 11, 2008

Mr. Orci

Judging by early reports and info from you and the creative crew, there seems to be many areas covered in the film:

• character development
• humor
• updated yet retro-esque look
• plot
• action and suspense

Earlier this year I mentioned on this site that I really hoped to see the new Trek give us a “sense of wonder” similar to TOS episodes like “The Cage.” Spock grabbing hold of the singing leaves on Talos IV (and then grinning), to me, is the perfect snapshot of this spirit and gives me chills to this day. You seemed to agree with this sentiment.

My question. With so many things going on in the film, my question is, will there be much focus on this element — the sense of wonder — the sense of discovery and the exploration of the unknown?

To me, this is much, much more important they assembled the Enterprise in Iowa or in orbit.

Thanks in advance and thank you for being someone I have put my faith in for this re-ignition: a true fan of the original series

209. Wrath - November 11, 2008

The canon whining is getting old. This all sounds good to me. The spirit of Trek seems intact, and the non-fans are drooling after seeing the trailer.

We’ve come a long way since Nemesis.

210. montreal paul - November 11, 2008

OMG … you canon followers are just a pain in the ass! NO WHERE does is state taht uhura and Chekov weren’t serving under Pike. You saw ONE episode with Pike in command.. who is to know when they came aboard? The could have been cadets assigned to the Enterprise.. just because we didn’t see them on the bridge with Pike, doesn’t mean they weren’t there. How about this.. hmmm.. maybe WATCH the movie??

211. Flake - November 11, 2008

Most read story on BBC News website!

212. JL - November 11, 2008


“To me, this is much, much more important than whether or not they assembled the Enterprise in Iowa or in orbit.”

213. Alex - November 11, 2008

I really don’t see why this drifts into a canon-discussion again. Off the top of my head I can name a dozen canon violations, not only TOS vs. other Trek shows but also TOS vs. TOS. We’re not talking about altering the universe (or do we? :-) ), but for a 120-minute origin film for 7 characters plus a story to be told, there has to be compromises. But as long as it’s just trifles, I don’t give a shit. In the end, it’s neither that nor the big explosions and effects-driven scenes we’ll remember, but the quiet ones, the character moments. And we haven’t seen any of those so far.

@boborci (maybe): Do you think 10 or 20 years from now, people will still remember a scene of ST09 the way we do ‘KHAAAN’ or ‘The line must be drawn HERE’? Any ‘defining moments’ in your movie?

Anyway, I won’t judge this thing before it comes out, but I *will* once it does. For now, all I have is rave reviews all over the place, but I couldn’t care less. It’s me they have to convince to like it. But with the little we got they already convinced me and obviously many others to be there for the midnight screening, and that’s a really good start I guess.

And about the Spock post-VI or post-Nemesis era: Abrams probably said post-VI because he assumed people would be familiar with the TOS movies, but not so much with the TNG ones. Saying he’s from the time after TOS is easier than explaining some 15 years of backstory.

214. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

47 Klingon Warbirds, that’s a whole lot of dead Klingons, and enough of a hit to shift the balance of power for a generation. It seems like Nero’s strategy is much bigger than Kirk, the Enterprise or the UFP, and that some kind of reset button will be punched by the end of this movie.

215. Barney - November 11, 2008

What I’ve read so far makes me think I’m gonna like this film, and I grew up on TOS. I think the new writers and production team see so-called ‘canon’ as capturing the spirit and look/feel of the series, and having the major elements such as the Enterprise, the main characters – but they aren’t slavishly adhering to every detail. It’s pretty much a reboot, but I like what I’ve seen and read so far.

Oh, and James at #54, the Titanic was built in BELFAST, not Dublin!

216. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

If you don’t like it, don’t go. Just because you spent 40 years reading make-believe history, doesn’t make it real.

The idea of alterations in the past causing the future to change is not a new invention to Trek. It has been done a lot.

Furthermore, if you really want to argue it, then McCoy going into the past and saving Judith Keeler did create the “true Trek future” – a future without Starfleet. Kirk and Spock changed the timeline back to the “timeline” they believed was correct, but who is to argue. They just got lucky that by allowing Keeler’s death, they got back to “their future” They got lucky, because maybe their actions while they were in the past could have created a new timeline.

217. Weerd1 - November 11, 2008

Actually- I am being unfair in post 208. I don’t really think the writers took an easy way out, but I wish it was different. Like the later Star Wars films, Lucas didn’t do with them what I would do, but I do enjoy them in their own right, and perhaps I will enjoy this film as well. The spirit of wonder and the commentary on the Human Condition is what is important in Trek. I am however very disappointed the film is a reboot.

218. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Undermining the integrity of canon undermines the foundation of the entire franchise. The “spirit” won’t count for diddly squat.

219. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#208—-“What a shame these professional writers weren’t able to come up with a story to please everyone”


I have some news for you….

That has never happened in the history of writing….ever!!!!

“This is a REBOOT, regardless of whatever story element you have to make it “fit,” it’s a complete reboot.”

No, it’s not….and here’s why.

Everything that happened in the timeline you are familiar with lead Nero and his cohorts to do what they did to interfere with the past. The relevancy of the previous timeline is therefore inherent in the story.

Everything we know is part of the course of events that leads the story to this. Furthermore, the possibility of alternate timelines caused by interference from the future has been a vital part of ‘canon’ in the Star Trek Universe since episodes like “Tommorow Is Yesterday”, “City On The Edge Of Forever”, “Assignment: Earth”, etc.

Like it or not, ‘canon’ has a huge inherent loophole, and it is called the alternate timeline…

It is clear that “how the original crew got together” is not the same in this story as it was before, nor does it appear that it was intended to be.

220. Wrath - November 11, 2008

Captain Robert April, TOS screwed with it’s own canon so much it’s unreal. Seems to me that adhereing as closely to canon as you would like would strangle the creativity of anyone trying to craft a story. Seems this movie isn’t for you though, but we’ll always have our Trek, so no harm can be done. This movie is a big gamble to attract new fans. If it fails, we’ll still have our Trek.

221. Devon - November 11, 2008

“219. Captain Robert April – November 11, 2008

Undermining the integrity of canon undermines the foundation of the entire franchise. The “spirit” won’t count for diddly squat.”

Looks like you’re on your regular interval again.

222. montreal paul - November 11, 2008

To hell with canon.. I have found it to be a major stumbling block. Why do you think there has been so many holodeck stories and time travel stories and dream stories.

223. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

The Pike depicted in this movie fills much the same role that April does in Diane Carey’s BEST DESTINY. I’d take a bet that Pike dies in this movie.

224. Peter Lemonjello - November 11, 2008

Trek Movie was a bit slow off the mark with this story.

225. Eric - November 11, 2008

“I was never that young.”

“No, you were younger.”

226. dalek - November 11, 2008

#156 sure thing.

What I mean is these changes would fashion a timeline so different that Kirk’s future and death remains open, rather than being fixed by the original timeline in which he died in Generations. I asked Mr Orci if the films events led to this possibility or not and he said he didn’t know. He was either protecting spoilers for the film, or stating that it is open to interpretation now. He didn’t say no, which tells me that Kirk’s death isn’t necessarily a fixed point now.

227. Kirokwannabe - November 11, 2008

It certainly sounds like the Romulan change to the timeline before Kirk’s birth will be the explanation for the “canon violations”. It’s also IMHO a great storytelling technique allowing us to see our favourite characters in new situations. We can compare the people they are now with what we knew before. What part of their personalities is genetic and what part is a result of experience? Fun stuff for us Trekkers.

I have been a TOS fan since the reruns in the early ’70’s. I could not be a bigger fan of the original series, yet I am am absolutely stoked to see JJ’s reboot!

228. Crusade2267 - November 11, 2008

Interesting… I can’t wait to see how it all fits together.

Poor Porthos :-(

229. JL - November 11, 2008

#216, #219, #220 among others

Really interesting stuff… I’m starting to understand more clearly the premise of the whole “altered timeline” thing…

230. rhall112003 - November 11, 2008

Mr. Orci,

The first movie I can remember watching while eating breakfast was TWOK, and the second was Balance of Terror. Reading these descriptions made me unbelieveably excited and thrilled to be a Trek fan. I, for one, am looking forward to seeing the film, and I sincerely hope the film is a success for you and your team.

231. mac - November 11, 2008

God knows I love Trek, in almost all it’s incarnations, but …. it just hasn’t been clicking.
This sounds like “the change we need,” to quote from a certain president-elect.
I’m so ready for some optimism, for some change!

232. Weerd1 - November 11, 2008

Touche’ 219, touche’… There is no way to please everyone. I just prefer when I am in the pleased crowd! :)

233. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

Anybody who says this isn’t a full blown reboot is so far in denial, they’re running for Pharaoh. And don’t insult my intelligence by trying to argue that it isn’t.

234. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

47. 750 Mang – November 11, 2008
“The smartest thing Harve Bennett did before he came up with the story for TWOK was to watch all 79 episodes. Seems like the new gang might have skipped a step.”

Ohhh, how I was roundly critisized for saying that HERE (of all places,)
so many months ago.

You know who you are*

*Trekkies. Sheesh

235. JL - November 11, 2008

woah, regarding the “new” Enterprise, just saw this on AICN, thought I’d pass along:

“…J.J. Abrams’ production designer had no respect for the original show or designs, and “thought the project was beneath him,” according to a member of the production. The new Enterprise looks somewhat like a cross between the ST:TOS and the ST:TMP ship, but the overall size and component proportions are absolutely awful. First, the ship is GIGANTIC. It’s not 1000 feet long, it’s more like 3000 feet — like the BSG or an Imperial Star Destroyer (which makes its construction on Earth by a bunch of 22nd-century hard hat-wearing welders even more stupid.) Second, the ship’s secondary hull is half the size it should be, while the cylindrical, whale-like engine nacelles are HUGE — again, way out of proportion to the rest of the ship. Once again, there’s a reason why Paramount hasn’t revealed the whole ship yet, because true-believer TOS fans are gonna hate it…”

Don’t know about you guys, but I hope this isn’t true.

236. Glacevert - November 11, 2008

Mr. April, please GET A LIFE!

237. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

Here’s how I see it…

Everything we know——ENT, TOS, the TOS movies, TNG, the TNG movies, DS9, VOY—-leads to the point where (sometime post-Nemesis) Nero and his villainous cohorts act in an effort to disrupt the past in their favor.

Nimoy’s Spock is bent upon the notion of picking up the pieces and setting as much of it ‘right’ as he can.

What we get— as fans— is an opportunity to enjoy stories involving the (once again) young and inspiring characters of the Original Series in new adventures for years to come.

That can’t be a bad thing.

I think Star Trek will indeed continue to “live long and prosper” when Bad Robot delivers this movie to us….I can’t wait.

I’m more excited now about a Star Trek movie than I have been since waiting in line as a child to see TWOK at the Grandview Cinema in Odessa, Tx, back in 1982.

I feel like I’m standing in that line right now.

238. the king in shreds and tatters - November 11, 2008

Well… It sounds better than Voyager.

239. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

“…J.J. Abrams’ production designer had no respect for the original show or designs, and “thought the project was beneath him,” according to a member of the production. The new Enterprise looks somewhat like a cross between the ST:TOS and the ST:TMP ship, but the overall size and component proportions are absolutely awful. First, the ship is GIGANTIC. It’s not 1000 feet long, it’s more like 3000 feet — like the BSG or an Imperial Star Destroyer (which makes its construction on Earth by a bunch of 22nd-century hard hat-wearing welders even more stupid.) Second, the ship’s secondary hull is half the size it should be, while the cylindrical, whale-like engine nacelles are HUGE — again, way out of proportion to the rest of the ship. Once again, there’s a reason why Paramount hasn’t revealed the whole ship yet, because true-believer TOS fans are gonna hate it…”

Yeah, they really have respect for the original series and the fans…

240. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

207. Weerd1 – November 11, 2008


241. boborci - November 11, 2008

214 Not for us to judge. That will be your job.

242. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

219. Closettrekker

Since this movie does not seem to have an officeal name that encompasses the alternate timeline story, should we just call it
Star Trek – Alternatives

243. Izbot - November 11, 2008

39. Captain Robert April –
“Y’know, it’s precisely this sort of Mongolian clusterphuque that got Roddenberry to come out of retirement and produce TNG, to keep Paramount from making an unholy mess of the whole thing.”

Somebody get this guy a tranquilizer, he’s about to go postal. Dude, just don’t go see it. Stay home. Rewatch “Way to Eden”, “And the Children Shall Lead”, “Spock’s Brain” and all those other wonderful canon moments you so zealously defend. Spew your venom elsewhere.

244. CardassiaPrimera - November 11, 2008

Excellent. Every time I like the movie.

245. Pat Payne - November 11, 2008

Oh. AICN. THERE’S a reputable news source (rolls eyes)…

246. Captain Robert April - November 11, 2008

“Not for us to judge. That will be your job.”

Then y’all are in deep trouble.

247. boborci - November 11, 2008

oops — responding to 213

248. Hanabi - November 11, 2008

I was reading the Phase II book by the Reeves-Stevens’ and there are some sketches in there of the Phase II Enterprise Bridge, which are also mostly white. it does look like this new Bridge has borrowed from that aesthetic.

249. boborci - November 11, 2008

or maybe responding to 208’s question. that’s the problem with reading the thread backwards!

250. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#233—“Anybody who says this isn’t a full blown reboot is so far in denial, they’re running for Pharaoh. And don’t insult my intelligence by trying to argue that it isn’t.”

Forgive me for insulting your intelligence, but how can it be a “full blown reboot” when every event depicted in ENT, TOS, the TOS movies, TNG, the TNG movies, DS9, and VOY leads up to the point where Romulan villains in the post-Nemesis era decide to alter the past?

251. Jay - November 11, 2008

#27 – Captain April, I can only hope that you realize that this is fiction. Right? You do don’t you?

Why can’t you appreciate this on it’s own merit? It doesn’t have to fit perfectly into everything that has come before. And why do you canon-ites ignore the fact that there are endless contradictions of canon in the TOS series itself? Why are there contradictions? Because this IS FICTION!!

You say any 10 year old knows more, but you are wrong. The VAST MAJORITY of the film-going public, esepcially the ever important 15 to 30 crowed knows virtually nothing about Star Trek. Contrary to alot of Trekkies’ inflated ego driven beliefs, the VAST MAJORITY of the movie going publice thinks Star Trek is a has-been, joke of a franchise. Therefore they will not notice any proglem with Chekov or Uhura serving on Pike’s Enterprise, or any of the other unimportant details you obsess over.

Get a life. It’s a movie. And from the descriptions above, it sounds like a potential “Dark Knight” type of blockbuster.

252. Gustavo - November 11, 2008


253. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#246—I don’t think they are “in trouble” just because you post nasty things about it before it is even released.

Judging by the initial reaction of the 400 reporters shown the 20 minutes of footage, I’d say there is a pretty good chance your opinion won’t represent the majority of moviegoers…It sounds like it was fairly impressive to them.

254. JL - November 11, 2008

To explore strange, new worlds

Seek out new life and new civilizations

You know the rest

With everything that seems to take place in the new Trek film (ie; backstory origins, everyone meeting up, altered timeline plot, action, et all), I hope they did not omit this crucial, crucial element.

That would translate to disaster as far as I’m concerned.

255. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

Plus, if the alternate timeline button is hit sometime around the Kelvin, that means Khan is still sitting aboard his spaceship, ready for Star Trek 10, Rebirth of KHAN!!!!!!

256. JL - November 11, 2008

Thank you (I think), Mr. Orci

257. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

I meant 11

258. Pat Payne - November 11, 2008

251/Jay: Why can’t more people understand the point you’re making?


259. Wrath - November 11, 2008

When you start quoting guys at aicn you know it’s time to pack up and go home. Honestly, there are more “sources”, or people who know sources than there are poeple working in Hollywood. And all of them hate EVERYTHING that they are working on.

Go back and read some of the Batman Begins talk backs. Shocking.

260. Jay - November 11, 2008

#51 – Again, i don’t see your point. So what?

It’s a movie, and 90% of those going to see it won’t know any of that.

Do you think people liked “Dark Knight” and lined up by the thousands to see it because it was just like the 60’s TV show Batman?

Obviously you won’t like this film because you can’t get over constraints in story telling over 40 years of real time, but you know what? The millions of dollars that this film makes due to the droves of people seeing it like Transformers or Dark Knight will make you a very small minority that people will quickly forget about.

It’s just sad you won’t be able to enjoy the film with the rest of us for what it is – a good movie about characters we all enjoy watching.

261. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#255—Will the Enterprise be in the right place at the right time to discover the SS Botany Bay, the Doomday Machine, etc.?

Good questions, IMO.

The Botany Bay could drift for another 100 years before being discovered, or it could be discovered by another vessel….

262. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

I think this is going to be alot of fun.

