New Images From Star Trek Movie From Rittenhouse Card Set + High Res US Poster | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

New Images From Star Trek Movie From Rittenhouse Card Set + High Res US Poster March 30, 2009

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

Paramount was nice enough to send over an advanced look set of Star Trek movie collector’s cards coming from Rittenhouse in May. The set includes a bunch of new images, not seen in any trailer or previous image release. Check out the new stuff below, along with official captions. Also Paramount just released a higher resolution version of the USA Poster. [SPOILERS BELOW]

 

New Star Trek images from Rittenhouse card set
Note that the captions below each card are word-for-word what is on the back of the Rittenhouse card. In some cases TrekMovie has added some additional info [in brackets]. The set sent to TrekMovie also included some previously seen images, but those are not displayed below.

Click images to enlarge


A ship known by some as "The Jellyfish"
[ship in which Spock travels back in time]


Nero, once a heroic Romulan, now seeks vengence


Sulu, one of the best helmsmen in Starfleet


Uhura must choose sides on a divided ship


McCoy, uncomfortable on any ship, even a simulator
[note Kirk in background, during Kobayashi Maru simulation - set is a redress of USS Kelvin bridge]


San Francisco Bay, home of Starfleet Academy
[appears to be back of McCoy in foreground]


A young prodigy named Chekov


Try to guess James T. Kirk’s favorite color


Pike, the original Captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise


Young Spock pilots a stolen ship


An alien walks into a bar…
[Scotty's alien helper 'Keenser' on Delta Vega]


Spock advises his younger self against pure logic


Jim Kirk meets his accuser, Mr. Spock
[card previewed before, but caption is new]

 

USA Poster bigger
Last Friday the US Star Trek poster was previewed on MySpace. Today Paramount made it available to the press in higher resolution, check it out.


USA Poster (Click to enlarge)

 

Comments

1. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - March 30, 2009

I don’t know about Kirk, but I definitely know about my favorite color right now…

2. toasteroven - March 30, 2009

Looks like the Spock meets Spock is at the Academy… interesting…

3. Tox Uthat - March 30, 2009

f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-f-…..I can’t say it.

Can’t wait. Sounds like fun.

4. Dick Jones - March 30, 2009

Green!

5. SaphronGirl - March 30, 2009

You know what I like about that Orion girl? She’s not a stick.

6. John Ozdundar - March 30, 2009

mmm…. Green

7. NCC-73515 - March 30, 2009

Transamerica Pyramid is still standing (like the coast trees and the Palace of Fine Art). Good to know!
The alien’s name is Keenser, if memory is correct ;)

8. John from Cincinnati - March 30, 2009

I thought Robert April, not Pike, was the original Captain of NCC-1701?

I hope the movie explains this fallacy.

9. Electron - March 30, 2009

Nothing like an Orion slave girl with a little meat on her bones.

10. Chrono - March 30, 2009

@8: I think info like that from TAS is seen as apocryphal as Gene Roddenberry himself did not want Paramount to regard the animated series as canon.

11. John Gill - March 30, 2009

The communications device in Uhura’s ear is the shiznet!!!!!!!!!

12. SaphronGirl - March 30, 2009

Also, Kirk seems to be wearing a lot of eyeliner… does that mean he’s evil?

;-)

13. Chrono - March 30, 2009

@12 I think it means he is emo ^.^

14. Gorn Captain - March 30, 2009

#10: The “Yesteryear” episode of TAS was generally accepted as canon if not the whole series.

I wonder if old Spock will pass himself off as as Cousin Selek again? Would be a nice nod to TAS if he did! :)

And does that Orion look a bit like Drew Barrymore to anyone? ;)

15. Elise - March 30, 2009

12 Great. Now that’s all I can see. ;)

16. The Last Maquis - March 30, 2009

That Orion chick is a BABE!!

11. John Gill

it’s connected to shiznet (short for Shinzon.net??) ;)

17. OneBuckFilms - March 30, 2009

Starfleet Academy in that shot looks vaguely like something from TOS.

Spock and Spock meeting: Fascinating !!!

And Spock on a STOLEN SHIP? Could it be the Jellyfish?

18. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

8. John from Cincinnati – March 30, 2009
“I thought Robert April, not Pike, was the original Captain of NCC-1701? I hope the movie explains this fallacy.”

They DO NOT need to explain it, exactly because it’s a fallacy; that is you are mistaken and it’s not canon.

19. strangelove - March 30, 2009

i think thats sarke and not spock?

20. Wolfspawn - March 30, 2009

I don’t think that Old Spock…I think maybe it’s Sarek seeing his son off to the Academy…Note what looks to be some form of academy uniform….

21. Charles Trotter - March 30, 2009

Bloody awesome! I’m thinking of ordering these cards now. Ohh, if only I didn’t have limited finances. :-P

22. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

19. strangelove – March 30, 2009
“i think thats sarke and not spock?”

So the official card’s caption is wrong? The card company/Paramount screwed up?

23. MORN SPEAKS - March 30, 2009

Very Cool!

24. Oh No, Odo - March 30, 2009

The trading card images look wonderful…

… the poster does not.

25. DesiluTrek - March 30, 2009

The card images do a better job of selling me on the movie than a lot of the other images I’ve seen. And hi-res or no, that poster image is only recognizable as the Enterprise if you know that going in. It’s way too vague for a general audience.

26. spockatatic - March 30, 2009

Oh sweet, Spock meets himself!! We haven’t seen that since Yesteryear!

27. Newman - March 30, 2009

I have a new favourite colour.

28. Daoud - March 30, 2009

Robert T. April was the first captain of the NCC-1700 USS Constitution. It was only renamed Enterprise originally due to one George S. Kirk, its original first officer. But now in the revised timeline he dies on the NCC-0514 USS Kelvin, and thus cannot be onboard April’s ship to suggest it be renamed. (Read the novel that Orci mentioned before… Best Destiny, perhaps?)

It’s all simple quantum mechanics. :p

29. Olley Olley Olley - March 30, 2009

why has Chekov been given a perm??
I can understand a move away from the Beatles cut, but a PERM!??

30. sean - March 30, 2009

#8

“I hope the movie explains this fallacy.”

Why should they? Paramount’s official position on TAS is that it isn’t canon (Rodenberry felt the same). April is not mentioned anywhere but in TAS, so he’s not canon. The movie doesn’t need to explain anything.

31. Check the Circuit - March 30, 2009

Young Spock’s Vulcan salute is completely wrong! Look at the angle of his pincky and ring fingers. It’s at least off by 6 1/2 degrees! And it’s obviously a very relaxed salute. Every real Star Trek fan knows the gesture is supposed to be rigid to reflect the nature of their culture. Quinto and Abrams clearly don’t get it. I’m sorry, I was sitting the fence before but now I know for sure…I’m boycotting this movie.

;)

32. Z - March 30, 2009

wow! first!

33. Beck - March 30, 2009

The red cadet uniforms – especially the women’s – keep reminding me of Neon Genesis. God I’m such a geek.

34. McCoy - March 30, 2009

If you set aside the design of the bridge, the hallways, the water room, the communicator, the tricorder, the Enterprise, Quinto’s voice and the time travel aspect of this film, these images make the film look good.

35. David - March 30, 2009

as soon as i saw this image…

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/ritcards/13.jpg

…i instantly thought it was those aliens that worf, picard, and data were trying to get away from in the argo in Nemesis. Is that the same alien or no?

36. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

31. Check the Circuit – March 30, 2009

Pretend trolling. Heh, heh!

37. Catie - March 30, 2009

The caption under Uhura’s picture peaks my curiosity. Choosing sides?
:-)

38. Pat Payne - March 30, 2009

@1 — I’ve always liked green… now I know I backed the right color ;)

As for the rest, I’m halfway regretting opening the article to get the spoiler of Spock and Spock meeting at the academy. But, it’s my own dumb luck. Great shots, and yet another reason that this next 37 days are going to be the slowest in my life.

“Star Trek, Star Trek time is near
Time for Spock and Kirk to get here
We’ve been nerds, but we can’t last
Hurry Star Trek, hurry fast!
Want a ship that that turns time in loops
(Me, I want a hula hoop!)
We can hardly stand the wait
Please Star Trek don’t be late!”

39. TheKirk - March 30, 2009

The Orion girl is Rachel Nichols.

40. Bren - March 30, 2009

Spoiler tags for the Spock Meets Spock moment would have been nice!

It’s kind of a big deal!

I’m not sure I wanted to see that yet!

41. Superboy - March 30, 2009

Uhm, the Transamerica building is TOTALY out of place in that picture. I work at the Trader Joe’s near there and geographicly Starfleet Acadamy would be somewhere in downtown near Chinatown or Union Square. It looks somewhat out of place – like they dropped it in there just to reference San Francisco. Plus there are no hills – McCoy would be looking down – not forward. I guess there is a major earthquake in the future that clears downtown on a 1906 scaleand they build starfleet over it. Weird.

42. The Governator - March 30, 2009

35. David

No.

43. The Governator - March 30, 2009

37. Catie

I believe the caption refers to having to chose sides with Spock or Kirk.

44. bgiles73 - March 30, 2009

Seeing as how thinking green will save the planet,I think this movie is definately environmentaly friendly. Go Green!!!

45. JML9999 - March 30, 2009

37. Catie What’s been leaked/revealed so far is that Old Spock conveys to Young Kirk Possibly during a mind Meld how to get under Spock’s Skin. So Young kirk provokes young spock into attacking him so Spock can be relieved of command thus prompting the McCoy Line

McCoy:So Now we have no Captain and No First officer to replace Him
Kirk: Yes we do.

leading to
Uhura:I Hope you know what you’re doing
Kirk:So do I

46. Anthony Pascale - March 30, 2009

Bren
http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/ritcards/spoilerstagrit.jpg

47. Anthony Pascale - March 30, 2009

and yes that is Spock not Sarek, the caption is correct

48. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - March 30, 2009

38-

Same here — green was a favorite of mine long before I understood why Pike, Archer, and now Kirk all share my favorite color. Now, I feel vindicated.

49. Krik Semaj - March 30, 2009

The “Jellyfish” looks like the Queensryche symbol.

50. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - March 30, 2009

46-

I have to say, the face on the Rifftrax advertisement in that image was very funny in the context of pointing out that spoiler tag.

51. boomer13 - March 30, 2009

These haters of this film are giving me a headache…they could power windmills with their hot air for centuries.

52. Daoud - March 30, 2009

Hmm, good thing Spock doesn’t go back too far, lest someone claim he fathers his father, Sarek. Then he’d be singing “I Am Not Spock’s Grandfather” or something to the tune of “The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins”.

53. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - March 30, 2009

spock and spock very cool hope he tells his younger self to remind Kirk not to hang out with a certain bald captain who sips and can’t throw a punch to save his life

54. Poizen_Prince - March 30, 2009

“Young Spock pilots a stolen ship”

So, Young Spock is aboard what appears to be the ‘Jellyfish’ (judging from the lighting & colour-scheme)…

And it’s stolen. Well, it’s unlikely that Old Spock would have had to steal it from Geordi, so I’ m guessing it is Young Spock who’s stolen it from Old Spock…

And we see in the 1st(?) theatrical trailer that the Jellyfish eventually makes a suicide run on the Narada…

Hmm… What’s the odds that Young Spock steals Old Spock’s ship for the purpose of timetravelling back to before the attack on Vulcan (& possibly even the Kelvin) and destroying the Narada (or at least weakening it enough that either the Enterprise or Kelvin can take it out) by ramming it?

Thus, Young Spock making an heroic sacrifice is the big reset button for this move…

If so; that’s sooooooo emo!

55. Poizen_Prince - March 30, 2009

@ 54. Poizen_Prince (me) – March 30, 2009

Also, if that is so,…

…I just ruined the end of the movie for everyone.

Huh…

GOODNIGHT EVERYBODY!

*runs away*

56. Tak Kovacs - March 30, 2009

31. – maybe old Spock will reprimand young Spock and help him get his act together. :)

57. Adam E - March 30, 2009

Can anyone tell who the photo on the dresser behind the Orion girl?

58. John Whorfin - March 30, 2009

37 Catie: piques — not peaks ;-)

59. NaradaAlpha - March 30, 2009

look at tge image of the card with the Orion chick…me senses potential Star Trek bedroom furniture sets and lamps and lingerie in the works xD

60. NaradaAlpha - March 30, 2009

—sorry, ‘the’

61. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

40. Bren – March 30, 2009
“Spoiler tags for the Spock Meets Spock moment would have been nice!”

Anthony wrote: “[SPOILERS BELOW]“; you were warned.

62. NaradaAlpha - March 30, 2009

#57–thats kirk and uhura in the pic on the dresser

63. Aaron - March 30, 2009

Orion girl a bit big for my taste…but oh well.

64. C.S. Lewis - March 30, 2009

Regarding Green Orion Slave Girls:

Star Trek’s women love interests were feminine, seductive and respectable without aping common prostitutes or simple tramps as is so often the seen in today’s adolescent character development. Vina/Susan Oliver’s Slave Girl was erotic precisely because of her forbidden, yet femininely aggressive power over Pike; she did not throw herself at him – she worked to seduce him despite his enormous self-control and discipline! (She would have succeeded, given another few seconds, thus the incredible drama of that scene.)

I wish but doubt this movie restores this higher level of human sexuality to Star Trek, since TPTB decided to include sex as a key selling point. We really do not need another teenage sex-fantasy movie where too many of our girls get the idea they are nothing but compliant sexbots for the boys, and the boys grow up treating them that way.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

65. The Governator - March 30, 2009

54. Poizen_Prince

Interesting, but probably not totally accurate. Good theory though. Can’t wait to see how the film plays this out and puts all our bits and pieces together. And I agree, that is probably the Jellyfish Spock is piloting in that pic.

66. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

41. Superboy – March 30, 2009
“Uhm, the Transamerica building is TOTALY out of place in that picture. I work at the Trader Joe’s near there and geographicly Starfleet Acadamy would be somewhere in downtown near Chinatown or Union Square. It looks somewhat out of place – like they dropped it in there just to reference San Francisco. Plus there are no hills – McCoy would be looking down – not forward. I guess there is a major earthquake in the future that clears downtown on a 1906 scaleand they build starfleet over it. Weird.”

Maybe it was rebuilt after WW3….

67. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - March 30, 2009

63-

Haven’t all the Orion women we’ve seen been roughly the same size and build, anyway? At least as far as I recall, all of them have had feminine curves to them. Not sticks, as one of the posters above mentioned.

68. Ensign Ruiter - March 30, 2009

Suzie Plakson is hot in all things Trek. Sorry this is a random thought. But damn!

Nero shops at Old Navy?

I like how Keenser’s shades have extra-long stems to avoid seeming as just another pair of cheap sunglasses.

Guys, this movie is almost hear–I declare we made it. Everyone who has doggedly visited this site for the last year and a half, please give yourself a pat on the back–it is time for catharsis, ladies and gentlemen. We made it.

69. WhatInBlueBlazes?! - March 30, 2009

Just to follow up on my statement, I’d hardly call her ‘big’ by any stretch of the imagination.

70. Ensign Ruiter - March 30, 2009

uh, “here.”

71. screaming satellite - March 30, 2009

man its getting harder and harder to resist looking at spoilers…the lead up to May 8 is gonna be SO hard…

72. 750 Mang - March 30, 2009

46. Anthony Pascale – March 30, 2009

“Bren
http://img.trekmovie.com/images/st09/ritcards/spoilerstagrit.jpg

LOL! pwned.

Remember the Farragut!

73. KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - March 30, 2009

#49 – YEA!!! Love it!

~ REVOLUTION CALLIN, REVOLUTION CALLIN, REVOLUTION CALLIN MEEEEEEE! ~

74. SaphronGirl - March 30, 2009

63.

//Haven’t all the Orion women we’ve seen been roughly the same size and build, anyway? At least as far as I recall, all of them have had feminine curves to them. Not sticks, as one of the posters above mentioned.//

Exactly. They remind me of a Frank Frazetta girl: http://cgmesh.com/upload/Mark_wip/Beast/Ref/frank_frazetta_savagepellucidar.jpg

75. Negotiator - March 30, 2009

These are way cool.

76. DaveyNY - March 30, 2009

# 39 nope… It’s Diora Baird… see here…http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1401531/

77. The Governator - March 30, 2009

And I must say, that although some people continuously complain about the production design, and I suppose to some degree it deserves it, to the credit of the production designer, they didn’t do such a bad job on everything. Many, many things do look quite good (I have liked the bridge from day one, but that’s another subject that has been through enough debate already). The pipe room is different and I suppose is rightfully alarming, but there is some good stuff they’ve done here. For example, the crew quarters are very cool and very reminiscent of the quarters from the original series and movies.

78. DJT - March 30, 2009

The more I see of this movie, the less I can wait for it to come out. With the exception of the “Scotty and Kirk Go to Raging Waters” scene that recently became public, everything else looks promising.

Bring it on.

79. The Governator - March 30, 2009

68. Ensign Ruiter

I wish I could agree with you, but the following 37 days are going to seem really, really long. Still, considering I’ve been waiting for two years, I will give myself a pat on the back anyway. :-]

80. Mikey M - March 30, 2009

I am getting excited. The movie looks great. Hope they pull it off.
What was Paramount thinking with the big grey Enterprise glob in the poster.
I could have even done that in Photoshop. Give us something other than a blur.

81. Star Trek: What’s That In Her Ear? « Weather Station 1 - March 30, 2009

[...] also groaned about it on the Starbase 66 podcast. Now a new image, one of several released via trekmovie.com today, shows the shining silver buttplug in all its [...]

82. DaveyNY - March 30, 2009

Best comparison pic of Doria Baird and Orion Slave Girl Card…
http://www.diora-baird.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/diora-baird-sexy-picture.jpg

83. boborci - March 30, 2009

We’re giving everything away, it seems – might as well just stream the movie online already!

84. Christine - March 30, 2009

LOLWUT.

All these guys are going ga-ga over the green Orion gal.

But I LOVE the cards.

85. spockatatic - March 30, 2009

I cannot wait. The more I see Zachary Quinto as Spock, the better he seems for the part. And Pine just has that “Kirk arrogance” to him that makes him perfect. I’m not so sure about the others, but, holy, Chekov is so adorable, like a little puppy. LOL, like the wet-behind-the-ears cadet he is.
Wait a second. In TOS, Chekov’s 22, and Kirk’s about thirty. This is like, 5-10 years before Kirk takes command, so…
Chekov’s 12?
17?
Holy.

86. SaphronGirl - March 30, 2009

80.

HOLYCRAP. And I thought *my* melons were big. O_o

87. moauvian moaul - March 30, 2009

I believe I once read it was Roddenberry himself who when asked mentioned the name April as the first captain of the Enterprise since the ship was already 20 years old when Kirk captained her and Pike wasn’t in command all that time. And wouldn’t that make it canon? I believe I read that in the chronology some years back. Anyone else recall a similar story?

88. Pragmaticus - March 30, 2009

63 – You clearly have no taste then.

89. sean - March 30, 2009

#63

The Orion girls in this movie are played by Diora Baird and Rachel Nichols – neither of which, in any universe, could be considered ‘big’.

90. sean - March 30, 2009

#85

He mentioned it, it was in one of the Chronology books. However, if it isn’t on screen it isn’t canon.

91. 750 Mang - March 30, 2009

82. boborci – March 30, 2009

“We’re giving everything away, it seems – might as well just stream the movie online already!”

Agreed. I’m ready.

RTF!

92. SaphronGirl - March 30, 2009

//Try to guess James T. Kirk’s favorite color//

The K/S shipper inside me cackled with glee. ;) Green’s a very attractive color indeed.

93. RTC - March 30, 2009

#81 boborci, just thought you’d like to know that I did the VIP tour at Universal Studios Hollywood today and took a photo of your reserved parking spot. You’ll be relieved to know that the tour guide offered no Trek spoilers (but then, he doesn’t work for Paramount….) ;-)

94. cpelc - March 30, 2009

81 – Boborci

Bob would you happen to know the music from the latest tv commercial? Not the Kid-Friendly one, but the “Forget Everything You Know” one?

95. SChaos1701 - March 30, 2009

I still think this film should be premiered on the ISS. Who do I get ahold of in order to bring up this idea?

96. Captain Roy Mustang - March 30, 2009

Need to see it, Im getting exciting

97. Catie - March 30, 2009

#81 Mr. Orci,
I like that idea!
:-)

98. Chris Basken - March 30, 2009

28: “Robert T. April was the first captain of the NCC-1700 USS Constitution. It was only renamed Enterprise originally due to one George S. Kirk, its original first officer.”

So close, yet so far.

The novel in question was Final Frontier, not to be confused with the 5th Trek movie (which it predated).

The ship we know to become the Enterprise was actually the prototype for the entire Constitution class. It was a secret project initially, overseen by Captain Robert April. George Kirk was Chief of Security at a nearby starbase and due to storyline events found himself on board the unnamed and unmarked test starship, functioning as an unofficial XO (no one was official on the ship at the time).

At the end of the novel, Kirk recommends to April that the ship be named Enterprise, as it represented a whole new “business” to the Federation. April agreed, and bumped the ship from 1700 to 1701 so that the next ship built could be given the 1700 number and be called Constitution in order to be the official class ship.

It was also hinted that, as a prototype, the Enterprise was somewhat “overbuilt,” and that the later Connies were more streamlined and in many ways more efficient. But the “overbuilding” of the Enterprise made it a unique ship with its own quirks and characteristics, as well as uncommon durability and raw power.

Fun novel, even if it’s entirely non-canonical.

99. section9 - March 30, 2009

CRAP, CRAP, CRAP!!!

What’s the Transamerica Building doing south of the Presidio?

They just dropped it in to say “Hey, this is San Francisco!”