263. mgoodr00 - November 11, 2008

If the timeline is FUBAR … maybe it can be assumed

Kirk enters the academy later – 2254 or later

Never lives on Tarsus IV

Pike has a different fate

Pike is Captain at the start of what would have been the five year mission,
which could answer why Spock is first officer.

264. JL - November 11, 2008



265. Daoud - November 11, 2008

Paging Mr. Coto. All I can say is… the sequel should be setup to “fix” a lot of the reasonable criticisms.

Certainly, I can see the Federation not willing to have so many new officers filling positions on the Enterprise under this Tom-Paris/Nick-Locarno-like J.T. Kirk.

Perhaps, Starfleet refuses to honor Pike’s brevet field promotions given to Spock for example, or Spock’s field promotion given to McCoy. So in the sequel, we see a “grim” “by the book” instructor from SFA, Gary Mitchell (Of course! His description of Kirk thus becomes a description of him instead!) assigned to be Kirk’s first officer. And we see Starfleet assign Dr. Piper as CMO, reassigning McCoy to SFHQ… and assigning Dr. Dehner, etc. Transferring Sulu to physics…

And of course, Lt. Cmdr. Scott has to take over for Olson.

266. Brad - November 11, 2008


267. Peter N - November 11, 2008


I checked the Jonathan Archer entry at Memory Alpha, and Sussman’s biographical entry indicating that Archer died after the commissioning of the NCC-1701 Enterprise (thus possibly being the Archer in the Scotty comment) is not necessarily canon as it was not shown on screen. Even if it could be considered canon, Archer had by that point retired as Federation President – hardly makes sense to go back into Starfleet after the pinnacle of his career, although perhaps he remained an honorary admiral to the end of his life. We may never know….

268. Wolf Trek - November 11, 2008

I’m not making any judgments until the movie comes out and I see it. Until then, there is no way to critique the movie.
All these conversations we are having about these scraps being tossed our way reminds me of a story I heard when I was a small kid. It was about some blind men touching a small section of an elephant and then trying to describe what the entire animal looked like. And to the best of my knowledge, they were all wrong.
Let’s watch the movie and THEN get critical.

269. A. .S.F.33 - November 11, 2008

I don’t know maybe JJ is smart letting us in on this a little at a time so the shock of all the changes they made, doesn’t send us screaming into the night crying foul. Maybe he’s trying to desensitize and prefare us a little at a time but what i feared all along about this movie seems to be coming true…This is not my Trek anymore and that makes me very sad. I knew when they said they were including the novels as “canon” (which had never beed done before) that we would be in for changes that i knew i woldn’t want to accept. I wanted to like this film but for me Kirk is key and this, so far, sounds far from the Kirk of TOS. I wish they had made this movie using new characters. I mean if they wanted to change so much of what we know about these existing characters and their history, why bother using them at all?

270. Neftoon - November 11, 2008

Colour me excited, I can’t wait until May, I ove the reference to admiral archer and the beagle as well.

271. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008


I was reading these four scene descriptions, trying to figure out how to make this all work in my head as part of Star Trek, as TPTB claimed it would be. Yeah, maybe this is all out of context, and maybe some of this is resolved later, but what I was reading sure seemed like pretty much of a mess to me.

For the first time since I started following this production, my hopes really sank. Based on reading this set of scenes–and allowing, again, that there’s almost certainly a lot of material we haven’t seen yet–but this doesn’t seem like Star Trek to me. This seems like a story about some folks with the same names as characters I care about, with a few ships and planets with the same names as ships and planets I care about, but otherwise there’s little resemblance to the fictional world I care about.

For the first time, it’s starting to feel like a total continuity-buster, and, yeah, a reboot of the worst kind (and, yes, a reboot with the cheap-ass excuse of an alternate timeline is a reboot, nonetheless, unless the alternity is resolved by the end of the story).

For the first time, I’m starting to feel like the oft-asserted claim that this movie is designed to be an origin story for the Star Trek that we know and love is in fact a lie.

Maybe I’m wrong. I really hope I’m wrong. But for the first time, I don’t feel good about this movie anymore.

If I’m not wrong, that’ll be a couple of C-notes I won’t be spending on movie tickets next spring.

#237 – If they’ve thrown out the Trekverse, it most assuredly is a bad thing.

Can someone, anyone, who’s in a position to know give me any hope that the conclusions I’m drawing are wrong, and that I should still have any reason to care about this movie (except maybe to hope that it goes away quickly and does as little damage as possible)? Please? I want to feel good about what’s going to come in May, and I’m having real trouble now. :(

272. LostonNCC1701 - November 11, 2008

Okay, y’know what? Screw Canon. This movie sounds awesome. As long as it doesn’t make a uber-error (like, I don’t know, replacing Warp Speed with Hyperspace or something like that), I’ll be fine. As long as the movie is good. Which it sounds like it will. And from what I’ve read, there seem to be very few things that DIRECTLY are going against Canon here, the rest merely goes against Fanon or could easily be explained away as Time Travel related or as results of personnel movements that were never acknowledged on screen but easily could have happened.

Although Porthos must’ve been like 90 when Scotty got to him, meaning Archer must really like Beagles.

Hail to Greenwood as Pike. He’s a great “That Guy” who can play an important character in a supporting role (See: Thirteen Days, where he is JFK and is Second-Billing).

273. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

245 zactly, AICN talkbacks are like getting sex advice from a 3rd grader.

The nacelles seem much thicker in diameter, so the proportions may be different. But I can’t see the small secondary hull thing being true, especially if the shuttles are longer and the ship’s carrying Drop Ships, too.

One interesting thing: The redshirt named Olsen–Greg Ellis is listed as Chief Engineer Olsen on imdb. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0254862/

There are two adult actors listed as Klingon Guards on imdb, too, one black one white. The white guy fits the profile of a TOS Klingon–but we’ve never seen a TOS Klngon played by a black guy.

274. Classic Trek RULES!!!!! - November 11, 2008

Definitely Fan-boy Nonsense with NO understanding of classic Trek and just SPITS all over it!!!
Screw you JJ and Writers for Killing Trek.
GO Kill LOST while your at it. That Pile of Epic Fail needs to DIE More!

275. captain_neill - November 11, 2008

Its obvious that it is not fitting in with canon and because of that I am pissed off at JJ. He has re wrote it all.

That scene with Kirk in the bar is so cliched and why is Uhura an officer before Kirk enters the Academy, she is younger than Kirk.

I thought the Enterprise was built in the San Fransico Orbital Shipyards not in Iowa?

What happened to the serious student that Kirk was and why is Chekov being depicted as a similar age to Kirk.

Have they forgotten about Kirk serving on the Farragut?

I will still go and see the film and hope he has respected the Roddenberry ideal. I see this being a great movie but it will not be a Star Trek movie.

276. JL - November 11, 2008


“if they wanted to change so much of what we know about these existing characters and their history, why bother using them at all?”

I’m optimistic about the movie BUT —

I think it’s a legitimate question.

277. raulpetersen - November 11, 2008

hopefully, this is what there up to… in regards to canon.

we know theres an intergallactic crisis thats why there on the enterprise, its not their assigned ship!

when the good guys win its crisis over! and you get an ending that could mirror star trek vi with everyone saying goodbye to each other !

we know they’ll serve together again – they dont!

the crewgo there seperate ways on to other ships or back to the academy .

pike will regain control of the enterprise, spock will be demoted, kirk will go to faraguat and everyone else goes where they should be.

just because this movie brings the characters together its still set before the five year mission, the first time they all served together properly,.

they dont need to end this movie with the begining of the five year mission because they can make movies leading up to it!

please tell me somebody filmed the 20 mins! please! please!

278. Kev-1 - November 11, 2008

Sounds like they’re just turning Trek into another action film.

279. Doesn't Have to Know Everything Now Now Now - November 11, 2008

If I could go back in time, I’d convince Mike and Denise Okuda not to write the Star Trek Chronology. Pretty sure half of the canon arguments on this thread would disappear.

280. pinky - November 11, 2008

Ahhh… I see it now!!

Scotty, after the Enterprise D rematerializes him, designs a time travel ship. The old Spock, who is alive at the same time just because his Vulcan lifespan is so very long… meets up with Scotty in the future!! That’s got to be it! haha… awesome fun. awesome fun.

281. Devon - November 11, 2008

“235. JL – November 11, 2008 ”

I read that same post too. In fact he made two of them where he somewhat changes what he says throughout both of them.

A couple of things make no sense. First, did Paramount go and have someone take a tape measure and see how long the Enterprise was?

He made the same sort of post in another Trek thread from the other thread on AICN. His first claim was that it was just “bigger than 1,000″ feet. Now he has a definitive measure of 3,000 feet? How do you confuse the two? HOW CAN YOU TELL?

“Once again, there’s a reason why Paramount hasn’t revealed the whole ship yet, because true-believer TOS fans are gonna hate it…”

But they are already revealing it! Again, some of the stuff he says makes LITTLE sense.

Second, most of the accounts just say that the nacelles are a little over sized (which most already knew from the teaser trailer.) Everything else appears to be proportionally correct from the reports (contradictory to what he said.)

282. blake powers - November 11, 2008

I want to be in one of these screenings. Contest??

283. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

Also, re size of the Enterprise, the size of workers on the saucer section seems roughly the same as the size of Kirk and Spock walking on the saucer in TMP.

284. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

I got to say at this point, and I think you may all agree, I still like my Trek XI Synopsis better.


285. Tox Uthat - November 11, 2008

#251 and #252


286. Donn - November 11, 2008

210. Wrath – amen to that.

As always, it’s been entertaining to read everyone’s reactions. Here’s mine: if I couldn’t wait before, now I REALLY can’t wait! Fortunately, I’m already slated to see Quantum of Solace this weekend. It’s odd to me that so many here have commented disdainfully about seeing it, or going just for the trailer. What’s not to like about a Bond movie? Oh, right, the blasted canon problem.

Canon. *rolls eyes* Canon is great, but if it doesn’t serve to help tell the story, then its only purpose is to prove how smart you are to other dorks. (I can say that, _I’m_ a dork.) As has been pointed out, Star Trek was remarkably consistent, but it was also frequently inconsistent, and when it “violated canon,” it did so to serve the story being told at the moment. Data’s cat, Spot, switched from male to female to serve a particular story. Kirk was alternately a bookworm or a fisticuffs loving maverick. (Can we use that word safely yet?) Checkov was the one on the planet, so he’s the one Khan remembered from Space Seed, even though he wasn’t in the episode. You can explain stuff away all you want, and that’s a lot of fun, but ultimately it’s just not the end of the world when a new writer and director want to tell a particular story and fudge what’s gone before.

You can certainly explain the events in the upcoming movie by claiming time travel and timeline alteration, and if that makes you feel better and ready to enjoy the show, I think that’s great. For me personally, it doesn’t matter as much that things might be different. I like to think of it as a different interpretation, a different way of telling a story about a crew consisting of people named Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Sulu, Checkov, Uhura and Scotty aboard a spaceship called Enterprise. I’d be okay with it even if there was no time travel whatsoever in the movie to “explain” what we see in the context of the canon of all the other shows. (And as I’ve said before, it looks like JJ et al are being remarkably faithful to what most people know about Star Trek anyway.)

I’ve been to the conventions, I’ve got the TNG uniform (made custom before you could feakin’ buy them), as likely as not I can name the notable episode you describe, I’ve been to the Vegas Experience, I’ve met some of the TOS cast, got most of the Hallmark ornaments, and I know I’m not even remotely the Trekkiest Trekker out there… but I’m telling you it’s okay. You can give yourself permission to go to this movie in May and be entertained, and see, if not what was, (because established canon is too dear to you) then what might have been. An alternate version, if you will.

Some people like Tim Burton’s Batman, some people like the new one, and some people still even like Adam West. There’s room for everyone, IDIC and all that.

287. Devon - November 11, 2008

#269 – “I mean if they wanted to change so much of what we know about these existing characters and their history, why bother using them at all?”

Can you name some examples of what they are changing so much of?

288. Ryan T. Riddle - November 11, 2008

“17. Captain Robert April – November 11, 2008

Bend over and grab the ankles, kids, ’cause we are about to take it up the rear with this one.”

Well, at least, Abrams is offering a reach around.

Meanwhile, I look forward to the film.

289. James Cannon - RUNCORN TREKKER UK - November 11, 2008

I dont mind a few changes, ship looking like TMP or bridge a bit updated as well as uniforms… but this just sounds like that arse Abrams, wants kids & teens to see it…

Nope, I’m unhappy. And I wont be spending my £8quid on this…. I’ll download it and watch it on my own projector system at home.

(I give this post 5 minutes before Admin delete it. Seems us hard core Trekkers always get slaughtered by others or our posts deleted – harrumph)

290. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

If you aren’t happy with this movie, avoid it and donate your $10.50 to Bill Shatner so he can add in some super SFX to the ending of Trek V. That way you will be happy and can rejoice in having your old, but stinky Trek V.

291. JL - November 11, 2008


You have a point. Makes me feel better.

What about my earlier post though? ( #276 )

292. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

289. James Cannon

Right on (about the 5 min comment) ; )

But I’ll still give it a chance.

Don’t judge too early.

293. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#279- Probably not. Most of the arguments taking place have little to do with the various conjectures that Mike and Denise came up with, but instead are dealing with what was previously established on film.

294. JL - November 11, 2008



295. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

remember when they rebooted dukes of hazzard and suddenly there was all this swearing and sexuality that was never a part of the original? I really really really hope that the new star trek avoids the same thing.

i’ve been totally onboard and open to this movie but as of today, i’m on yellow alert.

yo orcster, have you been hanging out at this site for months now out of a sense of guilt? have you betrayed us? although i trust in you, given all the new “sh*t”, (as dude lebowski would advise us) i’m getting the uneasy feeling about trust in sir JJ.

maybe its one too many “this one’s not for the fans” or “i never was a fan” comments. maybe captain robert april is right. god, i hope not. but why is uhura tending bar in iowa and accusing james t. kirk of beastiality?

that word doesnt belong in the star trek i know. oh you can imply it, etc. but this is one instance where i think that a network’s standards dept actually helped. Yo, please don’t be R-rating my childhood, yo. Lets please keep that innocence and good taste atleast?

have you betrayed us, orcster? were there battles with sir jj where he just didnt give a care about the canon that you were trying to preserve, as a fan? i think awhile back you said something along the lines of the bottom line is that either we buy your version or we dont. you said this when addressing specific particulars and plot points as some sort of blanket… as i might see it now… apology?

dude… please post more than a one-liner that says nothing.

these british naval dudes have seen about 1/3 of the movie and are spilling all kinds of beans about it. is this the way you wanted it to all go down? what is UP with kevin smith and garth brooks and every father’s daughter’s a virgin seeing this thing way – and a mean WAY – before it comes out? and oh sure, i get to read first person accounts on the interwebs. but still. where’s my chance to see the movie now?

and what is up with sir jj saying that spock is post -nemesis, now it’s post st6? has sir jj even seen these movies to know what he is answering?

you can imagine me, as quinto, as nimoy, as spock – standing in the transporter bay as a landing party prepares to beam down to talos 4, yet only 2 chicks from the party actually materialize and I cry out in my most contained vulcan non-emo:



296. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

Right Wing Canonistas, proceed immediately to this link and STFU:

297. QUANTUM LEAPBACK - November 11, 2008

Nope! Won’t read this report!! Won’t ruin my total movie experience!!! Only children need to peek in the closet on Xmas eve!!! I don’t care who’s seen it nor what they think!! I am capable of individual thought and freedom.

298. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008


Yeah? And if we did not have “ours,” you would have this new Trek.

It’s called respect QUANTUM. Plain and simple.
Respect for your elders and what brought you here. That kinda thing.

Learn it, Love it, be it.

299. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#296 – Got ’em all. What about the left-wing canonistas? Or even the center-moderate canonistas? Or… ;)

300. JeffreyNdallas - November 11, 2008

Nimoy has faith, Pegg has faith, the press at the screening has faith, Kevin Smith has faith…..Everyone so far who has seen bits and pieces really digs this movie….but it is not your fathers Trek….it is something more….Please have faith that this will be a great movie…tell your friends about it….get excited….Hope for the future is what ST is about….IDIC….Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations…..I have always joked (well half heartedly) that Trek is my religion…..people coming together for their similarities and embracing our differences….to me that is what Gene was talking about….but when I read the comments on here, I feel like I accidentally logged on to a right wing, narrow minded evangelical church website proclaiming the end is near, Obama is the anti-christ, etc…etc…..Star Trek is about hope and if things don’t evolve or at least adapt, they tend to die off…..Thank you J.J. and crew for taking a chance…..second star to the left and straight on till morning….(yes I substituted left for “right” with political undertones…lol)

301. Smike van Dyke - November 11, 2008

#271: Yeah, I guess it’s not an origin story of the Trek we know but an origin story for the new Star Trek blockbuster movie series that is going to be made IF this movie is a success.

Just think of TOS as a comic book series being reimagined by JJ & Company and adapted for the big screen. That’s what I’ve been guessing from day one and NOBODY seemed to believe me anywhere on the internet. This one’s a plain reboot, reimagining, reinterpretation of the original making use of some recognizable icons, nothing more, nothing less.

You’re not going to watch 2007’s Transformers movie and then start watching the 80s cartoon, are you? No, you are expecting the blockbuster sequel! You can’t expect Paramount to finance a new “pilot movie” for a 43 year old low-budget cult show! It’s an all new take, nothing more, NOTHING LESS!

I’m looking forward to it for what it is because that’s definitely more exciting than the second backdoor pilot of that lost Phase II series or whatever fanwank some of us were expecting. Yeah, it IS a sad day because it’s defintely clear the OLD TREK is NOT coming back the way some of us wanted to believe. But then, it is also a HAPPY DAY because Trek will be brought to a new generation that had no chance of entering the complex 700 episodes and 10 movie-spanning megaverse that came before…

302. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

Sorry Quantum!

That little shot (on stun setting only) was meant for 296 – Jeffries Tuber.

Damn Phaser…

303. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

You know, I am one who doesn’t really want what I remember changed, so I guess you could call me a canon nut as well. However, I am willing to give this movie a chance and enjoy it for what it is, another story in the Star Trek Universe. It took me four seasons before I would even admit that I WATCHED TNG. I had to wait til they killed Wesley….they did kill Wesley didn’t they? No? Can we go back and re-edit? Wait, maybe this altered time line theory that everyone keeps throwing out will result in Wesley never being born. Yeah!! I can live with that! Ok, I got it….we continue in this altered time line and then redo all the Next Gen first 4 seasons episodes sans Wesley!! Yeah! I like it!!! Thanks JJ.

304. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#271: “For the first time, it’s starting to feel like a total continuity-buster, and, yeah, a reboot”

I’ve thought this was pretty clear from early on.

#284: “I got to say at this point, and I think you may all agree, I still like my Trek XI Synopsis better.”

No, I don’t. Sorry.

305. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

So, there’s product placement in new Trek movie!

306. Glacevert - November 11, 2008

#298 – It’s your own fault, and loss, if you can’t appreciate both.

307. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

#295 – Post of the day. Seriously.
There wasn’t sexuality in the original Dukes of Hazzard????????????????- good god man where do you think the term “Daisy Dukes” came from? Its because Daisy sat around the whole TV show wearing those itsy bitsy pants. Umm yeah that was sexual.

Good god. Delusional. Please don’t mention Dukes of Hazzard again. Thanks.

308. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

304. Dennis Bailey – November 11, 2008

Yeah, I guess it had too much cannon, vulcan mysticism and sction thrown in.

309. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

306. Glacevert – November 11, 2008

Never said I would not gie it a chance. I ust have a deep respect for what TOS did for ALL OF US!!!

310. Smike van Dyke - November 11, 2008

#286 + 300: Kudos to your posts! That’s the spirit!

311. boborci - November 11, 2008


JJ was the perfect choice for us precisely because he wasn’t a die hard fan. Doesn’t matter what he knew or didn’t know, that wasn’t his job. That was our job.

312. Kerr Avon - November 11, 2008

RE: 254. Exactly what I was thinking as I read this post.

As someone who is more of a “typical” fan of S. F., I hope the spirit of the original show is kept intact in that exploration of new worlds and meeting new life forms is an essential aspect of the spirit of Star Trek as are the philosophical underpinnings that Roddenberry wanted to explore (remember that even the “dumbed-down” second pilot, Where No Man Has Gone Before, still had the courage to cite Spinoza.)

Since when has Starfleet been primarily a peace keeping force? Where is the emphasis on exploration and discovery and the mandate for five year missions to seek out strange new worlds?

What I do not want to see is just another military SF action film. That would betray Star Trek more than any “canon violation” that some of you fans seem to be so obsessed about.

Can Abrams deliver a film about pushing the frontiers, exploring space, the thrill and danger of a voyage of discovery and questioning the very nature of what it is to be human or are we just going to have an angst-driven young Kirk taking command of a warship and saving humanity from the Romulans by killing them all in battle, just like certain other tired recent Trek films have done?

313. boborci - November 11, 2008


Another way of saying that I am not preparing any apologies or disclaimers at this point!

314. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#304: “Yeah, I guess it had too much cannon, vulcan mysticism and sction thrown in.”

It just didn’t impress me strongly. I didn’t see what I’d like about it if I didn’t go in already real familiar with and determined to like “Star Trek.”

315. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

dude – it was implied, never expressed directly AND w/ potty mouth.

“double dumb-ass on you” and “haven’t you got any goddamned feelings about THAT?” are about the only instances of swearing that star trek needs. remember when kirk explained to spock the colorful metaphors of the time?

other than shat putting his boots back on… he would never have openly talked about sex like that. no way.

R-rated dukes of hazzard ruined what was a clean, wholesome, friday night family show. star trek doesnt need that.



316. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

Dukes of Hazzard was rated PG 13.

317. JL - November 11, 2008

#311 Mr. Orci

“…that wasn’t his job. That was our job.”

You read my mind; how true a statement.

The director brings the story and the details to life by directing, not writing.

318. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008


I was excited to go see the last Star Trek movie. Took the day off from work just to see the first show. When the movie was over I was very disappointed and I felt betrayed.

If I can leave the movie you wrote without feeling like I wasted my time, I will be happy.

319. Lynies Esprit - November 11, 2008

I think everyone should judge this movie when it comes out, all this bollocks about cannon I couldn’t care less, what’s important is that this movie has the essence of Star Trek and has a great story too, it’s all about entertainment. You should all get a life and wait till May 2009, I’m sure most of you idiots will all go and see the movie anyway because you all have nothing else better to do with your lives think about it? Did Khan know Chekov in TWOK…No! But you all regard this movie as the best Trek movie! Judge this movie on it’s onw merrets, if it’s crap so be it, if it’s great then it will apeal to a wider audience which is more important than worryng about fine detail.

320. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#315: “R-rated dukes of hazzard ruined what was a clean, wholesome, friday night family show. ”

Wait a minute, there was something to the “Dukes” TV show besides Catherine Bach providing fapping inspiration?

I missed that.

321. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

alrighty, orcster, i was just probin’ ya. you’re a man of principle and you stand by your work. but please man, tell me this is rated G dialogue???

PG, old school star trek the motion picture before there was a PG13, kind of PG atleast?

AND johnny knoxville free?



322. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

314. Dennis Bailey – November 11, 2008

Well it only took me four hours of early morning writing.

I also wrote it as a benchmark against what the new writers would promote. To see if this long time Trek fan could compare to what the Hollywood professionals would dream up.

I guess if I spent a month on it it would hit ALL the proper Trek chords.
I also thought it was a bit too brief.

323. JL - November 11, 2008


Although I always smile at your signature, times they have a-changed.

How many of us would have shuddered in horror if Burton or Nolan delivered a relaunch of Batman via the Adam West vibe…

I have concerns for my beloved TOS just like the next guy but we should do our best to keep an open mind. Young minds, fresh ideas… or something like that.

324. Adrian - November 11, 2008


325. boborci - November 11, 2008


I believe the dialogue is G. Might have one bad word.

326. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

302. TrekMadeMeWonder – November 11, 2008

I am respectful, but I don’t respect the intolerant. Capt. Robert April and his ilk on this board aren’t so much challenging JJKO’s creativity as they are objecting to change. They don’t want their history to progress. As I have made clear and Closettrekker has agreed, the timeline we love and honor is what leads Nero and his crew on this mission to rewrite history. Spock’s mission and the heart of this movie is in preserving the integrity of the crew, so that they’ll be around save life as we know it several dozen times during their careers.

Brand me a CARD CARRYING LEFT WING CANONISTA. I think the conservative approach to canon culminated in a spectacular lack of creativity. Although I didn’t like Deep Space Nine, it was creative and bold and took chances. It only failed INHO when it rested on its predecessor’s laurels. So I won’t piss on it the way that I will with Voyager or Enterprise. And believe me, I’ll drink of a pot of coffee just to take a strong piss on those shows.

Speaking of Enterprise, “IT’S A BEEN A LONG TIME,” since I seen some good Star Trek…

327. Donn - November 11, 2008

303. Michael Foote – Pop “Hide and Q” in, and press pause right when Wesley gets impaled. There you go. Or pretend that it was Wesley who died in “First Duty,” if you can wait that long. I don’t have a problem with Wesley.

Just to show I don’t take _everything_ I’ve read so far without having an opinion: I am a bit wary of introducing… not sexuality per se, Star Trek has always had some amount of sexuality to it, (I mean, have you seen how they dressed the female guest stars in TOS?) and Riker _certainly_ got his fair share… but I’m wary of the crassness. Kirk, Riker, Paris… they may have had their pick-up lines, but tongue and sheep jokes? That’s a little graphic.

Maybe I’m an old fuddy-duddy at 33, (just saying that probably makes me old) but while I’m willing to accept action-hero type stuff in Star Trek going forward, I think Trek would be better served staying above certain kinds of adult discourse.

328. Marc - November 11, 2008

To clarify what JJ said today – it’s not a re-boot. Bob Orci called it a ”re-inivigoration’ and this is the best way to describe it. They havent re-imagined the characters, they are ”re-introducing the characters in a different way”

There you have it

And for what it’s worth, as I said above – the film looked amazing from the 20 mins I saw. more action packed than any of the other 10 movies.

329. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Very concerned now.

Three of the four scenes that were described contained some kind of dipshit humor. Please no more Work with a zit, Scotty knocking himself out on a bulkhead, or Data as a flotation device.

Is it really this hard to make a good Star Trek movie?

I hope I am wrong, but everything I have read today really depresses me. Kind of glad it’s not coming out on Christmas Day.

330. DJT - November 11, 2008

Show me the trailer.

331. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

327 Donn

No you are not old, I am…..46 (the old release date will be my 47th birthday).

332. JL - November 11, 2008


333. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

Bob, You know Diane Warren buys her coffee at the Coffee Bean on Sunset & Holloway almost every morning. If you play your cards right, maybe she’ll write a new country song for this movie.

334. ShatRuinedV - November 11, 2008

All these canonphiles are NOT respecting people who want the Star Trek name to mean epic storytelling, interesting sci-fi, and good character interactions.

No, their only concern is that their 40+ years of mass consumerism of anything with the Star Trek name, and who believed they were gaining something by being able to recite every “real” and “alleged” data point about the Star Trek universe. Face it, Star Trek is fiction, and every generation reinterprets and redoes fiction.

335. Mark - November 11, 2008

#293– Star Trek continuity is so screwed up from the TV shows and films alone. That’s what makes arguing “canon” so silly to begin with.

336. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

Trek fans have been overly judging Trek for years, that’s why it bombs so much.

337. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#301 – “Just think of TOS as a comic book series being reimagined by JJ & Company and adapted for the big screen.”

I quit following the comic book franchises a few decades ago, as barely more than a kid, because it was clear that they couldn’t keep their continuities straight. Why should I respect that being done to Star Trek? Decades of stories, dozens of writers and producers managed it pretty darn well, and this team couldn’t manage to do it for one two-hour movie set in a period when there were maybe 10 datapoints they’d actually have to keep track of? Sheesh…

“That’s what I’ve been guessing from day one and NOBODY seemed to believe me anywhere on the internet. This one’s a plain reboot, reimagining, reinterpretation of the original making use of some recognizable icons, nothing more, nothing less.”

Then the people involved with the film should have just said so, instead of lying to us. Frankly, the one slender bit of hope I’m holding to is that I really don’t want to imagine this production team as liars, and maybe there’s another explanation for what we’re seeing/reading about.

“You can’t expect Paramount to finance a new “pilot movie” for a 43 year old low-budget cult show!”

It may be 43 years old, but it really wasn’t low-budget. In fact, in the late 1960s, it was among the most expensive shows on TV. Jus’ sayin’…

“It’s an all new take, nothing more, NOTHING LESS!”

And it could have been an all-new take without betraying what had come before.

“I’m looking forward to it for what it is because that’s definitely more exciting than the second backdoor pilot of that lost Phase II series or whatever fanwank some of us were expecting.”

I dunno what anyne else was expecting, but I was expecting the story of how those characters I love had come together, but it’s starting to look like that won’t be it. Now I’m not sure what it is.

“But then, it is also a HAPPY DAY because Trek will be brought to a new generation that had no chance of entering the complex 700 episodes and 10 movie-spanning megaverse that came before…”

I guess I’m seeing it all differently, because I would have imagined that the new generation would have had every chance of entering that world, given an opportunity like a big budget movie that helped bring them into it. I thought the idea of a TOS origin story was a brilliant one, because it could have done that. As it is, well…maybe I’m wrong, like I said, but it’s looking at this nanosecond like a wonderful opportunity thrown away.

#304 – (shrug) It was never clear to *me*. I took Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, et al. at their word that the film would be the origin story that had never been told. Even Nimoy said, outright, that those of us who were concerned that what had come before was being shoved aside had nothing to worry about, that it was not happening. I was more than willing to accept production design differences, even when I worried that they’d go too far. But now it looks like what they told us just isn’t true, and that feels worse than if they’d just said up-front that they were throwing the rest away and doing whatever they pleased.

338. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

orcster, thanks for the tip. you are a true stomach acid neutralizer kicking it hardcore like prescription strength Famotidine™ – not the cheesy Pepcid AC, over the counter crap. I’m officially standing down from yellow alert.

Thanks for slowing bringing us the changes, over time, so that we have time to adjust. Remaking something like Star Trek is sooo Kobayashi Maru to begin with. I don’t like this much being revealed this soon, but in some senses it is a good move. heck maybe by May 2009, even old captain robert april may accept things and simply… enjoy.



339. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

I don’t understand why we can’t have an epic movie and also have it not ignore Star Trek history.

If the writers felt that Kirk should be mentored by a former Captain of the Enterprise then why not make it Robert April? That would have thrilled hard core fans and not defied the continuity of Kirk’s lines in The Menagerie.


Disappointment is really setting in. I can’t believe it.

340. LostonNCC1701 - November 11, 2008

However, I have to say that I will be pissed if they blow up Vulcan…. unless if they do it in a awesome way. Really, there is this scale between awesomeness and canon. If the movie is good enough, any changes will be forgiven. If the movie is crappy…

By the way, I get this feeling that the movie will be Spock moving back through time making changes to counteract any changes Nero and his Cthulhu Ship of Time-Traveling Destruction make, but that he moves back slowly. If he were to go to the very beginning and fail, the entire universe would be a crapsack and there would be nobody else to change it. So first he is stopping in some other areas to make it so that the timeline, while messed up, won’t be the wet-dream of a Romulan Pirate. Only when he has these backup plans put into motion would Spock go and try to stop Nero at the beginning (which, I’d have to imagine, would be Kirk’s birth, which may fit into rumors of Spock being present at Kirk’s birth).

341. boborci - November 11, 2008


Can’t take credit for the slow assimilation. As you know, if it were up to us, nobody would even know Nimoy was in the movie until it came out. Sadly, we have to go out there and show things because we have to get people to show up.

342. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Wouldn’t Archer be like 150 years old by TOS time frame?

Does anyone have a calculator?

343. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

The only substantial change to real “canon” that I’ve noticed in all this coverage is Kirk’s extensive interaction with Christopher Pike. What else is there?

Where and how the Enterprise was built is not canon.

Nothing about Kirk’s early life, other than that he had a brother, is canon.

Who the first captain of the Enterprise was is not canon.

Where and how any of these characters met is not canon (other than the minor bit about Pike, noted above).

344. LostonNCC1701 - November 11, 2008

Also, I noticed on one of those reports that there is a mention of “Slusho”. To which I say: The Romulans are using the Pattern to draw out the Dharma Initiative!

345. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Starfleet knowing what Rombulans look like is BS.

Kirk and Pike being buddies is BS.

But hey now we know that Sulu took fencing lessons! I’m glad that was revealed, it’s really been a burning question of mine for the last 30 years (note sarcasm).

346. Devon - November 11, 2008

“If the writers felt that Kirk should be mentored by a former Captain of the Enterprise then why not make it Robert April?”

Then where would Pike fit in? Robert April is undoubtedly even less known than Pike is. I swear, people get their head mangled up about the smallest things.

By the way, has anyone heard a BAD review from the people who’ve actually seen this, including the fans? Nope. *HINT HINT*

347. Edwin - November 11, 2008

I am sure this movie, whether good or bad, will take a ton of money and they will go on to make more sequels. However, from what I have read, it sounds as if the writers have taken little care when it comes to pre-established continuity. And by continuity, I am not referring to books or fanzines — I mean facts taken from the original 79 episodes.