Why didn’t JJ just plop Alioto’s in and have a bunch of gay men run around in the background with Rainbow flags, for Christ’s sake?

Where the frak is Joe Montana Memorial Stadium? The Neo-Cow Palace? The Statues to Hendrix and Joplin? The Harvey Milk Radio Tower in the Castro District? How could JJ forget Bobby Bonds Field (known affectionately to the locals as “Steroid Stadium”)?

What are frakking Palm Trees doing in the Bay Area? Did JJ import them from Bel Air or something? Is that what an Angelino thinks SFO looks like in the 23rd Century?

Where’s the Monster Reefer that was grown near Coit Tower? After Colonel Green’s war, when they finally decriminalized pot, the entire town got together and rolled a hundred and fifty foot doobie to celebrate the fall of Colonel Green and the foundation of the United Earth Government. The whole town gets as high as Mount Everest every Federation Day. Starfleet has to confine the Cadets to Barracks.

People in Oakland still have to pay toll to use the Bay Bridge to get to San Francisco. There is still massive crime in Oakland. There have been no buildings built in Oakland since 1956, and the city is run by an audioanimatronic Jerry Brown. It’s a huge problem for the Federation and an eyesore for the United Earth Government. However, the Raiders routinely come to Montana Memorial and wipe the floor with the 49’ers year after year.

Oakland people resent having to pay to use the public transporter system to get to SFO. As a result, San Francisco people who get lost in Oakland have been known to have been flayed and skinned alive for having had the temerity to cross into Oakland for free. Vulcans avoid Oakland. On the other hand, the visiting Klingon diplomatic legation parties in Oakland constantly.

100. I want to beleive - March 30, 2009

Definately Sarek NOT Spock.

101. SciFiMetalGirl - March 30, 2009

Capt. Robert April was one of the original names that was considered for the lead character of “Star Trek” when it was first being created by Gene Roddenberry, along with Capt. Christopher Pike. Pike was in the original pilot, played by Jeffrey Hunter, but replaced by William Shatner and renamed James Kirk in the second pilot. TAS was simply acknowledging the history that was already established and documented in the show’s early beginings by using Capt. Robert April as the captain of the Enterprise before Pike. So IMO April, while never actually mentioned in TOS, should still be considered canon.

Re: The Making of Star Trek by Stephen E. Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry (Paperback – 1973)

102. Trekphobic - March 30, 2009

I LOVE the new poster!

And dude, everyone knows what the Enterprise looks like. Plus, it says “Star Trek” on it.

103. RAMA - March 30, 2009

Cool!! Nice shots. Nice aliens!

104. They're everywhere... - March 30, 2009

OMG! More PIPES!!!

;-)

105. jimjones - March 30, 2009

99.

“What are frakking Palm Trees doing in the Bay Area? Did JJ import them from Bel Air or something? Is that what an Angelino thinks SFO looks like in the 23rd Century?”

Global warming. Duh.

106. section9 - March 30, 2009

Global warming. Duh.

——————–

A problem which we are supposed to have solved by then. Duh.

107. Jefferies Tuber - March 30, 2009

96/97: Great posts.

The other book in that series is BEST DESTINY is perhaps even more of an influence on this movie, it being about April, Kirk Sr and James T. on a long-range shuttle attacked by pirates hiding in a nebula [er somethin]. James is petulant and resentful of his dad’s career, but the experience takes everyone to their human limits and James’ heroism emerges. The novel is meant to depict the events that let a misdirected young man turn his life around and become Captain Kirk.

BEST DESTINY is one of the more violent and scary of the Trek books. ‘Scary’ in its depiction of space and the shitty things that can happen when you aren’t destroyed or killed in a neat explosion. The “danger and disease wrapped in darkness and silence” line feels like it comes straight from BEST DESTINY.

Clearly they’re proposing that San Francisco has been destroyed and rebuilt, as it has several times as of 2009. Hopefully the San Jose area was destroyed, too.

And what’s to say that moving or transporting a skyscraper is impossible in the 23rd Century? By this time, the Transamerica building would be something like a European cathedral.

I hope San Francisco still has all those beautiful women with no make-up.

108. The Governator - March 30, 2009

99. section 9

Relax, man. I imagine San Francisco will undergo many major overhauls over the next 200 years. Just imagine how much has changed since the 70’s. The world is a different place. And palm trees, well, I guess they will be in greater abundance in the 23rd century. Who knows.

109. Enc - March 30, 2009

7
does Keenser look like the aliens from the argo mission to get b4 in NEM?

8
i caught that too
its called an alt universe. JJ/orci can make up anything they want. so they claim that canon is seperate.

31 i c ur kidin
but i prefer th erigid salute. and am put off by that pic. however i rec that this could be a still takenb at thwrong time. and the scene will have the rigid salur as it should be. blame the ad people et al.

41 youre not alone
Starfleet also aint in the city center as one might get if they look at picks thus far. its located closer to the south end of the golden gate bridge. watch TMP TVH. JJ seems to be moving closer to the city and the city buildings closer to the bridge. and the acaemy is suppost to be on the north end of the golden gate.

110. Butters - March 30, 2009

35: That’s immediately what I thought. I’m going to go out on a limb and say it is the same type of alien.

111. Enc - March 30, 2009

110
without breaking ou the dvd or any one yet posting a comparison pic.
iirc this alien is shorter the the NEM ones.

112. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - March 30, 2009

Hey Young me tell your buddy jim to bring a parachute or a grappling hook should a friendly future Captain come a calling to help knock out the Clockwork Orange guy

113. cpelc - March 30, 2009

The pic on the simulatior just screams the line

“Dammit Jim I’m a Doctor, not a helmsman!”

114. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

98. Chris Basken – March 30, 2009

Thanks for the synopsis.

115. JRBinDFW - March 30, 2009

i agree, even the same type of goggles from nemesis….

116. Liz - March 30, 2009

“31. Check the Circuit – March 30, 2009
Young Spock’s Vulcan salute is completely wrong! Look at the angle of his pincky and ring fingers. It’s at least off by 6 1/2 degrees! And it’s obviously a very relaxed salute. Every real Star Trek fan knows the gesture is supposed to be rigid to reflect the nature of their culture. Quinto and Abrams clearly don’t get it. I’m sorry, I was sitting the fence before but now I know for sure…I’m boycotting this movie.

;)

HA HA! At first I thought you were serious and was going to blast you. Glad to see the smile…! Poor Quinto. Didn’t he wear rubber bands trying to get that right?

117. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

“Pipes and pipes! What is pipes?”

118. Dennis Bailey - March 30, 2009

April’s not canon and, apparently, finally disposed of.

119. The Governator - March 30, 2009

35, 110

Those aliens, although they looked similar, were much larger and paler in skin tone. This alien seems to have a greenish tent. Also, their heads did not pull back so far and many of the facial details are different, including the nose. Remember, this is J.J. Trek, not Nemesis, and J.J. hadn’t seen Nemesis when production started.

120. fred - March 30, 2009

I really do buy Quinto as young Spock in that shot with Sarek. Wow, he’s a dead ringer!

And I’m loving that green orion girl, one of the better ones since the first and best!

121. Enc - March 30, 2009

119
talkin first impression
also it might be JJ to aprove the look. but it is also the person who made/designed it in the first place.

122. Shatterhand - March 30, 2009

@#54:

Interesting theory, but it makes no sense. Why have younger Spock make the suicide run for the Narada? Couldn’t Older Spock do it just as easily? Hell, he wouldn’t have to involve any of the Enterprise crew; he could just calculate the Jellyfish to travel back to the point where the Narada faces the Kelvin, determine the ship’s weak point, and RAMMING SPEED! BOOM! Big explosion, Robau says “WTF was that?”, baby Jim Kirk is born, and the universe unfolds as it should.

My bet is that Spock steals the Jellyfish in an attempt to save Captain Pike, due to an event that I won’t reveal because it’s a spoiler. How he manages to get his hands on it is a good question, but I suppose we’ll have to wait until premiere day to find out about that.

123. The Governator - March 30, 2009

117. Dennis Bailey

April’s not canon? Good. I guess we can skip it then. That only leaves 9 days to go! Yipeeee!!!!!

124. T Drake - March 30, 2009

actually starting to get into it…

125. T Drake - March 30, 2009

PS- the Orion has NOTHING on Valerie Bertenelli!!

126. Ralph F - March 30, 2009

No, no, no; it’s not called The Jellyfish or anything like that. The official name is the USS SPOCK’S TIME SHIP ™. I thought we established that six months ago.

I would still pay top dollar for a polo shirt with that embroidered on it.

127. TrekMadeMeWonder - March 30, 2009

The slave girl looks pretty poor and way fanish.

And what’s up with some of the captions. The Kelvin Bridge redress for the Kobyashi text? Not really relevant, and it cheapens the big show a bit.

128. Daoud - March 30, 2009

#98 Exactly… So, since we watch George Kirk die prematurely, he can’t be there to insist Constitution’s a lousy name. Ergo, Pike’s Enterprise is a different ship from April’s.

#118 I’m sure the great O&K will simply have fun in the sequel and refer to a Fleet Captain April and the USS Constitution in some manner. And just for grins, they can throw in Captain Garrovick and the USS Exeter. Maybe we can see a retelling of a cross between the Doomdsay Machine and The Ultimate Computer… yep. Let’s fry the Exeter! Woo hoo!

129. Ryan - March 30, 2009

#127 Starships had common bridge designs so it would make sense that the simulator bridge would look like the Kelvin’s bridge.

130. BK613 - March 30, 2009

An alien walks into a bar…

…the Vulcan ducks.

131. The Original Spock's Brain - March 30, 2009

127. TrekMadeMeWonder – March 30, 2009
“And what’s up with some of the captions. The Kelvin Bridge redress for the Kobyashi text? Not really relevant, and it cheapens the big show a bit.”

The text immediately below the scans is the official caption. The text in parenthesis is Trekmovie.com’s informed commentary.

Pay attention in class.

132. Daoud - March 30, 2009

#127, 129 When Saavik tests for the Kobayashi Maru, her bridge simulator looks exactly like the contemporaneous USS Enterprise. So, another reason it makes sense. I don’t think Kirk is ON the Kobayashi Maru. The point of the mission is to attempt to rescue a ship (the KM) that can’t be rescued (by the Starfleet vessel, any current class, such as Kelvin).

133. Jefferies Tuber - March 30, 2009

Everyone’s getting a little punchy on these boards. It’s like the 9th month of pregnancy.

134. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 30, 2009

Aaarrrggghhh!!! Too many spoilers starting to appear now! Must ween myself off site! :-)

135. Jefferies Tuber - March 30, 2009

I think the Jellyfish aka Spock’s Time Ship should be renamed the Queensryche.

http://queensrychefans.com/files/2008/12/queensryche-cool-wall.jpg

136. mgoodr00 - March 30, 2009

I wonder if Nero knows that Wrestlemania 25 is this weekend

That green skinned alien is really ugly … sorry

137. DGill - March 30, 2009

The “Keenser” alien looks very much like a Kolarin, complete with the goggles. For all we know, Keenser could very well be a Kolarin!

138. The Governator - March 30, 2009

136.

Perhaps you should see her without the green.

139. Enc - March 30, 2009

134
LOL good luck w/ that

137
the thing is people will complain that in NEM they were at society about the same tech as us now. But in the TOS era (pre) they would be us some 200 years ago. it would look like firist contact rules have changed a bit under that thinking. unless they pulla tng:first contact ep and hes the only one of his kind off-world.

140. Chingatchkook - March 30, 2009

83. boborci –

We’re giving everything away, it seems – might as well just stream the movie online already!
————————-
Well, I wasn’t going to say anything…..but now that you bring it up…..ohpleasepleasepleasepleaseplease!!!

Seriously though, I find myself skimming over these articles more as we get closer to d-day. I definitely want to see a few surprises rather than reading about them all here at trekmovie. Obviously Mr Pascale is doing too good a job!

141. Shunnabunich - March 30, 2009

I can’t shake the feeling that the Orion woman just looks like a human with green paint on — the lips probably aren’t helping. Considering the context, though, I’m pretty sure none of us will notice when the time comes. :)

142. Will_H - March 30, 2009

The Starfleet Academy screen shot looks like it was taken from another angle from one of the first leaked shots. And with all they’ve updated, Im disapointed to see that they left Uhura’s ear thing the same. Hoshi’s from Enterprise was smaller than that and it’s a century older. I guess they just left it there to be recognizable for fans, but I still say its stupid.

143. magnumpc - March 30, 2009

Re: Kirk’s favorite color:

To paraphrase Michael Douglas’ Gordon Gekko, “Green is good.” :)

144. Captain Cohen - March 30, 2009

131

“The Vulcan ducks” nice line .. but ..

What do they do, waddle in on their little pointed green webbbed feet?

145. Captain Cohen - March 30, 2009

oops – soorry that should have reference 130 with the ducks ..

by the way .. earlier people were saying with reference to all the plumbing .. we never see a toilet on Trek ..

Check “The Undiscovered Country” where Kirk pushes a button to bring out the toilet seat from the wall when he, Spock & McCoy have been put in the brig by Sybok .. ST/TUC.

I think if memory serves there’s even a little sign about not using it in Spacedock..

146. RetroWarbird - March 30, 2009

Scarlett from G.I. Joe as an Orion study buddy … aim high, young Kirk …

Nice to see the decidedly “Romulan” tailoring on Nero’s jacket – you don’t see those squared shoulders anywhere else in the galaxy except 1980’s Earth!

I take it Spock’s not a fan of Kirk cheating on the Kobayashi Maru. It’s gonna be a kick in the pants when they commend and possibly promote him for it instead of punishing him (although maybe they consider that to be punishment for JTK)

147. Rainbucket - March 30, 2009

I’m very upbeat on the movie but agree with #141, the pink lips make the Orion look like a painted human. Our past Orions had dark green or black lips, even in TAS.

Then again maybe she’s wearing pink lipstick.

148. Reynaldo Garza III - March 30, 2009

Actually, Capt Robert April being the 1st captain of the Enterprise IS canon. Gene Roddenberry HIMSELF said so. Robert April was based on one of his friends and fellow police officers. There are photos of Roddenberry in Starfleet uniform with him being listed as “Capt. Robert April, Captain, USS Enterprise, NCC-1701″

149. JohnWA - March 30, 2009

#41 et al. –

I don’t think casual movie audiences care whether the Transamerica Pyramid is on the right street or not. As with the Golden Gate Bridge, it is only there (as a prop) to establish that we’re looking at San Francisco. Not everyone who watches this movie will be familiar with Star Trek lore.