I was not impressed with Transformers, I rapidly turned off Fringe, so I am not expecting a great deal from this writing team. I will go and see the movie purely because Nimoy is in it. After that, I have a feeling I will retreat into my 79 episodes and continue to enjoy them, as I have done throughout the “modern Trek era”. They can re-write the timeline, but they cannot wipe my DVDs!

348. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#345: “Starfleet knowing what Rombulans look like is BS.”

Do they know what *Romulans* (as opposed to their ships) look like?

“Kirk and Pike being buddies is BS.”

I already noted above that this is the only clear “canon” shift.

349. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


Maybe Pike shouldn’t be in the movie at all if it can’t be made to work with what has been established already.

350. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

343 Dennis Bailey

Actually the dedication plaque which is visible in some episodes states “San Francisco Shipyards”. As for the rest, I think people are upset that it APPEARS from what we have so far been told about the movie, is that Kirk no longer seems to serve aboard the Farragut. The he never was on the Planet with Kodos the Executioner. That Gary Mitchell has not been mentioned. Now I am willing to bet that Bob and the gang are big enough fan boys not to miss these things, and probably have great explanations which we are not privy to….yet. Heck, Gary Mitchell may be one of the rumored surprise characters that have been kept secret.

351. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#184. um, a girl has never even been in my mother’s basement. not even my mother!

352. Marc - November 11, 2008

Kirk and Pike aren’t buddies as such from what I saw

And what’s this ‘canon’ that you keep going on about, please explan

353. Devon - November 11, 2008

“#345 – Starfleet knowing what Rombulans look like is BS.”

Wow, I think even people who hadn’t been following to closely with this movie even knew that Romulans went back in time. Hmm, do you think Romulans are going to care too much if their Starfleet counterparts know them? Wow, REALLY?

“Kirk and Pike being buddies is BS.”

Yeah, because Pike is part of Kirk’s “Axis of Evil” right?

“But hey now we know that Sulu took fencing lessons! I’m glad that was revealed, it’s really been a burning question of mine for the last 30 years (note sarcasm).”

You need to chill out.

354. Jay - November 11, 2008

#258 Pat, I don’t know. I guess after attending a Star Trek convention I can understand how there are some really obsessed people out there that seem to believe this is real in some alternate universe or something.

What I really don’t get is how they hold TOS up to be the gold standard of what makes Star Trek what it is, yet they ignore the countless contradictions and inconsistancies in the series itself, and then turn around and blast a new movie like this for contradicting some things in TOS. Makes no sense at all.

The inconsistancies and contradictions are there becuase it’s fiction and it’s impossible to write a complex story like this set in the future and make it exciting and inject drama without a few inconsistancies and contradictions. You have to make those in order to create drama or excitement in a particular moment reguardless if some detail doesn’t fit with a previous epsiode. Most people don’t pay that close attention and even if they did they realize it’s fiction and overlook it.

355. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


Well we have Kirk and Sulu in hand to hand combat with the Rombulans.

I guess they could think they are Vulcans but by everything we have read today it seems Sulu knows who he is fencing with.

356. Adam Shepherdson - November 11, 2008

JJ – Let the TrekMovie.com readers (and posters) get exclusive sneak peeks at the movie!! PLEASE!!!

357. Devon - November 11, 2008

#349 – Well Mr. Bossman I say you go to Paramount’s front lawn with a Pickett Sign and protest! After all, you obviously know better than anyone what this movie needs and doesn’t need!

You know, I know they are after new fans, but I honestly hope that a few of the old ones who spoil the fun for anyone else get left behind. Seriously…

358. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#347: “They can re-write the timeline, but they cannot wipe my DVDs!”

Psst – they don’t *want* to.

People are talking as if this footage contains wholesale violations of occurrences that have been shown in previous “Star Trek.”

In fact, if it is as described then the preview violates one or twho things that have been *said* in previous “Star Trek” – another thing altogether – and not all that much of that.

For the record, I *like* Uhura’s remark about farmboys, mainly because I like Kirk’s unruffled, wry response. LOL

359. DeafPoet - November 11, 2008

345 – IMO, all the storytelling constraints that “Balance of Terror” put on Federation/Romulan history are stupid and arbitrary anyway. No warp drive or viewscreens during the Romulan War? Fighting the whole thing without even knowing what your enemy looks like?

Sure, hindsight is 20/20 and the writers of BoT couldn’t have known that people would be making movies about this stuff 40 years later, but to force Bob, Alex et al. to hew precisely to these boring constraints is ridiculous, and frankly, would make a crappy movie.

I’m 100% happy with what’s been released so far.

360. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


“Yeah, because Pike is part of Kirk’s “Axis of Evil” right?”

No because that’s what Kirk said on screen in “The Menagerie”.

But you are right I need to “chill out”, think I’ll put on some TOS and get to a happy place ASAP.

361. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#350 Michael Foote:

“Actually the dedication plaque which is visible in some episodes states ‘San Francisco Shipyards'”

First, I’m not sure that it’s legible in any episode.

In any event, it doesn’t actually say anything about shipyards or where the ship was constructed. It reads:

U.S.S. Enterprise
Starship Class
San Francisco, Calif.

362. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

Is this the same bar seen in the “First Flight” Enterprise episode?

363. Mark - November 11, 2008

As I said earlier, the 79 episodes contradicted themselves at times. Wow.

Keep your DVD’s hidden– I hear JJ and crew are tracking all the canonists and are planning to take ever last trace of TOS away from us!

364. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

363 Mark

I thought that was Rick Bermans job.

365. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

Canon purist or not, everbody here has to agree that this film has accomplished one very major thing:

People are talking about Star Trek. When was the last time that truly occured? 1987, when TNG premiered? A tiny bit with Generations, maybe… and that was it.

THIS is what Trek truly needs… a push into the light.
I do not agree with a lot of what I’ve read in the reviews ( I am a purist of Canon, fanon, whatever) but I am also just as very anxious and excited as I am nervous. What it does not need is any of us calling any of the otehrs idiots or non-fans or over-zealous purists. Everybody likes what they like and we can live with that… IDIC, after all.

Trek is back in the spotlight, and for whatever part of the franchise you are a fan of, that is direly needed to keep it going at all.

366. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#226. thanks. it makes pretty good sense, I suppose. it would also fall into the canon of sci-fi where all things are possible. Obama is prez, right? (which COULD, but likely won’t, make it possible for the shat in ST12).

However, film is really not a good story telling technique. Its amazing to me that oral history (the illiad/odyssey, for example) has maintained its integrity over thousands of years but film makers can’t keep it consistant for five. Honestly, what’s to stop other people like JJ from just reinventing all films, like Greedo kills Han Solo, Dante doesn’t go into work at the quick stop that day, (well, they do that anyway, superman, hulk, changeling, for example). or (Tombstone, wyatt earp). if “canon” doesnt’ really matter, than neither do films, thus, neither do film makers. But I am pretty darn sure Gene would not like this unless it will all get reversed in the end (regardless of what his family thinks, no disrespect, but they are not him). its why you can respect a guy like tolkien (bad writer) and JD Salinger for NOT wanting their books put on film, becuase they know that filmmakers would jsut do what they want and the heck with the book.

If this film does not go back to the original timeline, then ALL our star trek TOS shows n movies are essentially worthless, which would also make this film worthless. If this film didnt stray TOO MUCH from star trek as it has been laid down, a lot of us would have no problem. But its like going back in time and stopping LHO from killing JFK..wait, that WAS a Gene Roddenberry idea..I THINK I SWALLOWED A BUG

367. Jamie - November 11, 2008

Wow, everything I read sounds fantastic. Hooray! :D

I’m not worried in the slightest about minor canon changes. Trek has always messed with canon. If this were a new TOS film with the original cast, no one would care if they messed with canon a little, as long as we had the characters we know and love.

And that’s why I like the sound of these scenes. They seem spot on i terms of character, and the sense of fun and friendship that TOS had. If TOS was still running today, it would no doubt be slightly “edgier” than an 1960s TV show. And that’s the only difference I can percieve in these scenes.

Look at it this way: I love TNG. Now, if I watch any episode from TNG’s first season (and maybe second), I not only find plenty of canon that is inconsistent with later episodes, but I find that the whole tone of the show is different, and characters are different. But despite this, I still watch these episodes because it’s close enough to enjoy. However, by the sound of it, this film is in no way a departure from the characters or “tone” that we know of TOS. The creators are not trying to “improve” those things, because they understand that they are already perfect. The only thing that is changing is certain minor elements of canon, which are being changed for the sake of the story.

Big thumbs up from me! :D

368. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Well said #365.

I’m as excited as anyone about the new film. I even told my folks to screw off that I was staying home for Christmas this year so I could go see it repeated times on 12/25.

And until today I thought things sounded pretty good, I mean Nimoy is in it for God’s sake.

But the scenes I read about today really make me shutter. I really really want to like this move.

369. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

Hey, I am a canon purist, but if it is a good story I will over look a lot. That is why I overlooked Dr McCoy taking back the pill he slapped in the old lady’s hand and she still grew a new kidney, in TVH. That is why I overlooked the Chekov Line in TWOK. Heck, that is why I overlooked the ridges on Kang, Kor and Koloth when they were on DS9 (a much maligned, but I feel superior spin off).

370. Ed - November 11, 2008

Couldn’t resist looking, looks like it’s gonna be a fun ride.

Can’t wait for Friday, just better get a trailer unlike what I got for 10,000 BC.

371. JL - November 11, 2008

It was my birthday yesterday and it was rather uneventful.

But – !

At around 9pm (when the kids went to bed) my wife asked me if I wanted to “watch a Star Trek” since it was my birthday and she knows how much I love it (she isn’t a huge fan of TOS, kinda annoys her although she does enjoy it from time to time, I can tell…)

So I put in “What Are Little Girls Made Of” and my birthday went from “eh” to very content!!

Some GREAT moments in that episode (“Androids don’t eat, Miss Chapel…” etc), yet you rarely hear anyone rave about it…

372. DeafPoet - November 11, 2008


If some of the scenes make you shudder, that’s obviously your call. I personally found them to be pretty cool.

But you gotta admit, that dialog quited over at Empire between Pine and Nimoy sounds positively old school. That’s the best single thing I’ve read about this movie yet.

373. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Happy Birthday JL!

Great episode, great stuff.

374. Dr. Image - November 11, 2008

#331, #327- No, I’M old. (51)
-The Original Donn

Ok. Bottom line.
If this movie is better than the crap B&B had been dishing out, I’m there.
I’ll just have to put up with the questionable aesthetics, etc.

375. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


Kirk accidentally feeling up Uhura sounds good? Pffft.

376. cellojammer - November 11, 2008

All these accusations of “betrayal”, “lying”, “disrespect”…does anybody really have enough evidence to make such remarks? I’ve been a Trekker since the 70s and have thus far felt no cause for such outbursts.

For goodness sake, get some baby powder and soothe that diaper rash, people! All the whining is getting irritating.

377. boborci - November 11, 2008

371 Great wife!

378. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#355 750 Mang:

“Well we have Kirk and Sulu in hand to hand combat with the Rombulans.”

Well, have you noticed something about the poster photo of Nero the Romulan? ;-)

379. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008


380. Jason P Hunt - Kansas City Filmmaker - November 11, 2008

In either timeline, the loss of Kirk’s father would possibly serve to transform him from the reckless rebel to the serious bookworm. Finnegan would have been the one to finally get under Kirk’s skin enough for the old-school hellion to come out and fight.

I can also buy a classified mission wherein Kirk and Pike meet, thus giving the lie to Kirk’s line to Mendez in “Menagerie”. Mendez’ line about the age thing has already been discussed to death.

Vonda McIntyre’s book “Enterprise” was a take on Kirk’s first mission, and she has Uhura and Scotty both serving under Pike.

One of the novels (I forget which) mentioned something about McCoy coming to the Enterprise as CMO, then having to take a leave for a time, which is when Piper came in as a temp, then McCoy came back to duty.

I don’t buy the whole “everyone’s at the Academy at the same time” line, though.

As has been said earlier, I’m on Yellow Alert.

381. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#348—-“I already noted above that this is the only clear “canon” shift.”

I disagree that it is even a “canon shift”.

The possibility and existence of alternate timelines is in itself ‘canon’.

The attack on the USS Kelvin some 3+ decades prior to TOS by Romulans from the post-Nemesis era isn’t supposed to happen, according to the timeline with which we are all so familiar.

It is not a shift in canon, but a continuation of it…Look at it this way…Everything which transpires in the timeline we know leads to Nero and his cohorts deciding to take action to alter the past. The “canon” we know is therefore inherently relevant to the story in question. That is, IMO, the one element which precludes this from being either a “reboot” or a “prequel”.

Since Pike serves aboard the Kelvin with Kirk’s father, it is reasonable to conclude that something about that incident changes Pike’s potential relationship with the elder Kirk’s son. Whereas Kirk may have met Pike “when he was promoted to Fleet Captain” before, that is obviously not the case this time around. They will apparently have a more significant relationship due to events unfolding somewhat differently as a result of Nero’s actions.

Since alternate timelines are themselves canon, it can hardly be a violation, as long as the “changes” are a result of the timeline interference.

382. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

#378 Ya, I did.

And that worked for me until I read today how Kirk knows it’s the Robulnans screwing around on Vulcan.

Even in this part of the galaxy two plus two equals four. So you think they jump down to stop the Rombs and don’t think the people they are fighting are in fact Rombulans? I dunno sir..

383. JL - November 11, 2008

“If this film does not go back to the original timeline, then ALL our star trek TOS shows n movies are essentially worthless…”

No they will not be. Because the TOS episodes and films will not be erased like some photograph in Back to the Future.

I love the stories and the characters and the charisma and the amazing ideas of the future! I love TOS

See, to me, the best episodes of TOS are priceless no matter what someone comes up with after the fact. Nothing can ruin that or change that for me, nothing.

384. Mark - November 11, 2008

Could we hope that the canonists will have figured out by now there will be changes from the ridged forms they think have to take place… and stop coming to this site?

Seriously, you have expressed your point– you wish they had stayed within the narrow confines of what has been established (even when it contradicts itself, but we won’t go into that), you wish the bridge looked just like the plywood one from the 60’s (although you will allow for some changes, though how that doesn’t disagree with canon is beyond me) and you don’t like Pine’s blue eyes. Okay, noted on all the above.

But, Paramount has just made a MAJOR investment in this movie, and this is the way things are going to be. Ever thought about the idea that because of this movie, there will be a lot more interest in TOS. That there will be a lot more people interested in watching those episodes who never would have seen them before. How wonderful is that.

So, if you have decided you don’t like the movie already because Kirk’s eyes won’t be blue, or they have not slavishly stuck to the “timeline,” then do yourself a favor and stop making yourself sick by coming to this site. That way those who are excited can be excited, those who aren’t don’t have to get upset with those who are, and we can all be happy.

385. Billy The Cid - November 11, 2008


386. DeafPoet - November 11, 2008


Why can’t he accidentally feel her up?

I totally understand where you’re coming from on one hand. On the other (and I’ll almost certainly be in the minority around here on this) I just don’t get the blind reverence that some people have for Trek’s “serious” reputation. It’s supposed to be fun!

I’m not saying this movie should take itself less seriously than TOS did. But it should definitely take itself less seriously than many TOS fans do.

387. Michael Foote - November 11, 2008

379 mikey_pikey

I actually kinda like it. And I am surprised.

388. Beck - November 11, 2008

Well – whether it’s canon or not, whether it’s a reboot or not – I’m excited about this, and I plan on withholding any judgement until I’ve actually seen it. Overall, though, I am optimistic.

389. Billy The Cid - November 11, 2008




390. JL - November 11, 2008


That moron posting on AICN is such a liar.

391. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#339 – “I don’t understand why we can’t have an epic movie and also have it not ignore Star Trek history.”

Me, neither. There’s so little in the way of canonical datapoints in that period, anyway, that it’d be easy.

#359 – “345 – IMO, all the storytelling constraints that “Balance of Terror” put on Federation/Romulan history are stupid and arbitrary anyway. No warp drive or viewscreens during the Romulan War? Fighting the whole thing without even knowing what your enemy looks like?”

Umm… Nobody ever said, even canonically, that warp drive and viewscreens didn’t exist during the Romulan War. See, I never understood how people got that. There pretty much had to be FTL capability, and the whole who-didn’t-see-who issue is as simple as the Romulans not turning on their interior cameras. That always seemed ike making a mountain out of a molehill.

392. cagmar - November 11, 2008

#111 – McCoy : Agreed !

Where’s the Wow moment of a cool, innovative science fiction idea? Where’s a complicated and insightful twist on the human condition?

Wrath of Khan had the Genesis device… even The Final Frontier had a search for God! And this movie has a big drill? I understand it’s supposed to be an action adventure… but where’s the Star Trek ?

393. Paul B. - November 11, 2008


EW.com has a genuine, honest-to-goodness, real picture of the new Enterprise. Looks…well…, I don’t think it looks like a blend of TOS and TMP designs at all. In fact, the engineering/secondary hull looks like a relative to the Enterprise-D. The primary hull looks like the refit, but from there the design just has too many pointless changes.

It’s not awful, just…not the TOS Enterprise. But it’s pretty cool in and of itself. I just wanted a more retro-TOS look…this is not a canon-fitting design.

Don’t click unless you REALLY want to see the REAL Enteprise. No joke, no rick-rolling. (A friend told me of the pic and sent me the link.)


394. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


He can. But who wants to see it? Come on guys, it’s Worf with a zit all over again.

395. Doesn't Have to Know Everything Now Now Now - November 11, 2008


That sound you just heard was Captain Robert April’s rectum exploding.

I kinda dig the look.

396. Mark - November 11, 2008

The new Enterprise has the potential to really be cool. Captures the feel of the original (love the dish), but… wow. Still love the original, but this will do just fine. Just fine.

397. Peter N - November 11, 2008

As many comments have expressed, Trek fans are hoping that his movie will somehow fit into the continuity of all that has come before. Certainly it will amplify the backstories of characters we know and love, and since the script was in the hands of true fans I am still optimistic that those backstories will feel “right” by the end of the movie. Those may not be the backstories any of us imagined, but if the actors do a good job at “selling” their versions of the TOS crew then the Trek universe will become richer for their backstories. As I was saying to one of my Trek friends, as long as the look of the movie is (more or less) post-ENT and pre-TMP then I will not complain – I really don’t believe that the look of the 60s sets would work on a movie screen today. And while these scene descriptions may rightfully cause some apprehension for fans of Trek continuity (and I do consider myself one of the crowd) it is hard to judge them out of context. Landru knows that Trek before this movie has never been entirely consistent with itself, but if the basic parameters of the Trek universe remain unchanged – and, as hoped for above, enriched by this “introduction” – then this should be a welcome addition to the saga. IIRC, one of the “supreme court” posited on trekmovie.com that watching TOS after this movie will not be like watching a completely different animal, such as watching the two versions of BSG.

I remain optimistic until proven otherwise!

398. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

Whoah. I kinda like that!

399. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2008/11/star-trek-first.html?xid=rss-popwatch-'Star%20Trek‘:%20An%20exclusive%20first%20look%20at%20the%20Enterprise while guessing its cg of course, im really glad it looks so physical, this picture reminds of the publicity stills of the enterprise from TMP nice touch, very nice :)

400. st-midway - November 11, 2008

WOW! It looks a little different but it REALLY REALLY LOOKS GREAT!!! AHHHHHH! AHHHH! AHHHH! I love it! This is gonna be fun! The Big E is back, and it´s beautiful! AHHH! GREAT!

401. DaiMonRon - November 11, 2008

Wow! The new Enterprise looks AWESOME!!! Thanks, Mikey Pikey for the link!! You’re the man!


402. 1701 over Gotham City - November 11, 2008

Nope, I see the entier AICN report here in this picture… overexaggerated, but I see it..

The secondary hull does look skimpy in the back… somehow not as dynamic as the original 1701, but I don’t hate it.
Just not overly crazy. I think if the dish wasn’t quite so thrown forward of the neck it would look better. But it’s still a damn site prettier than the D ever was!!!

403. cagmar - November 11, 2008

Hey all, looks like the new Enterprise is out:


Little squished… but not bad.

404. JL - November 11, 2008


omg this thread is going to blow up real fast… talk about hit overload…

405. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

Looks like a big turkey.

406. Paul - November 11, 2008

Hmmm very unsure about this. Especially the bit were Nimoy meets the younger Kirk.

So young Kirk sees his dear friend yet in TWOK still cries even though he saw him as an old man?

Old Spock does not warn his younger self about the Nexus?

Both are massive issues unless this movie is not for the existing fans in which case I understand its a reboot which ignores most of Roddenberry’s canon.

Still cannot believe they could not find a way for Shatner to appear especially as this appears to ignore or totally change canon!!

Danger is this film will appeal to no-one which is why they are showing 20 mins now. If they were that confident of its success it would be kept under wraps until April next year.

407. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008

Looks good, but I do wish they could have worked in the old school deflector dish.

408. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#382: “Even in this part of the galaxy two plus two equals four. So you think they jump down to stop the Rombs and don’t think the people they are fighting are in fact Rombulans? I dunno sir..”

The point being, does he see Romulans that look like Romulans (that is, like Vulcans), or just enemy fighters who have obviously mutilated their features?

409. Paul - November 11, 2008

First Enterprise picture shown here!!


Oh dear looks horrible to me.

410. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

And out come the bashers.

411. 750 Mang - November 11, 2008


“No Rombulan, human or alli has seen the other.'”- Spock

412. GoDFaDDa - November 11, 2008

I think it’s a pretty safe guess at this point that the destruction of the USS Kelvin is like the Enterprise-C returning in Yesterday’s Enterprise – we’re now in alternate-timeline mode.

413. Tom Moogan - November 11, 2008


The new Enterprise

414. cellojammer - November 11, 2008

New E: Oooh, I’m liking it!

415. Enterprise Fan - November 11, 2008

Just took a look on trekweb.com. I suggest that all of you puritans out there go to the website, look at the (only slightly) new Enterprise and take a valium. Good grief, people! The movie doesn’t come out for another 6 months! You’re all going to be dead from cardiac arrest by then!

I for one am really looking forward to May 9th. The reference to Archer and his dog are a strong indication that there will be plenty of bones (pardon the pun) thrown to the fans, and the movie itself will no doubt be totally entertaining. Just relax, everyone!

416. mark - November 11, 2008

“Oh dear looks horrible to me.”

hahahahahahhahah oh if it only wasnt the same as it always was

417. fred - November 11, 2008

Well, if Kirk knows how to drive a stickshift car, I’m not going, this is too much a departure from established canon.

418. Enterprise - November 11, 2008

1000 Trek fans die grisly death looking at pic on internet.

419. Alex - November 11, 2008

The new E looks good, design-wise, but aesthetically, I don’t like it. Assuming the ship will get a makeover at the end of the movie due to heavy battle damage, I can live with it. :)

420. ksmsscu - November 11, 2008

#153 said – Look, the Canon that we’ve accumulated in 40+ years of Trek all created the milquetoast future of the UFP that leads Nero to travel back in time. With due respect to the Right Wing Canonistas on this site, the timeline now loops backward. Cry yourselves out, take a nap, and then accept that JJ&KO were a little truthy about this not being a reboot. But to state that this movie doesn’t respect canon is silly.

I agree completely! It’s supposed to be new, a shot in the arm to a dying franchise, a ‘re-invigoration.’ The Non-Canonistas already love it — just what Star Trek needs to survive and prosper. 98% of the complainers will eagerly see it and most of them, IMHO, will greatly enjoy it. Only the bitterest will bitch ‘No Jose Tyler, no Captain Garrovick, is Sulu older than Kirk’? The rest of us, even those who remember sitting in front of the TV on September 8, 1966 and never losing faith since then, will be as much on Cloud Nine as many of us were on Election Night — a new human adventure is just beginning.

421. Kirk's Toupée - November 11, 2008

I hope we get to see Ol’ Pikey’s electric bath chair….

If you agree, bleep once for yes, and twice for no if you don’t……………..

422. Donn - November 11, 2008

366. lieud vejgrint.. WHOA. I mean, what?

If film isn’t a good storytelling technique, boy are we all a bunch of losers wasting our time. Well, okay, that could be true anyway, but given the size of the industry and the obvious interest from laypeople in new films, I think there is clear evidence that film is at least a compelling way to tell a story. All the old methods are still around, from sitting around a campfire, to reading your kid a story, to listening to a radio drama, reading a comic book, playing a story-based computer game… we have an infinity of storytelling methods, film hardly least among them.

Sci-fi fans: how many of you love The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy? Now there’s a story that’s been told in just about every medium imaginable, AND violated its own canon with every version, written by the SAME guy no less!* I think it’s the best example of how, when you’ve got something to say, a story to tell, there’s nothing wrong with taking some liberties.

That said, contrary to all the furor, very few liberties have been taken from Star Trek canon. If I wanted to fit this thing into canon (though as I’ve said I don’t really care), I would just ignore Kirk’s line in The Menagerie as an inconsistency or cover-up for some reason, and the “Romulan Problem” as a timeline change. No need to “throw out” 40 years of Trek canon, not that I think you need to even if they made Spock purple.

Robert April is not canon, in the strictest sense. That’s it, Pike and Romulans, that’s all you’ve got to worry about. Seems like not much. If you’re still hung up on visual changes, nobody can help you.

It’s very off-topic, but I can’t begin to fathom the comment “Tolkien (bad writer).” You must live on a different planet. And I think, given the demanding nature of the literature, Jackson’s LOTR films are the best novel-to-film adaptations of all time.

But to answer the question, what’s to stop filmmakers from just changing everything? Nothing at all. They do it all the time. Sometimes out of storytelling necessity (LOTR), sometimes to suit their own idea of the story, sometimes to explore a what-if. Not everyone will agree with every new version. But one particular artist’s new take on an old work does not diminish the quality of that original work, unless you somehow let it in your own mind. I didn’t see the Duke’s of Hazzard film, it looked like it was going to be atrocious, but the fact that it exists doesn’t diminish my fond memories of the original series.

* I will grant you that Douglas Adams passed before the film was finished, but the film was no less/more/whatever inconsistent than Adams’ own work had been with itself.

423. TrekMadeMeWonder - November 11, 2008

No. NO! NOOOO!!!!!


Everyone let’s just remember, this is the ALTERNATE timline Enterprise,

424. Ashley - November 11, 2008

I’m sure TOS writers would be the first to agree that good storytelling and characters should go before ‘canon’ any day… TOS itself was not continuous and fully adhering to itself, let alone the rest of the spin-offs… James R. Kirk anyone?? …This sounds like it will be a great movie all around, as well as great Trek, and I think they’ll be more than generous with the references, nods, and attempt at keeping things fairly consistent with established details, considering what they’re doing. People complaining about the little things being off need to get a grip and look at the big picture. Trek is coming back, and it’s going to be AMAZING.

425. rehabilitated hitch1969© - November 11, 2008

you remember when we was kids, and at night we’d have star trek dreams, and in those dreams everything was a lil out of sequence and the big E – while we knew it was the big E – didnt quite look like the big E but in the dream state it didnt matter because it all worked for the dream. then we we woke up the next morning, it seemed a lil stranger … like i was dreaming about star trek but it only kinda looked like star trek but I knew it was star trek and it was real to me.

thats my reaction to the new enterprise in a nutshell.



426. mikey_pikey - November 11, 2008

BEEP BEEP , yes , yes :=), haha have to say it again, im liking the new enterprise :=))

427. James - November 11, 2008


OK, Belfast, not Dublin. Knew it was an Irish capital – got confused as to which one. My point was that it was built in one place and commissioned in another. This could easily follow through for Enterprise. This follows through to my larger point – don’t confuse established canon with ‘fanon’ – what fans believe to be canon.

Like Kirk not being a bit of a jackass when he was younger. Yes, of course – you can really picture him being the studious type! Did somebody mention Kobayashi Maru? My point exactly!

Everything I hear about this film is good – it is staying faithful to the spirit of Trek, and not necessarily picking over every word of dialogue.

‘Ooooh, Chekov’s too young to be in this movie.’ Yeah, would really be a bit crap if he WASN’T, though, wouldn’t it? A bit of a conspicuous omission? SO WHAT?! Other bits of canon conflict each other! Hell, we can’t even agree on what is canon and what isn’t (TAS)!

Canon does conflict. So does history. Here’s a quick explanation – maybe Chekov was JOKING about his age in TOS. Maybe he WAS on the Enterprise in ‘Space Seed’ and met Khan in the toilet, as Koenig likes to put it.

Not convinced on the Enterprise, though – the picture is a little odd. The Engineering section looks too squashed up to the saucer section and I don’t like the nacelles. At all.

428. Q - November 11, 2008

I think that we are going at this the wrong way. First thing that we should do is ask ourselves what is the essence of Star Trek. Is it expanding the universe that Gene created and sticking to it, no matter the cost. Or was it the essence of Star Trek to challenge the scientific community, to inspire them, to challenge the boundaries that holds the world back, to teach us something about ourselves, and that we can work, no matter the backgrounds, as one.

Can we inspire the world again trough Star Trek, especially with this new era of Star Trek with JJ and Co, at the helm. Can this new era inspire NASA to name their ship again Enterpise, can this new era inspire CNN to make a breaktrough in some new ST related technology. Can this new era inspire people like Stephen Hawking to say… Hey, I’m working at this pointing to a Star Trek technology.

I’m from Macedonia and I will ask you to bare with me for a moment because i will go in a different realm. Some of you may know, a lot of you surely don’t. My country is being blocked from entering NATO and the European Union because Greece has a problem with us. The problem is our name. The terms are change your name and we will support your entrance to this organizations, which for a small country like us and the region that we are in is imperative and the only way to survive, yes survive as a nation, to join this ORGs. The Greek side has there points about the issue, our side has ones etc.. By mentioning this I’m not trying to relate a message or win sympathy. My point about this is will this new era of Star Trek with JJ and Co, inspire the world to just let go of this trivial issues.

Because Gene’s Star Trek did all of this things. This is Star Trek for me, this is what i want to see in this new era. When I go in the cinema in May with my nephew, and when we walk out of that door after 2 hours, i want to see the look in his eyes that he learned something about what it is to be a human being. As ones I had and still have. I want to see that and not an adrenaline rush.

If i see this things in the movie, i won’t care that much about what kirk said in the turbolift in TOS, on how he met Pike. Or why did Uhura ordered cardassian drink. Or where the heck was Chekov in Space Seed. I really won’t give a sh*t.

First of all I want to address the fellow fans that are here. We can all at least give a credit to the team behind Star Trek for being us with here and doing the same thing that I am doing at the moment. It’s a real honor and it has never before been done in Star Trek.

That being said I want to ask Bob Orci. We’ll your Star Trek inspire? And I want to ask you what you think and I don’t want you to tell me you’ll be the judge. Because ethier way I will be the judge. But I want you to say to me that you are confident that Star Trek will inspire the next generations.

Thats Star Trek what’s all about to me. If you achieve this, as somone said here, you’ll be God amongst men.

Thank you and greetings from Macedonia.

429. trekmaster - November 11, 2008

Hmm, with THOSE warp nacelles it looks like a car in the 1950s äähh 2250s…*g* The surface of the back hull seems to me a little bit polished and unstructured. There I’m missing textures for more detail. Well, let’s see more pictures hopefully to come. So and you guys have an explanation for these changes? Someone said, the destruction of the USS Kelvin causes same effects like the Enterprise-C coming out of the singularity in TNG’s “Yesterdays’s Enterprise”. Are there any indications for these kind of thoughts?

430. Donn - November 11, 2008

428. Q: Quite probably the best, most accurate expression of what Star Trek is meant to be about that I’ve yet read on trekmovie.com. I am honored share the screen and Trek fandom with you.

431. James - November 11, 2008

The BBC article is the most read article on the whole BBC website!!!

Trek just went mainstream!!

432. trekmaster - November 11, 2008

Why alternate timeline Enterprise?

433. Jamie - November 11, 2008

This really IS an Enterprise. A non-Trek fan would probably never be able to tell any of the Enterprises apart, including this one.

434. Dom - November 11, 2008

I’m gobsmacked by some of the gormless, downright idiotic reactions here! Have you never read comic books? Have you never read stuff like the Crisis of Infinite Earths? ‘Canonical reboots’ are nothing new.

To address one or two of the idiots out there:

The absence of Pike’s crew seen in The Cage – The Cage was 11 years earlier, so why should they still be serving under Pike? Different officers could have been promoted, retired or killed in action.

Uhura and Chekov serving under Pike: there was no indication that they hadn’t worked for him in TOS. They also served under Pike in Enterprise: The First Adventure, IIRC!

Uhura sex scene – cool! I really have no problem with this! She’s young, she’s hot, you so would, given the opportunity! After all, this is a film about a young crew! ;)

Bar fights and Classic Budweiser – Gasp! Star Trek reconnects with the real world for the first time since The Undiscovered Country! I don’t see why drinks and companies that have lasted decades can’t last for centuries. I hope they have money in this film as well!

Older Nimoy’s Spock – I’ll assume he’s been in the past since the events prior to Kirk’s birth and has been carefully been playing Prometheus ever since.

Admiral Archer’s Beagle – Admiral Archer could be President Archer’s son or unrelated. if it is Jonathan Archer’s beagle, why does it have to be the same one? Chances are he had more than one beagle in his life!

The ‘tougher’ Enterprise – well, to be fair, she’s always been a warship, given the phenomenal destructive weaponry she packs. If she’s bigger and more badass than before, maybe that’s because a series of destructive events in the past resulted in the Constitution Class being given a sturdier build.