Besides, if you got your knowledge only from movies, you’d probably think the Strip was the only street in Las Vegas. Or that Washington doesn’t extend beyond Capitol Hill and the Mall. Because Hollywood movies are distributed around the world, directors need to have location shots that are instantly recognizable to everybody. Ahmed in Cairo and Mei-Mei in Shanghai has to be able to process what they’re looking at. And geographically accurate renderings of “Trader Joe’s on 10th Avenue” isn’t going to cut it.

150. Devon - March 30, 2009

#148 – “Actually, Capt Robert April being the 1st captain of the Enterprise IS canon. Gene Roddenberry HIMSELF said so”

It’s only canon if you go by the theory “What Gene says is canon.” In that case, a good deal of TOS and the movies aren’t canon either. So what now?

151. Paulaner - March 31, 2009

Wonderful pictures

152. Jörg - March 31, 2009

Mhh, my first reaction when seeing Keenser was also – a Kolaran!

153. Paulaner - March 31, 2009

#148 “There are photos of Roddenberry in Starfleet uniform with him being listed as “Capt. Robert April, Captain, USS Enterprise, NCC-1701″”

Now, this is lame ;)

154. Trevor John - March 31, 2009

It’s hilarious that the ground and palm trees at Starfleet Academy are actually the main promenade in front of the library at Cal State University Northridge in Los Angeles, where a lot of movies and TV shows are filmed (Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Sky High School, etc). I went to college there, and it always weirds me out when I see it in movies, especially with fake background imagery like in this film, where a 23rd Century skyline was grafted into the shot.

So that explains the palm trees – it’s actually Los Angeles we’re looking at.

155. thorsten - March 31, 2009

Wow. These captions contain a fascinating amount of information….

156. thereare4lights - March 31, 2009

Picture 10: looks like Spock….in the 2002 Time Machine.

157. Mark - March 31, 2009

Nero looks a bit like Nosferatu… don’t you think so too?
http://hennie.wikispaces.com/file/view/Nosferatu.jpg

158. rumpcuz - March 31, 2009

#5 you are fat as well? :)

159. Me - March 31, 2009

That Orion is juicy as hell. We’ve had palm trees along the Embarcadero in SF for several years now.

160. Admiral - March 31, 2009

OUPS – ERROR

Captain Cohen said :

by the way .. earlier people were saying with reference to all the plumbing .. we never see a toilet on Trek ..

Check “The Undiscovered Country” where Kirk pushes a button to bring out the toilet seat from the wall when he, Spock & McCoy have been put in the brig by Sybok
——

Actualy, it’s in STAR TREK : The Final Frontier. :-)

Keep trecking!

161. Holger - March 31, 2009

Great pictures! I particularly like the Transamerica Pyramid and the two Spocks.

162. OldTrekFart - March 31, 2009

#158:

Wow, are you that threatened by a woman who doesn’t look like a 10 year old boy with silicon bumps that you have to attack someone who appreciates a woman who actually looks feminine?

Sheest.

163. Just Wonderin' - March 31, 2009

Damn, that Orion cadet is thick.

164. fizzben - March 31, 2009

#148 Only because Gene Roddenberry said so doesn’t not make it canon. It was never mentioned on the series or any movies so therefore is open to interpretation. It’s mentioned in some novels but they are not usually included in canon. We know for certain Pike was captain anything before that is wide open. In Star Trek 3 the admiral said the Enterprise is over 20 years old, which btw is an obsurd age to retire a starship considering we use aircraft carriers for 50 years or so today, but would put the time line in check for a 5 year mission for Pike and the rest for Kirk and Spock. Anyway, I wouldn’t get your panties in a ruffle over something as trivial as that, it’s really not important.

165. crazydaystrom - March 31, 2009

#83- boborci,
“We’re giving everything away…”

I trust you guys have a few tasty surprises and revelations in store for us. Hopefully more than a few.

God! We’re excited!

Thanks!

166. Tom Welling For Superman - March 31, 2009

Does anyone think that Old Spock will no that Old Kirk died in Generations? And do you think that Old Spock thinks that he might change the entire timeline by going back in time?

167. T'Cal - March 31, 2009

I always thought Quinto looked quite a bit like Nimoy’s Spock in general, but the shot with him saluting his future self clinches it for me. Wow.

168. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 31, 2009

#166 … It won’t be acknowledged in this movie, but yes, I’m certain Spock knows Kirk died on Veridian III. He’d have to know.

169. harley3k - March 31, 2009

EPIC….

170. TrekTwenty - March 31, 2009

People seem to forget about WW3 which still happened in the Trek universe in…2063? Which could have completely devastated huge parts of San Francisco…so we can’t really be surprised that things aren’t in the same place that they are now 200 some years from now.

171. The TOS Purist aka The Purolator - March 31, 2009

I couldn’t believe that the Orion picture was actually from the movie; the makeup looked so fake, I assumed it was a fan picture or something.

For those who are saying she’s fat/heavy/thick/juicy/larger than normal, she’s not really – it’s her hilariously oversized mammary glands (and the unflattering pose) which make her look heavier than she actually is.

172. Marian Ciobanu - March 31, 2009

- That green lady seems to be a little too fat…so i’m pretty sure of one thing : she’s not a vegetarian …

173. sean - March 31, 2009

#158

That girl IS. NOT. FAT. You are out of your ever-loving mind if you think she is. Do you watch reruns of Ally McBeal and ponder how much better the show would have been if only she’d lost a few pounds? You either need a shrink or a good optometrist.

I’ve known waaay too many girls with Body Dysmorphic Disorder and Anorexia due to careless comments like that.

174. Marian Ciobanu - March 31, 2009

- Ham….!!!

175. sean - March 31, 2009

#172

That Vegetarians are skinny by default is a commonly held but erroneous preconception. Just because you don’t eat meat doesn’t mean you don’t eat fat. I’ve seen plenty of Vegetarians with variable body sizes.

176. Frederick - March 31, 2009

For anyone who thinks that orion slave women shouldn’t have pink lips, check out the original, in this pic I have posted on my blog:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_s8l-yu7AZLM/SX4HfNU8o4I/AAAAAAAAGCw/mLH7VwwEhM0/s1600-h/vina_orion.jpg

I love the curves on the new girl! Looks good and healthy, not anorexic.

177. Frederick - March 31, 2009

And I slipped and said “slave” women, I meant simply green orion women. The slave slipped out based on the original.

As far as her makeup looking fake, that can’t be said unless you see areas where the makeup has worn off. I see none, she looks as natural as a green woman can to our eyes.

She’s all good.

178. Frederick - March 31, 2009

And, and, I like Uhura’s earpiece, it’s so very much like the original. I totally discount ANYTHING seen on Enterprise.

179. krikzil - March 31, 2009

“That girl IS. NOT. FAT. You are out of your ever-loving mind if you think she is. Do you watch reruns of Ally McBeal and ponder how much better the show would have been if only she’d lost a few pounds?”

Sadly, a lot of men and women DO believe normal weight is “fat” now thanks to all the skeletal actresses and models out there. And just look at the magazines and entertainment shows. God forbid an actress or singer gains a pound or takes a bad angled photo.

180. Chris Basken - March 31, 2009

re: Fat Green Slave Women…

She’s not fat. But something about the photograph makes her head look… undersized. It’s probably just a combination of lighting, her hair, and the angle. So people tend to compensate, since head sizes are pretty consistent (when you consider sex differences — men have slightly larger heads than women). Compensating for what appears to be a small head means you inflate the body. So either she’s a little overweight or she’s 7 feet tall.

Wait until you see her in action in the movie. I’m sure you won’t be thinking “ew, fattie!” then. ;-)

181. Clay "Why-oh-why-can't-we-have-red-nacelle-caps" Farrow - March 31, 2009

164: With regards to the age of Enterprise (20 years old), agreed.

This especially makes sense when you remember that all of the spacecraft in our our CURRENT fleet (the shuttles) are over 20 years old, and compared to spacecraft built to travel interstellar distances, shuttles are made of little more than tinfoil, acoustical tile and good intensions.

I would imagine that when/if we truly do have “starships,” they’ll be maintained in a fashion similar to our current naval ships AND our current spacecraft: upgrade/refit the guts as necessary, but keep the basic hull intact.

Not too far off from what was done to the Big E in the 18 months prior to TMP…

182. JWM - March 31, 2009

Too cool. So stoked for this movie. Must see it opening weekend now.

183. Jorg Sacul - March 31, 2009

I *like* the Orion girl! She’s exciting!! :-)

Calling her fat? hahaha.. that means Marilyn Monroe was a complete PIG then. Just like the people calling Jessica Simpson fat. Oh, give her to me, I’d burn the calories off her.

What are ye, a bunch of Lohan fans? ;-)

184. Sterne - March 31, 2009

@24

How can you NOT like the poster? It looks like the Enterprise going at Warp from a really super artsy perspective. I think it looks amazing

@25

You’re 100% right, but regardless I think for the “general audience” it will make them curious as to what the hell it is. Which may or may not be better than just the plain old enterprise.

185. Robnhud - March 31, 2009

That’s not “Older Spock” Quinto is talking to… it’s Sarek.

186. Tony From Canada - March 31, 2009

Palm Trees, the TransAmerica building??? Who cares…. It’s the 23rd century, and I think looking at a Romulan 200 years from now may be a bit more of a life changing experience.

Mind you, I’d rather look at that very well put together O-Girl….and how about Uhura???

If the previews are as good as the movie, this will be what the new Batman movies have done for that franchise.

187. Frederick - March 31, 2009

I wonder if we’ll see the split between Spock and Sarek that happened when he joined Starfleet, that kept them from speaking for so many years?

188. Tripper - March 31, 2009

I wonder about that being Old Spock with Young Spock. When they originally previewed the 20 minutes of clips, several sites stated that Spock tells Kirk that he cannot meet his younger self.

And the earlier preview reports could have had it wrong.

189. Closettrekker - March 31, 2009

#8—-“I thought Robert April, not Pike, was the original Captain of NCC-1701?

I hope the movie explains this fallacy.”

No need to—“The Counter-Clock Incident” is a TAS story, and (unlike “Yesteryear”) one never validated by reference in live action Trek.

Robert April is not a ‘canon’ figure. There is no “fallacy”.

190. Chadwick - March 31, 2009

I love the poster, black and white very simple yet complex, I will probably end up buying it when its on ebay. Its by far the best movie poster since First Contact or Undiscovered Country! The new photos are cool, the young Spock and old Spock and the San Francisco scenes are cool

191. Closettrekker - March 31, 2009

#164—“In Star Trek 3 the admiral said the Enterprise is over 20 years old.”

Actually, he said that the Enterprise *is* 20 years old (which in itself is contradictory to “The Menagerie”), and both Nimoy and Bennett have made clear that this was quite intentional on their part.

“…which btw is an obsurd age to retire a starship…”

If that is the only reason—yes. But consider the incredible amount of damage inflicted upon her by Khan. The resources necessary to refit her once again would have to be a consideration as well, in addition to her age. In fact, it may have been more efficient to build another ship altogether, rather than expend resources on repairing one that is 20 years old.

192. ucdom - March 31, 2009

Just a thought on the ‘fat’ comments….

Is is possible that the original poster meant to use youthful slang, and should have written ‘phat’ ?
Anyway, I think she looks like Kerry Katona – for those who don’t know, she’s a vapid bint you’d expect to find tottering around Essex in white high heels smoking a fag and pushing a pram.

Now, that San Francisco view. In an earlier thread, I noted that the building which looks like the top of a Dalek is located (as far as I can tell) near the corner of Edie and Girard Roads, off Marina Boulevard. In the picture above, McCoy is looking due south, which puts the Transamerica Pyramid somewhere around Presidio Boulevard.

I have to admit, this is quite disappointing (and I know it doesn’t really MATTER), it’s just that the view we saw in the trailers seemed to respect the street layout nicely.
I still think we should hear from the artists responsible for updating SF.

193. ClassicTrek - March 31, 2009

This movie looks awesome but that USA poster sucks

Greg
UK

194. 1701 over Gotham City - March 31, 2009

Rittenhouse always does an excellent product. I should know… I’ve been an artist for them for 2 years now :)
Istopped buying movie cards years ago, but these I’ll need to have

195. thereare4lights - March 31, 2009

God dammit, I’d hit that Orion bitch hard.

196. Kirk - March 31, 2009

I really think that Scotty’s buddy Keenser is actually Jem’Hadar form of midget :D

URL: http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/5281/rittenhouse11mala.jpg

197. Beck - March 31, 2009

158.
Obvious troll is obvious.

Also, I quite adore the movie poster…

198. Ryan - March 31, 2009

I love the KM simulator pic with Kirk smirking and leaning back.

Bones – Captain there are are three Klingon battle cruisers approaching!

Kirk – That sounds like an instrumentation error, check again.

Bones – Umm…

Kirk – Go on, check it.

Bones – There are three little kittens now approaching. This isn’t supposed to happen! What do we do now?

Kirk – Load photon torpedoes, full spread.

199. SpocksinnerConfict - March 31, 2009

There ARE palm trees in Sf. I see them everyday. They are especially prevalent near the Embarcadero and along the various wharfs and tourist piers..

I believe McCoy is standing somewhere between the Embarcadero and Fisherman wharf.

Scratch that, it looks like he’s across the street from the Ferry building.

Sans crazy future buildings, it doesn’t look all that different.

Maybe you all just haven’t been up here to Sf in a while, but…unfortunately it’s starting to look more and more like Southern CA up here in the Bay Area.

Jesus, there’s even palm trees in Oakland, at lake Merritt.

Palm trees in Santa Cruz, where i was born and raised.

PALM TRESS TAKING OVER!!!!!!

200. Stan Winstone - March 31, 2009

Nero looks like he just sharted…

201. Jamie - March 31, 2009

I love these images. The movie looks amazing.

Hey, even if every Trek fan hates this film, I guarantee that kids will love it, and an appreciation of Trek will be passed on to a new generation.

202. ucdom - March 31, 2009

Okay, I’ve put together a little montage to show exactly where McCoy is standing on the San Francisco waterfront, in relation to what we’ve seen in the trailers.
http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~ucfbanf/SF4.jpg

You can very clearly see an aerial bridge in the background which is identical in both images. However, the TransAmerica Pyramid isn’t visible in the trailer shot. Why is it there? Was it moved? Was it rebuilt? Do we care?

203. Closettrekker - March 31, 2009

#14—” The “Yesteryear” episode of TAS was generally accepted as canon…”

The obvious difference between that and “The Counter-Clock Incident” is that elements of the former are repeatedly referenced (and legitimized) in live action Trek. The rest of TAS is no more “canon” than the novels and comics.