‘Canon violations’ – God help us! I so desperately loathe all this canon rubbish! We all know pilots invariably have anomalies compared with the regular series they spawn. Gary Mitchell and his comments about Kirk were never borne out by the way we came to see Kirk behave later on in the series. The canon obsession, curiously, seems to come from fans of TNG and its successors. Growing up, I never remember there being quite so much paranoia about it. The books and comics were pretty much all we had alongside the original shows, cartoon series and movies until 1987. We were all pretty chilled out about it! Roddenberry himself was happy to play fast and loose with Trek history when setting up TNG.

I’m saddened that the idiot ‘fans’ on this board are so lacking in imagination these days. When I was younger it was fun to discuss the contradictions and not have everything explained in minute, anal detail. Nowadays, you’d all be begging for an explanation for Khan keeping on his glove in TWOK and a definitive history of Chekov on board the Big E to explain Khan knowing him.

Chill out everyone and use your imaginations. We’re dealing with a reinvigoration of a great concept, not a complete rewriting of a religious text!

435. kelinda - November 11, 2008

Sounds like ANOTHER “Kirk is so magnificent” piece. I’m not a Kirk fan and don’t think I can sit through 2 hours of seeing and hearing about his greatness again. Reading the description, I remember just how sick and tired I got of hearing about how great Kirk or Picard or Janeway were in theior respective series. I think I’m losing interest as well as my lunch. Should have revolved around the greatness of the other characters more.

436. Third Remata'Klan - November 11, 2008

#434 – Dom

“Canon rubbish.” Hear, hear! Whiners, please stop!

Oh my god, oh my god, oh my god, ohmygodohmygodohmygodohmygod….

I wish I could stop reading spoilers!!!!

“Admiral Archer’s Beagle”

THANK YOU, J.J. for referencing Enterprise!!!

437. Third Remata'Klan - November 11, 2008


Amazing how people can judge this movie so early, after so little is let out.
And Kirk–and Spock–ARE Star Trek. I’m not a Kirk fan either, but let’s face it, he was Star Trek’s first captain. The series WAS ABOUT HIM, and Spock, and McCoy, and to a much lesser extent, the others. Kirk is the hero; that’s all there is to it.

438. Q - November 11, 2008

#430 Donn, thank you. I’ve found TrekMovie.com to be one of the most influential, objective and realistic, fan spots in the entire internet community. And I’m really pleased if I can contribute to that image.

And to be on the safe side… I want to apologize if I offended someone with the politcal part of my post. It was not my intention.

439. Kirk, James T. - November 11, 2008

Dang, that does all sound very cool, although is anyone else getting nightmares about this becoming JJ Abrams version of Jonathan Frakes’ “Thunderbirds”???? i dunno i just get the feeling with all the bright colours and white retro look and the childish banter and brash brash “OC” kinda sounding James Kirk – it sounds like Alan from Thunderbirds… the almost cliche zero to hero story???

Surely Kirk deserves better…

440. GO - November 11, 2008

Enterprise…. YESSSSSSSS!

Playmates? NOOOOOOOOOO!!!

That is one mighty fine ship in that first peek shot… now if only they let Art Asylum produce the toy…errr… realistic model… I’d be completely thrilled.

441. Kirk, James T. - November 11, 2008

Dang, that does all sound very cool, although is anyone else getting nightmares about this becoming JJ Abrams version of Jonathan Frakes’ “Thunderbirds”???? i dunno i just get the feeling with all the bright colours and white retro look and the childish banter and brash brash “OC” kinda sounding James Kirk – it sounds like Alan from Thunderbirds… the almost cliche zero to hero story???

Surely Kirk deserves better than to have a story like Ryan’s from The OC?

442. A. .S.F.33 - November 11, 2008


This may be heresy to say here but why should i care if Trek is coming back if it’s unrecognizable to me? I loved TOS and was so hoping this movie would be true to the characters and events and yes at lest most of the history established there, but so far at least, there seem to be too many changes for my taste.

443. Smike van Dyke - November 11, 2008

#406: New timeline! No TWOK, no GEN!

#424 + 434: Agreed 100%

444. Smike van Dyke - November 11, 2008

#429: Yeap, not exactly the same temporal mechanics but yes, the attack on the Kelvin will start a new timeline, one without Kirk’s father being involved with the construction of the big E, leading to different results in design and maybe even purpose, crew compliment etc…Kirk’s career will change significantly…

445. Cafe 5 - November 11, 2008

Remember when you wanted to do something different everyday so life would not get boring. When you got to go some place and see new things and your days were an adventure. Don’t let go of this kind of feeling. If you do you’ll shut yourself out of challenges and wonders that are unlimited. This film will be an adventure. Treat it as such. Having something to look forward too is a good feeling. Now more than ever we need to be able to have things to be excited about . Star Trek is continuing be happy about it.

446. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

442 – “This may be heresy to say here but why should i care if Trek is coming back if it’s unrecognizable to me? I loved TOS and was so hoping this movie would be true to the characters and events and yes at lest most of the history established there,”

If that be heresy, then call me heretic. :)

I feel the same way. I wouldn’t have thought that they’d be particularly hamstrung by what few continuity datapoints were actually established in early TOS. If they really couldn’t navigate their way through, what, ten of them? while writing a two-hour movie, most of which has to be new story, anyway, I have to wonder about their capabilities as writers.

In fairness, production design is a much dicier thing, because they really do have to reach a modern audience with different sensibilities, and I’m willing to cut some slack on that. But basic continuity? No. It’s so easy that I don’t feel they need a lot of quarter on that. And the Trek writers are bright guys; I’ve seen and enjoyed their work. They’re not incapable of getting it right.

447. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

Y’know, two thoughts just hit me…

One’s improbable, but worth considering. One’s just interesting to note.

Rumor for a long time has had it that in the various alternate timelines we’d see in this movie, at least one would have a significantly different Enterprise, one which is primarily a warship. Perhaps they’ve released an image of that one, just to keep us guessing. (Yeah, I know, not likely, but impossible…? ;) ) (Actually, might it be that one or more of the scenes they released is also in an alternate universe that is dealt with later in the film?)

Also, I just keep coming back to the fact that we were told that Mr. Shatner couldn’t play an older Kirk in this film because the character had died in “Generations”. So, *is* it really a massive reboot, or was that just another smokescreen? Because if it’s that much of a reboot, why all the sturm und drang about not including an older Kirk? Something is just not adding up. Or was that just an excuse because they just didn’t want Mr. Shatner in the film? Or… Oh, never mind. On the way of the next “or” would lie madness. ;)

448. RAMA - November 11, 2008

The nacelles tips are awesome, they really do make the E look like a powerful hot rod, but still majestic. I have a feeling that like most other starships in Trek, different views of the ship will be more appreciated than others, but right now, this is an awesome design!

449. Dom - November 11, 2008

442. Use your imagination or move on!

I’m a Doctor Who fan, but I detest the drivel the overrated Russell T Davies has put out under the name Doctor Who these last four years! So you know what I did? I stopped watching it and stopped visiting Doctor Who-related fora. It’s not hard to do if you feel no investment in the new version.

I disliked the way in the 1990s everyone seemed to start trumpeting TNG and its cohorts as the second coming and laughing at the original Star Trek.

I ‘kept the faith’ by not getting involved in the Star Trek world anymore. I watched the occasional episode of a Trek spinoff show, some of which were very good, many of which truly depressed me and gritted my my teeth through three of the four TNG movies, enjoying First Contact. I mostly left the TNG films shaking my head sadly at how Star Trek had been driven so low.

And I really missed the days of Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but accepted that I could still watch the original shows, cartoons and six films. I also read the occasional book, but preferred the ones written pre-TNG as the existence of a century-later series reduced the scope of adventures the original characters could experience.

But what I didn’t do was hover round boards screeching like a syphilis-ridden fishwife that TNG was all wrong! I stayed away until the new film was announced.

And, as far as I was concerned, if proper Star Trek was to come back, it would have to be a ground-up revamp. I think the guys behind the film have been remarkably generous to include as much old-school background material as they have.

The original Star Trek was a blood and thunder action-adventure series, full of passion, beautiful women, red- (and green-)blooded men, space battles and fistfights. It also had a nice line in self-deprecating humour to undercut the potential preachiness of some of its philosophical discussions.

The new Trek film appears to have taken all that and dosed it up with steroids. In other words, from my point of view, Abrams and his team have ‘got’ Trek in a way that none of the other spinoff shows did. Far from being unrecognisable, this sounds like proper Star Trek: a Star Trek that’s got its balls back!

450. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008


When another industry fella lurked in message boards to promote “Live Free or Die Hard,” he was nowhere to be seen after it was released. Will you try to not be like the infamous “Walter B.” and come here after the premiere’s dust has settled?

Gracias, from another UT alum!

PS. Are there going to be any US screenings of these clips? Other clips? Will JJ, et al, consider any cutting/pickups based on those comments?

451. Christopher Lee - November 11, 2008

Admiral Archer. I was wondering if Abrams would reference Enterprise. So glad that he did. Although, I would have preferred and Ambassador T’Pol character but at least it gets some mention.

452. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#446—All of the continuity of the 5 series and 10 movies remains intact, as long as any ‘changes’ to the backstory with which we are all so familiar are solely due to timeline interference.

Every event depicted in filmed Trek in the last 4+ decades leads up to the point where Nero and his cohorts decide to take action to alter the past. Therefore, the continuity we know is inherently relevant to the story about to be told to the World.

The attacks upon the USS Kelvin some three-plus decades prior to what we know as TOS (assuming it did not occur in the previous timeline) is inevitably going to produce a ripple effect in the timeline, changing much of what we know of Kirk’s backstory from episodes like “WNMHGB”, “Obsession”, “The Conscience Of The King”, and “Court-Martial”.

It also makes it less likely that the Federation would be unaware of the physical appearance of the Romulans by the time of the incursion by the BOP across the Neutral Zone in the Mid 2260’s.

It will no doubt affect th backstories of others as well, including Christopher Pike. It would be ridiculous to assume that, in ‘this’ timeline, everything would pretty much play out the way it did before.

Perhaps the attack on the Kelvin 4 days prior to Kirk’s birth makes Pike more interested in the son of the man he served with aboard that ship. I got the impression that George Kirk did something to distinguish himself (in a way he may not have before) during the attack.

My guess is, Nimoy’s Spock has set out to “correct” as much as he can, including assuring that JTK will eventually assume command of the Enterprise during its famous 5 year mission.

The bottom line to me is, nothing we have seen before is suddenly irrelevant. It is all a part of what leads us to here.

That’s why this is ‘not’ a “reboot”, nor is it a true “prequel”. In fact, since everything from ENT-Nemesis is required to get the story where it is headed, it has more attributes of a “sequel” than anything else.

I think that, by utilizing the built-in giant loophole in Star Trek canon, they may be breaking the mold here on revisiting old franchises !!!

They may also create something very different…..not quite a ‘sequel’, but not a ‘prequel’ or traditional ‘reboot’ either.

Everything which came before is required for the story. I think that’s what makes it fit in with the other movies/television series.

453. boborci - November 11, 2008


Of course! That’s when we can finally talk openly about everything! We’ll screen some stuff here, but not until later. The rest of the world needs some attention early because Trek has never been big overseas.

451. Glad you liked the reference.

454. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008

Oh, and those bastards hurt or killed Porthos? I am writing to 5555 Melrose, right now! Expect me to CC: PETA on this one! LOL

455. Regula One - November 11, 2008

Oh hell yes!
This sounds bad@$$

Just saw the new Enterprise, that’s one beefy lookin’ ship. It has that 50/60’s muscle car look to it.

Overall: Big “Thumbs Up” from me!

456. Jeffries Tuber - November 11, 2008

428 Q: Thanks for your post, politics included. I agree, it’s the vision of a borderless Earth and dreams larger than self-interest that make Star Trek great.

That said, the 4 scenes sound like a lot of fun and the new ship kicks a lot of ass.

457. S. John Ross - November 11, 2008

Any damage done to canon makes me smile and do a little dance, so that stuff not only doesn’t bother me, it … um, it makes me do this dance here, and smile. F*ck you, canon. Take THAT.

Oddly, it’s the Budweiser thing that concerns me the most. Lines like that are always cheesy cheap-chuckle lines, the kind that make an audience wince and squirm uncomfortably in their seats.

Anyway, we’ll see soon if the trailer sells it or sinks it.

458. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008


I guess TPTB finally found a way to slip product placement in a Star Trek film. Certainly, there is not another example of this. The marshmallow dispenser in ST5 doesn’t count, as there were no logos on it. At least from what I remember.

Unless we count all of the street scenes on ST4. Anything else blatant in that flick?

459. Q - November 11, 2008

# 456 When you live in a place like this you are very careful of picking the right words. Just mentioning an issue can have major reactions, and i didn’t want to screw up the discussion here, which fortunately i didn’t. :)

But i would like Bob’s response on 428 and soon because my german shepherd is giving me the look that says if you don’t take me out now i’ll shit all over the place. :)))

460. spiked canon - November 11, 2008

I love this line in one of the reviews

I’m not a Star Trek fan, and I really wanted to give this one a good, hard kick in the dilithium crystals. But dammit, Jim, if it doesn’t look like a half decent movie.

461. boborci - November 11, 2008

458 “Anything else blatant in that flick?”

Does the “save the whales” campaign qualify? And don’t forget the Yellow pages when they’re looking for tank equipment.

462. boborci - November 11, 2008

428 We really believe that it will, or we had no business trying.

463. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#411: ““No Rombulan, human or alli has seen the other.’”- Spock”

I’m pretty sure he didn’t know that Romulans were going to time-travel back from the 24th century to kill Kirks’ father, at the time. ;-)

BTW, no “b.”

464. spiked canon - November 11, 2008

and this one…..

Whatever the case, it certainly whetted the appetite for May 8, 2009, and if the rest of the film is anything like these four scenes, it looks like Abrams and Co. will have a monster hit on their hands.

465. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008

I guess the bottle of Dom hitting the “B” in Generations might count. As far as placement in ST: Cero, it’s either KO wrote it, or were “compelled” to write it, re: a product plug. Won’t ruin the movie for me either way! :)

466. Realtrekfan - November 11, 2008

For everyone freaking out about cannon.
Yesterdays Enterprise people!!

Possible spoilers:

Just as the Enterprise C going through that rift, not only, allowed Tasha Yar to be alive and on the Enterprise. The Enterprise it self was different, the uniforms, even the characters (Picard being much more of a ‘war time” captain), this new film will contain an event similar, in which the time line changes…just like in Yesterdays.

So, calm down.

467. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008

Roberto, was this movie shot on film, or something like the Panavision Genesis? If it’s mentioned somewhere else, forgive me asking here…

468. Dom - November 11, 2008

466. Realtrekfan

They’re hardly going to introduce the set-up for a whole new series of films then throw it out and start in a new timeline for a sequel, are they? The changes in this film look set to stay.

469. Q - November 11, 2008

Ok, then Bob.

I believed in you from the moment you took over the franchise, eventhough my faith has been in a little crisis today, but I still think that you can pull it off. If not in this picture than in the next movie or show. Just hope you are right. And I hope that Kirk is not a Paul Teutul 23rd century replica.

Thanks again.

470. Wheeli - November 11, 2008

OK let’s see Cannon, there was the Ugenics war in the mid 1990’s, no wait the mid 21st Century.

Kirk was a stack of books with legs, yet in Court Marital he told the his lawyer how old fashioned fashioned books were as if they had not been around for a long time.

In WNMHGB Kirk’s Middle initial is “R” then it is “T” later.

The United Earth Space Probe Agency, the Federation.

Enterprise having 250 Crew members, later in TOS having 450 Crew Members.

the Brady house not having a attic, Greg Moving into the attic.

Oh sorry.

Hey people it is Fiction, if the new Movie Keeps the Spirtr and doesn’t become a Star Wars, Or BSG Clone (both of which I love for different reasons.) I will love it.

471. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008

One more query for this evening, Herr Orci… Obviously, I haven’t seen the trailer yet, so can you enlighten film score nerds, like myself as to what music is used in said trailer? Giacchino? Or scores from previous Trek endeavors?

Thanks a bunch!

RS out!

472. Realtrekfan - November 11, 2008

469-No, that’s not what i’m saying (or it’s partly).

Unlike Yesterdays Enterprise, the time line will not go back.

But, like that TNG with Worf in the various time lines, the old stuff with go on along a parallel track.

I guess a better example would be the Mirror universe.

473. King Zooropa - November 11, 2008

All I can say is I seriously can’t wait until this movie comes out! The descriptions of the clips are just making me salivate more and drive me to higher levels of impatience! *grin*

Bravo to the production team. As a long-time Trekker, it sounds like you have a real winner on your hands. I’ll definitely be there the first night it opens.

And knowing me, probably the second, too. ;)

474. Gabriel Bell - November 11, 2008

371 – JL …
Happy Birthday! Sounds like a great one.

And that Enterprise is FANTASTIC. 95% of the people picking at it on these boards will be saying they loved it all along in six months.

475. Boborci - November 11, 2008

471 Giacchino

476. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008

re: 475

AWESOME! Can’t wait to hear it!

477. dalek - November 11, 2008

#475 wicked! Big fan of his work, got both Alias soundtracks, which incidentally I am rewatching. I miss Alias, but I’ve forgotten so much about the early episodes its like watching them again fresh. Incidentally I really rated Will Tippin, and was shocked to hear that wasn’t a popular opinion.

478. Red Shirt - November 11, 2008


Listen to Michael’s work on that Pixar short, “Lifted.” You’ll hear some sci-fi range that you might not hear on Alias, Lost, and even The Incredibles. That short sold me on him to score this flick!

479. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#452 – “#446—All of the continuity of the 5 series and 10 movies remains intact, as long as any ‘changes’ to the backstory with which we are all so familiar are solely due to timeline interference.

Every event depicted in filmed Trek in the last 4+ decades leads up to the point where Nero and his cohorts decide to take action to alter the past. Therefore, the continuity we know is inherently relevant to the story about to be told to the World.”

If the end result, when the movie is done and all the smoke clears, is that future productions are not taking place in a different fictional world from the last 5 series and 10 films, I’ll be completely fine and dandy with everything you just said. Ditto if the world they end up in is considered so similar that all the rest is still considered “valid” for the purposes of the storytelling going forward. If not, then no matter how one tap-dances around the fact, it has shoved what has come before aside and all that has been built up to this point is mooted for the purposes of further Trek projects…at least under this team’s lead. That is not my idea of a good thing.

As I’ve said, I’ll give this team every chance to prove my fears wrong, that this will still be a part of the “Star Trek Universe”, both in its beginning and at its end, irrelevant of what happens in between those two points. I owe them that much. But I’m sad, really, because for the first time since they announced this production, I’ve crossed the divide between being basically optimistic and hoping not to be proven wrong, and basically pessimistic and hoping not to be proven right. :(

Y’know, it’s ironic. On another board, I was talking with someone who had given up on continuity because he felt that ENT had messed everything up. And if indeed there will be, after this film, a separate Abramsverse, as distinct from the Trekverse Prime, ENT will be the only part of what came before that the two share.

“Would that constitute…a joke?” – Spock, “Star Trek VI”

480. Dom - November 11, 2008

479. Alex Rosenzweig

Ironically maybe all this time travel-related destruction was part of what Future Guy and the Temporal Cold War was actually about and Star Trek: Enterprise really did end up being part of a different timeline!

481. Dennis Bailey - November 11, 2008

#479: “Y’know, it’s ironic. On another board, I was talking with someone who had given up on continuity because he felt that ENT had messed everything up. And if indeed there will be, after this film, a separate Abramsverse, as distinct from the Trekverse Prime, ENT will be the only part of what came before that the two share.”

Well, that and Captain Kirk and Spock and the starship Enterprise and phasers and warp drive and the Federation and Romulans and almost everything else.

482. lostrod - November 11, 2008


Folks who feel passionate about something they love are not “idiots”.

Show some class and provide inside without resorting to name calling.


483. Mr_Niemand - November 11, 2008

@ 234 Dom

“Bar fights and Classic Budweiser – Gasp! Star Trek reconnects with the real world for the first time since The Undiscovered Country! I don’t see why drinks and companies that have lasted decades can’t last for centuries. I hope they have money in this film as well!”

That’s great. Sure. Perhaps, they’ll even have a Sony viewscreen on the bridge, Motorola communicators, Smith & Wesson phasers etc. Perhaps, Kirk even drives a BMW and listens to music on his ipod. Wouldn’t that be great? Let’s have some futuristic product placement. Makes Star Trek more real and makes it easier for people to connect to this futuristic world.

But seriously, from what I’ve read so far about the movie, it’s going to be just another blockbuster action adventure with lame jokes, slapstick elements, a lot of CGI scenes, lots of action scenes etc. trying to appeal to almost everyone and thus ending up being just another uninteresting, boring film with cardboard characters that you don’t really care about, a film in itself nothing more than a cliché. And this isn’t Star Trek. It’s just the average Hollywood blockbuster trying to appeal to everyone and thus really appealing to no one at all. This is Star Trek for the video game generation. It will end up being just like a video game, but worse, because in a videogame you can play an active part, whereas here all you can do is passively watch.

The problem here isn’t even the canon issue. The problem is that Star Trek at its best was about sensation, a kind of wonder, about people “exploring strange, new worlds”, boldly going “where one has gone before”, thus exploring their own human nature.

But this film offers just another story where Earth/mankind is being attacked by ruthless aliens who seek to destroy the human race. Of course, these aliens are fought and in the end our heroes have saved the human race. In the meantime we get lots of space battles showing us what can be achived with CGI today. But this isn’t Star Trek. This isn’t about exploration and adventure, it’s just another sci-fi action movie with mindless space battles, too long (boring) CGI sequences, lacking “soul”.

Most of the Star Trek movies were lacking this adventure/exploration element that made the Original Series great. But at least they gave us the familiar characters that we liked. The new film is different in that it shows us characters with familiar names that are nonetheless a lot different from the characters we know from the Original Series. And, of course, it won’t give us the exploration element, either. (Just as so many of the Voyager and Enterprise episodes failed to do.) So this might become a financial success, but it won’t have anything to do with Star Trek as we know it.

484. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

422. Donn:
well, losers would not really be the title i would assign. im not hear to hurl names and i dont believe people are losers for watching film. I’m merely stating how that BECAUSE of people like Bob Orci saying they sifted through the novels, shows and films (thanks for clarifying that JJ is here to just do what he is told, not to have anything to do with writing), and then going ahead and writing any darn movie you pleased just trading on names to tell YOUR story with utter disregard to foundation, film as a story telling medium is severely worse than all other methods. Film is for the people who dont wanna read a book (lets face it, most people dont read a book nor have an attention span longer than Captain Robert April’s posts). Film is for the majority who make the daily fault of believing what their eyes show them without any furhter investigation. Honestly, how many people here have even read a star trek book (or more than one, for that matter?)
People dont write a book then go back and change the book or other people go back and write a book changing all that stuff, i believe you’d get your askicked for that. Like I said, what would everyone do if they went back and remade Godfather? Or dare I invoke a remake of the holy trilogy? or TWOK for that matter?
Yeah, i thought so. I dont mind if the enterprise looks a bit different, or the uniforms with slight changes, and i really dont even know where this (not the poster of this name) Captain Robert April came from. I never heard of him. I do know of Pike though and I know Kirk made a quick reference to him in Menagerie, I think.
As far as me living on a different planet, I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. And on my planet *where we don’t have warp drive yet, but thanks for interfering, we’re working on that now* tolkien’s books are debatable for “best screen adaptations”. Also never saw the Dukes of Hazzard movie here. We don’t get crap remakes out here, maybe because we’re not part of the federation of planets (yet) though there is a company called Haliburton who said they are coming to our country to give us democracy and build us into the 21st century, if you could help us with any research on that company, it would be helpful. Or if spock could, even better.
Clearly, this flick is for only those with touch ipods and have never watched star trek. (As far as orci saying that they don’t know much about trek overseas, perhaps he’s missed out on the countless conventions WORLD WIDE for the last 35 years and have never heard of them on his planet, or rented Trekkies to SEE the conventions in every other country. I get it if IRAQ has not seen Trek, I think Bush is killing two birds with one stone over there though, bringing both democracy and star trek (not the same thing). No, we are intentionally being ignored as far as being shown advanced screenings of Trek becuase Orci and co. dont care about us here. They just wanna woo the world wide audience with its new FX and try to brainwash them like the people here who (and 90% of you have said it over and over on this site: story doesn’t matter, just as along as it looks cool) and Orci and crew know that, so they will take your billion dollars for the three films they’ll give us and then walk away like a young man who just had a quickie on a frat girl. the poster Captain Robert April was right “grab onto your ankles” and as one poster replied, “Well, at least he gave us a reach around”. I like you Orci, I’ll even let you violate my sister just like you violated star trek..

485. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#483 and #484—Lmao.

You guys are concluding quite a bit from someone else’s perspective on 20 minutes of footage…

Star Trek was and is about a vision….a vision that promises that Mankind will not destroy itself, but instead, will unite to conquer the social ills which plague us today and to explore the final frontier.

I don’t see anything in the alternate development of these iconic characters which violates that… and certainly not in a few second-hand accounts of 20 minutes of footage from a 120 minute film (which are, by the way, probably the most positive reviews of any Star Trek film).

I have been a fan of Star Trek for 30 years, but what I want most from a movie is to be entertained. Unfortunately, by the time this film is released, it will have been 18 years since a Star Trek film actually did that…

I am more enthusiastic now than I have been about a Star Trek film since standing in line at the theater back in 1982.

#484—As for the “90%” who supposedly say all the time that “story doesn’t matter as long as it looks cool”, I have to ask—Are you on the right website? I spend quite a bit of time here, and have just about everyday for a long time. Who are you talking about?

Star Trek won’t miss you, guys. Just don’t go and see the movie. No one will force you.

486. FSL - November 11, 2008

Sounds like a lot of fun.

Though this further comfirms that established Trek history is bent and ignored at will.

487. FSL - November 11, 2008

And did Scotty kill Porthos?

488. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#486—-Not at all, since every part of ST “history” we know leads up to the point where Nero and his cohorts decide to take action in order to change the past.

Furthermore, the possibility of interference with the past creating an alternate timeline is in itself ‘canon’ (and has been for over 40 years).

But I agree that it does sound like a lot of fun.

I’m excited.

489. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008


Given the lifespan of beagles, ‘Porthos’ would have been dead long before that.

Apparently, he acquired more beagles (post-Porthos).

490. Databrain - November 11, 2008

‘I wish people would stop dictating their personal canon as gospel, decrying what JJ and co are doing. Get over yourselves, you don’t have to watch this film if it doesnt fit into your warped little world.’

And watch as this movie FAILS as a result of not adhering to canon and the vision trekkies have of the future. Once and for all, get it through your heads that those who have supported and continue to support the franchise, specifically true geek trekkies, ought to be catered to.

We have every right to demand they cater to us. I’ve spent enough money on star trek items in my young life that I could have a very big yard sale with it all. But my support for anything but the original roddenberry vision has dwindled into nothing.

This film will FAIL and I will not care. Because it is not true trek.

491. lieud vejgrint - November 11, 2008

#485. No, Star Trek won’t miss me at all, or ain’t you been listening. Star Trek isn’t for people who have seen and liked star trek. It’s for 13-29 year olds who, like, say like, like, all the time and have that whole, like, thing going on there.
I KNOW this is what Gene wanted. He never wanted Trek to be about issues and metaphors and social commentary or the human condition, he just cared about magnificent CGI (like his hand in space in “who mourns for adonis”). For him, it was ALL about money and special effects. THAT is what sustained star trek and made it so sucessful for 40 years. We’re in good, slippery hands! Why not bring back Brannon and Braga? Maybe we can knockoff Spock in this one too! Maybe he’ll stop the romulans from killing kirk and then get shot in the back!!
They say that tragedies bring people closer. Maybe AFTER watching this film Shat and Takei will kiss and make up.

492. Databrain - November 11, 2008

Just as the Enterprise C going through that rift, not only, allowed Tasha Yar to be alive and on the Enterprise. The Enterprise it self was different, the uniforms, even the characters (Picard being much more of a ‘war time” captain), this new film will contain an event similar, in which the time line changes…just like in Yesterdays.’

But in the end the established time line was restored….

493. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#480 – “Ironically maybe all this time travel-related destruction was part of what Future Guy and the Temporal Cold War was actually about and Star Trek: Enterprise really did end up being part of a different timeline!”

Perhaps, but it was never so established, nor did ENT do anything that expressly indicated that it was anything other than part of the same world as the rest of Trek. If the new film is as vague, I’ll be perfectly fine with it. I merely question whether that will be the case.

494. Databrain - November 11, 2008

And besides there is a major difference between time line alterations due to a valid interference pattern and completely re-writing characters so they seem more ‘action film’ oriented. I mean why didn’t they just get bruce willis to play kirk and call it ‘die hard in an alternate time line, where nothing matters but revenue’?

Kirk not in the academy? Yet everyone seems to think he is the most important thing this side of the Neutral zone?

Pathetic and silly!

495. Alex Rosenzweig - November 11, 2008

#488 – “Furthermore, the possibility of interference with the past creating an alternate timeline is in itself ‘canon’ (and has been for over 40 years).”

This is absolutely true. It’s why I try not to speak of canon, but rather of continuity, or specifically in terms of a common Trekverse that all filmed Trek to date (or at least all filmed Trek except maybe this new movie?) has shared.

496. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#491—Nothing that costs money is sustained for the public for 4 decades without being ‘about’ money to some degree.

When I think of Star Trek, I think of adventure. I think of Captain James Kirk fistfghting and fornicating his way across the Enterprise. I think of Spock and McCoy verbally sparring over philosophical differences and the human condition. I think of Scotty performing a miracle or two to save the Enterprise. I think of the occasional statement on a social issue or two. Above all, I think of the optimism necessary to imagine a scenario in which the human species is not erased by the 23rd Century, but has progressed to reach heights which are nearly unimaginable now.

I have not seen, nor have I heard, anything which suggests that this film will miss any of that.

I am a man who has been in combat, seen the effects of disease, hunger, torture, genocide, religious and ethnic intolerance, and everything else you can think of that plagues us as a people…as one race.

Despite all of that—-I don’t have to be 13-29 to be optimistic about the future of my children, and their children, and so on….or to enjoy a good Kirk fist fight, a well-executed Vulcan neck pinch, or a good McCoy quip.

Damnit, Jim, I think I’ll go see Star Trek in May. It sounds pretty entertaining.

497. JR - November 11, 2008

Shatner could have worn the red shirt.

498. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

#495—-“It’s why I try not to speak of canon, but rather of continuity, or specifically in terms of a common Trekverse…”

I know you do, which is why I fail to understand how you can disregard the fact that the very continuity built for 40+ years within the Star Trek Universe has lead us to this point in the ongoing story.

That’s why I say it is more of a “sequel” to the previous films than it is a “prequel”, and it certainly cannot be defined as a “reboot”, since everything that happened before is necessary for this story to unfold.

None of it is ‘disregarded’, IMO. It is still very relevant in my eyes.

499. Closettrekker - November 11, 2008

That’s “fistfighting and fornicating his way across the galaxy…(not the Enterprise)” in post #496.

Typonians got me.

500. Anthony Pascale - November 11, 2008


I was told by a friend of yours today that the music in the trailer is not from Giacchino as that wasn’t ready yet. I did send some emails to clarify this. are you sure it was Giacchino (except for that Courage sting at the very end with the logo)

501. Boborci - November 11, 2008

oh — maybe I’m confused cuz I was in the scoring stage when giacchino was editing music for the trailer. Assumed it was his. I could be wrong.

502. Finny - November 11, 2008

Here’s a thought – it’s not a reboot – this is HOW IT HAPPENED!

Now here me out, we don’t know Kirk’s father’s backstory,and except for a few lines,we don’t know much about kirk’s backstory or accademy days,we don’t know how the crew met,etc.

This doesn’t violate cannon- it CREATS IT!

Here’s a second thought – NOT ONLY DID THIS HAPPEN – but the older spot (“Spock prime”) KNEW at a point in his future he would have to go back in time to make sure things happened as they did!

See,simple logic!

503. Boborci - November 11, 2008



504. Weerd1 - November 11, 2008

Maybe in the second film Kirk goes back and SAVES his father, retconning the retcon and creating the known Classic Trek! :)

505. Weerd1 - November 11, 2008

I actually do have a question about the creative process, and in no way am I trying to imply it’s done badly. Why use the time travel element as the catalyst to tell this story? Could the story just show Kirk taking command without having Temporally warring Romulans? Not trying to criticize, just interested in the elements of the creative process which led to THIS Trek story.

506. THX-1138 - November 11, 2008

The 20 minutes of previewed material sounds great. I can get on board with that stuff.

Just not crazy about that ship.

But I guess there’s more to life and all that.

507. C.S. Lewis - November 11, 2008

Jumpin Jehosophat, Orci.

Please tell me you didn’t write this story for teenagers. If “The Cage” was condemned for being “too cerebral” this sounds too juvenile.

Do we really need to see Kirk grabbing some chick’s boobs? Haha. Very funny. James “Tomcat” Kirk is hetero. I feel so validated!

Badboy Jimmy gets himself kicked off a deployed warship because he can’t behave himself? Hey man, no one gets kicked off a warship during wartime, unless they are really really really really effed-up and then they end up at Leavenworth — not the skipper’s chair.

I walked out of that monstrosity reboot “Planet of the Apes” … just couldn’t stop the gag reflex, having watched the Wise/Heston classic the night before.

If I have to walk out of this … I’m sending you the bill!

508. Boborci - November 11, 2008



509. Boborci - November 11, 2008


What led to that was our conviction that Nimoy had to be in it in an essential way.

510. C.S. Lewis - November 11, 2008

^508: i’ll hold you to it — and that will include my wife and son, too!

511. Alex Rosenzweig - November 12, 2008

#498 – “#495—-‘It’s why I try not to speak of canon, but rather of continuity, or specifically in terms of a common Trekverse…’

I know you do, which is why I fail to understand how you can disregard the fact that the very continuity built for 40+ years within the Star Trek Universe has lead us to this point in the ongoing story.”

Maybe I’m not managing to get my idea across right. I understand and appreciate that the existing continuity brings us to the point where the catalyst for the plot of this film is set into motion. But if the result of the entire story is that we’re thrown into an alternate universe in which things may be radically, even profoundly, different than in the Trekverse that we know, and if the idea is that such a change is intended to be “permanent” from the point of view of what stories we, as viewers, will get to see from this point forward, then in my book, no matter what convoluted reasoning one uses, it’s still a reboot *in practice*, to wit, a restart in which what had previously been established is no longer relevant, because any such discussion of existing material is answered by simply saying, “We’re in a different universe now, so your point is irrelevant.”

So, yeah, there is an explanation within the bounds of canonical Trek, but it still has the net effect of a reboot. And I cannot endorse that effect.

In that sense, it would seem that the film is, as they’ve said, partly sequel, partly prequel, and partly reboot.

Now, obviously, if I’m wrong, if part of the journey of this film is to look at the Trekverse in different ways, but in the end, they follow the “Yesterday’s Enterprise” or “Year of Hell” examples, and the continuity is re-linked, going forward, to that of the other 10 movies and the 5 series, then I’ll eat my heaping plate of crow for my comments today and leave the theater a happy guy. :) But if not, if Trek ’09 is an “effective (or “backdoor”, if you prefer that term) reboot”, then I’ll be going to Shore Leave 31 on the money I didn’t spend buying movie tickets to “Star Trek”.

Does that clarify a bit where I’m coming from?

512. montreal paul - November 12, 2008

492. Databrain – November 11, 2008
“But in the end the established time line was restored….”

No, the timeline WASN’T restored.. by having Yar go back and captured by the Romulans… she has Sela. So the timeline looked as it it had returned… but it was different. one person going back in time changed it from that point forward.

So, that being said… the Kelvin being destroyed and Kirk’s father with it.. changed things from that point forward. And that is what you will see in this film more than likely. That would account for any and all changes that you are used to from TOS. things are similar but not exactly the same.

513. Regula One - November 12, 2008

I can pretty much guess. –ref. “the creative processes.”

*Remember this is just a theory–

1st- They needed established, well known characters.

Creating a movie with entirely new crew would not get nearly enough attention (from Paramount or the fans) to warrent a movie, maybe a new show BUT not a new movie. After what happened with Enterprise (I mostly blame UPN) prospects on a new show were grim.

2nd- I they were going to use “old” characters, who would they use? And why?

Well, if you’re going to jump start a francise you gotta go back to the begining. Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise told all their stories from begining to end. First episode: the crew assembles for their first voyage, seasons 1 – 7 (or 4) crew has various character defining adventures, then the series finale: the ship or space station is decommissioned and the crew go their separate ways.( except TNG, however, for the past 4 movies, everyone was slowly, but surely going their separate ways.) What’s left The Original Series.

And finally– The Original Series? Why not.

The nobody knows how the crew first assembled or what happened on their first voyage. The pilot (The Cage) and series began, for all intents and purposes, in the “middle” of their story.

And unlike Trek’s later shows, TOS never really delve too deep into any of the crews’ pasts or their motivations in life (with the exception of Spock).

J.J., Bob and Alex are doing something with these characters, that no one has done before: creating a definitive origin story for the Enterprise and her crew.

Based on what I’ve seen and read so far…They are doing just that, and I couldn’t be any happier. Thanks guys. I’ll be there to see it on opening day.

514. Commodore Redshirt - November 12, 2008

This “Major Spoiler” (whoever he is) needs a promotion to full Colonel!
I’m getting more excited as each day passes.
I feel like a phaser on “overload”!

515. Wes - November 12, 2008

“Included in Uhura’s drink order was a ‘Budweiser Classic’ and a Cardassian drink”

Cardassian? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL! Now they are really streching things! Definetly streching Canon!

516. John - November 12, 2008

Does anyone know if the trailer be shown in Australia with “Quantum of Solace.”??

I’ve looked everywhere and I can’t find any information.

517. RuFFeD_UP - November 12, 2008

Sounds awesome but IMO the new Enterprise looks terrible.

518. Databrain - November 12, 2008

‘No, the timeline WASN’T restored.. by having Yar go back and captured by the Romulans… she has Sela. So the timeline looked as it it had returned… but it was different. one person going back in time changed it from that point forward.’

Yes but Picard and company didn’t realize the overall effect of this until Redemption, when they came into direct conflict with Sela. And the alterations in the time line didn’t turn Picard and his crew into Bruce Willis’s and Tom Cruise’s. Using the ‘time line’ variable just seems like a cheap way of mucking up characters and turning them into action film caricatures of their former selves. NOT what trek was ever about.

519. Marian Ciobanu - November 12, 2008

– Everything seems to be cool…except maybe the fact that the Tng warbirds are my favourite ships..but now i’m pretty sure that this movie is a sequel to “Enterprise” , as it should be..

520. Sebi - November 12, 2008

Wow, it took me hours to read all the comments but I did it!

Thanks Anthony for a great blog.
Thanks JJ, Bobocri and all the others to try their best to make a good ST-Movie. I’ll always give you the benefit of the doubt until I see the movie. I don’t like everything which has been released so far, but the most of it.

Again, I try to judge the movie when I see it. Not before, based on some little things which have been released. I guess this is much more healthier to me..

521. FSL - November 12, 2008


Re: 488
Yea. Kirk mentioned something about this Romulan attack at his birth. So in effect the Nero group could have interfered with history as early as that. Nice theory.

Re: 489

522. Blowback - November 12, 2008

You folks all realize that these reveals are happening now to give us fans time to blow up, argue the finer points, and give our feedback, right? This conversation is as good as a private screening I would imagine.

Not that I expect there to be any major changes but it might be used as market research to tweak some of the finer points….

523. Dennis Bailey - November 12, 2008

Here’s something to keep in mind:

According to what’s been reported, a Paramount studio executive first broached the topic of “Star Trek” to one of the now-producers of the movie.

Abrams didn’t ask *Paramount;* Paramount was clearly looking for a new take on “Star Trek.”

How many of you here think that if the Abrams team had passed on Trek the studio’s next move would have been to offer the Franchise to someone who would have been *more* respectful of the details?

I’m thinking, “Michael Bay.” LOL

524. Daoud - November 12, 2008

#523 I’d be willing to see what Manny Coto might have come up with, or Ron Moore, or R.H. Wolfe, or Ira Steven Behr…. given the chance to revisit the TOS era…

Or even Harlan Ellison. Heck, then we’d have had McCoy infecting people with viruses… or selling drugs illegally leading him to face jail or volunteering for Starfleet… Oh wait, we do have that.

525. Dennis Bailey - November 12, 2008

#524: “#523 I’d be willing to see what Manny Coto might have come up with, or Ron Moore, or R.H. Wolfe, or Ira Steven Behr…. given the chance to revisit the TOS era…”

And there is no reason – no reason whatever – to think that any of those worthies would be on the studio’s short list to helm a big-budget theatrical version of “Star Trek.”

That includes Ron Moore, whose work on “Battlestar Galactica” is excellent beyond anything Trek has come up with in decades – because BSG’s commercial success and the size of its audience has not been such that he has (perhaps yet) become a go-to guy in the megabucks movie arena.

Bryan Singer? Possibly – but the tepid reaction to “Superman Returns” (a movie I quite liked) really diminishes that possibility as well.

526. Jesse Low - November 12, 2008

All this is great and stuff but where are the clips? footage? THE TRAILER? The Star Trek community is dropping the ball on this one if they can’t get a single leaked scene of the trailer. I mean, c’mon, didn’t they start the whole online community/forum thing? They invented it!!! Someone please post clips!!!

527. 750 Mang - November 12, 2008

So this is all an alternate time line except Nimoy’s Spock? Right? Like Star Trek – What If?

So we can get Khan again in the next movie I guess?

I dunno…

528. thenewK2 - November 12, 2008

If I can take a stab at the discrepencies we are seeing (Kirk and Pike meeting, The different look of the Enterprise et, al)…I believe that we are seeing a divergence in the Trek timeline caused by those rascally Romulans who go back in time and try and blow the snot out of Kirk or Kirk’s father, to give the Romulans an advantage in the future that they didn’t have when Kirk destroyed their secret weapon in “Balance of Terror”. If these Romulans destroy the Kelvin in the past, then the entire Trek timeline is altered from then on, thus, Starfleet would do as they did when they met the Borg, re-design their ships to be “heartier”, “faster”, with better defenses, etc. This would explain why Damon and JJ are saying things like this film still fits within the cannon and would explain why the enterprise looks more advanced than it’s 1960’s counterpart. Just my take. Can’t wait til Friday!

529. Shawn - November 12, 2008

That ship is the ugliest f*ing thing I have ever seen. You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves for supporting that P.O.S. Other than that, still looking forward to the movie.

530. Closettrekker - November 12, 2008

#529—-“You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves for supporting that P.O.S.”

You should be ashamed of yourself for posting that.

531. Shawn - November 12, 2008

“You should be ashamed of yourself for posting that.”

And you should be ashamed of yourself for a drive by post with nothing to back it up.

That ship is horrific and it pi$$es the entire franchise, all Trek fans, and the potential for this new movie (which I expect to be good despite this garbage).

Carrying the torch for this ship and praising it is shameful.

532. Closettrekker - November 12, 2008

#511—-Maybe this will give you some hope.

Bob Orci: “We will make no excuses about bending canon. If you see the movie, you will either agree with our final solution, or you won’t. But it’s too early to tell right. Just hoping for an open mind.”

BaronByng:”… by ‘final solution’ you mean there’s something we have to see the movie to understand, right…? Something not evident in a bunch of movie stills?”

Bob Orci:”Yes on ‘final solution’ question”

(taken from the Enterprise Image thread)

533. Closettrekker - November 12, 2008

#531—“And you should be ashamed of yourself for a drive by post with nothing to back it up.”

I’ve made my views on the new/old Enterprise quite clear in the thread dedicated to that subject.

This one is about the 20 minutes of footage from the film reviewed by reporters in the UK.

I’m afraid my opinion of the Enterprise image is different from yours. My point to you is that, while you have every right to feel however you want about it, that’s quite different from telling other fans how they should feel about it.

I am a grown man, and quite capable of determining for myself how asthetically appealing it is. That isn’t for you to determine for me, nor should I be ‘ashamed’ that my opinion differs from yours.

I didn’t feel that my response to your post needed further clarification, but since you require it anyway….there it is.

534. Jordan - November 12, 2008

I don’t get all the pessimism from people on here. It’s okay to be a die hard, but give the movie a chance before you bash it. C’mon!

535. Charles H. Root, III - November 13, 2008

I wish I had a time machine and could change the timeline by introducing JJ’s, Orci’s and Kurtzman’s parents to birth control.

C’mon guys… Budweiser? Are they wearing Rolex watches, Nike Space Marine combat boots and Microsoft Xoom tricorders? Is there a McDonald’s space station with drive thru docking port too?

Not digging the new Enterprise inside or out. And what’s up with the exposed printed circuit board looking things on the bridge? You would never do that with a mission critical system. It’s like putting the motherboard on the outside of your PowerBook, duh. It looks cheesier than the Lost In Space remake.

I bet these guys would make the actors work in front of a green screen to do their scenes with CG’d tribbles that, oh by the way, now have a single eye that extends from a pouch.

It’s also interesting to note how they’ve circled the wagons in an attempt to give themselves credibility and appear as nice guys by enlisting Nimoy, James Cawley and the late Dr. Randy Pausch.

Which reminds me f the old Abraham Lincoln story:

Abraham Lincoln posed this question: “How many legs does a dog have?” The reply of course was four.

Lincoln asked, “If we call the tail a leg, then how many legs does a dog have?” The reply: Five.

“No,” Lincoln said, “Just because you call a tail a leg doesn’t make it so.”

Well guys, just because you call it Star Trek doesn’t make it so.

I wish JJ would open up that damn silly Mystery Box. Perhaps he’ll find a clue inside.

If not, the box of really dead Sea Monkeys in there deserve a proper burial.

536. DJT - November 13, 2008

Can I be there when you guys preview this stuff in the U.S.?

It’d be nice.


537. Trimoon’s Blog » Blog Archive » BBC News 20 Minutes of New STAR TREK Film Footage - November 13, 2008

[…] More at BBC and trekmovie.com […]

538. Roadie - November 13, 2008

OK, Enterprise being built on the ground?? Oy. I am trying to go into this with the mindset of “this is an alternate timeline Trek” ala the Mirror universe. Even with all the disregard for c*non I will see it and give it a fair shot.

539. cagmar - November 13, 2008

“I thought you were some dumb hick who only has sex with farm animals”

– I don’t know, but isn’t this an awfully ethnocentrc, almost racist remark, coming from Uhura? I’m no “hick” myself, but even using such a term seems rather extreme. They wouldn’t have those kinds of hate labels in the Star Trek I grew up on. Especially not from the crew.


540. Veteran Commander - November 13, 2008

Some one hasn’t done his research!

Also, Karl Urban looks more like Gary Mitchell than Leonard McCoy, doesn’t he? And, where the hell is Gary Mitchell(Kirk’s best friend) in this movie????????

541. Nikk - November 14, 2008

wtf…I was looking forward to this trek movie more than any other, but now that the details are being released, I find this ‘reboot’ of Trek to be full of holes….The Enterprise looks retarded, and what is this crap about ‘Adiral Archer’s Beagle’? He died in 2245 the day after the launch of 1701 under April, and u are telling me that somehow Porthos survived into the 2250’s? (Trek explanation or not, thats just way to much for me) Waaay too many inconsistancies already in just the few scenes that have been described. My excitment level went from warp 9.9 down to one quarter impulse. Thumbs down for Abrams for already fracking up the timeline with lots of nonsence. No Gary Mitchell, no Finney, no Ruth, and whats this about Uhura having a Budweiser and a Cardassian drink? Ask any Trekkie what they think of a Cardassian drink in a human bar in the 2250’s? No one knew who the damn Cardy’s were until the first half of the 24th century. This movie is basically ignoring all that Trek has written for the time period Abrams is tackling. I undersatnd this is a reboot, and I still hope it does well, but we keep hearing repeatadly that this movie will be for the fans as well, and us fans are picky about or canonical Trek material, and this film seems to ignore all of what has passed in the Trek timeline. I do love how they somehow got an Archer reference, but with his 100 year old Beagle? Come on, who was sniffing glue when they slapped this monstrosity together?

Live Long and fill Abrams pocket full of Gold Pressed Latinum.

542. Beep - February 7, 2009

Hey. Not to blow the Robert April “canon or not canon” argument, but it seems, at least from a pic seen from the trailer of Star Trek XI, that Paul McGillion (the guy who played the scottish doctor on Stargate Atlantis, for those of you who’ve seen that show) might be playing Robert April.

That is, JJ Abrams said that he tried out for the role of Scotty, and said they were EXTREMELY impressed with his performance, but they went with the other guy since he was (1) well known in the movie business and (2) they had worked with him before in MI3. Abrams said he was so impressed with his audition, though, that he really wanted to include McGillion in the movie in some small one scene part. The part is supposed to be a surprise but Abrams mentioned that he was cast in a role that would be an homage to the original series and that he was NOT a red shirt.

In the trailer, there’s a quick scene where he’s depicted as a sort of starfleet instructor. People were speculating that he’d be Finnegan or Robert April (no other role would make any sense since there’s not many roles left that could be an homage to TOS) since Finnegan is Irish and Robert April is from the UK and McGillion would be able to pull off either accent. SO since Finnegan would not make any sense as a starfleet instructor, people are thinking he’ll be Robert April and it most certainly looks that way :)

543. ponnfarr6996 - March 19, 2009

I just wish they hadnt of killed David…..mybe the alternate timeline will save him….what ever happened to Saavik?……will we ever get some of this?

544. “nuevas noticias de star trek 2009 “ « CHICO STAR TREK - April 19, 2009

[…] Fuente: ZonaTrek y Trekmovie […]

545. Lowell Vandehei - August 21, 2011

Smart stuff, I look forward to reading more.

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