No reference to Robert April or a 2245 initial launch date for the Enterprise was ever made in 5 live action series and 10 previous films (the general standard for qualification of material as “canon”).

The ENT episode, “In A Mirror Darkly, Part II” nearly made such a reference to both elements—but did not.

204. Ian - March 31, 2009

I cannot believe people are calling her fat! Are you out of your mind? This is what happens when the freaks in Hollywood tell all the young girls they need to slim down and look like a walking stick. And the fact that men are beginning to view it the same is just sad. I personally think she looks great, because that is normal.

And are we really hitching about lip color on a fictional alien race? Lame!

205. Closettrekker - March 31, 2009

#204—-I think she is exceptional….far from “normal”.

206. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 31, 2009

#205 … I’ll second that!

207. Shatner_Fan_Prime - March 31, 2009

To elaborate further on what I just said, that looks like something fit for Kirk … something he could really sink his teeth into. LOL! :-)

208. BK613 - March 31, 2009

164
It’s an old argument but dialog in the Menagerie Part 1 and TWOK place the minimum age of the Enterprise’ at around 28 years, despite what some airhead bureaucrat with admiral’s stars says.

Because who are you going to believe, Kirk and Spock, or Admiral Morrow?

209. Ian - March 31, 2009

@#205

I would call her exceptional also. But it’s sad that normal body weight is considered “fat” or “thick” as some people here have stated.

I’d totally hit it! Haha

210. Omnibus - March 31, 2009

Robert April is absolutely Canon! Gene Roddenberry created him and USED him on TV outside TAS. He’s a prison chaplain in the “Have Gun will Travel” episodes Gene wrote. ;-)

Just guesses that follow. I don’t consider them SPOILERS, but you might:

I guess Nero’s little time frolics forced the Enterprise to be built later than it was originally intended to be and on the ground too because the sky was no longer considered safe or something. (maybe the San Fran shipyards get it along with the Kelvin? Are the Iowa ship yards in honor of the hero George Kirk?). Whatever the real case is in the movie, April as first captain (be it canon or not) is now 100% out. The truth is April being out doesn’t affect Star Trek in the slightest. A lot of things like April can be changed safely by this movie. The only thing I would be upset with is if Vulcan ends up being/staying destroyed in the 23rd Century. That is the only possible time change I can think of that can make the entire movie a total waste. I just don’t believe that will happen.

211. barrydancer - March 31, 2009

Rachel Nichols fat! She’s so hot I sat through that entire crapfest of a movie P2 (on HBO)!

212. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - March 31, 2009

Re: The age of the Enterprise vis-a-vis Menagerie vs. Search for Spock?

Series trumps movies. Every time. Period.

213. Craptain Amerika - March 31, 2009

#68 – IMO, Suzie Plakson is one of the best female Trek actresses of all time. Don’t know if they ever considered her, but I think she should have played the captain on Voyager.

214. NinaCA - March 31, 2009

Re: that photo on the dresser. If that’s really Kirk and Uhura, then are they Academy buddies in this timeline? For some reason I’d just assumed they knew each other, but didn’t hang out.

215. Closettrekker - April 1, 2009

#164—“It’s an old argument but dialog in the Menagerie Part 1 and TWOK place the minimum age of the Enterprise’ at around 28 years, despite what some airhead bureaucrat with admiral’s stars says. ”

Except that the “airhead bureaucrat with Admiral’s stars” just participated in the decision to decommission Starfleet’s most storied vessel. It makes no sense to suggest that he would be unfamiliar with her age and history.

No. It is a retconning of the dialogue in “The Menagerie”, and the filmmakers made clear throughout the 80’s that it was intentional. That “retcon” is 25 years old, and there is no reason not to accept the later entry as ‘canon’. There is no difference between that and the establishment (during the film era) of the TOS-era taking place within the 23rd Century, rather than the time frame being anywhere from 200-800 years beyond the 20th Century, as suggested in various episodes of TOS.

In fact, the difference is even less significant than that. If the movie-era could do that, then it could certainly retcon the timeline with regard to Pike’s command of the Enterprise and her visit to Talos IV.

15 years after the events depicted in “Space Seed”, the Enterprise is only 20 years old. Therefore, Chris Pike could not have been Captain of the Enterprise 13 years prior to the events depicted in “The Menagerie”. We have to assume, then, that the incident on Rigel VII and the first visit to Talos IV took place—at the most—5 or 6 years before (not 13), assuming that first season episodes represent the first year of the “5 year mission”.

216. krikzil - April 1, 2009

Closet — I remember when that whole “20 years” controversy came up — before we heard from Nimoy and Bennett that it WAS intentional — fans knew it was a booboo but naturally tried to shoehorn it into canon with the explanation that the Admiral was rounding (having been a poor math student!) from the retcon’s date. That way the entire age of the ship and the Menagerie/Pike, etc was left undisturbed. An easy fix and given that the retcon was so extensive, a reasonable viewpoint.

I have to admit that when I was younger, five years seemed like a huge error….now as I’m in my 40s, I find myself making similar errors about events and the timeline — heck what’s 5 years or so? (Kinda scary, actually) ;)

217. Closettrekker - April 1, 2009

#216—-Until you start breaking hips and losing control of your bladder, I think it’s okay!

:)

218. BK613 - April 1, 2009

215
“Except that the “airhead bureaucrat with Admiral’s stars” just participated in the decision to decommission Starfleet’s most storied vessel. It makes no sense to suggest that he would be unfamiliar with her age and history.”

An assumption (a.k.a. fanon) on your part. No where in the dialog does it say Morrow was involved in the process. Just a vague “we at” statement. Just as likely that he just signed off on a recommendation from his staff, having just quickly scanned the cover letter of the report. (Lord knows I’ve seen enough of THAT kind of decision-making to think it a credible event.)

(BTW, the Enterprise is the “most storied” ship from OUR perspective; there were other starships which I am sure had other, very interesting careers. IMO anyway.)

Anyway, as I said, it is an old argument that doesn’t need to be rehashed here. You accept it as a valid data point, I see it as an error on Morrow’s part (in-universe) and an asinine retcon on the part of the filmmakers.

212
“Series trumps movies. Every time. Period.”

I agree.
Especially if, on the one hand you have a “fact” that Spock has given, and on the other, a “fact” that a minor character has given.

219. Closettrekker - April 1, 2009

#212—“Series trumps movies. Every time. Period.”

So—by that logic, I suppose you did not accept the notion that the “5 year mission” takes place within the 23rd Century—at least not until the VOY episode, “Q2″ placed its end at 2270.

There is no difference between this and the placement of the time period as “the 23rd Century”, and “the late 23rd Century” by TWOK and TVH, respectively.

#218—“An assumption (a.k.a. fanon) on your part. No where in the dialog does it say Morrow was involved in the process.”

Hmmm.

“The Enterprise is 20 years old. *We* feel her day is over.”

Add that to the fact that Admiral Kirk is *asking* Morrow what is to happen to the Enterprise in the first place, to which his response is—“She is to be decommissioned”, and I think it is pretty clear that he is–at the very least–“involved in the process”.

220. Chris Basken - April 1, 2009

So the “20 years” line was written in full knowledge that it contradicted previously established dating? Does anyone have a source for this?

I’m curious to know why they deliberately chose to retcon the Enterprise’s age…

221. BK613 - April 1, 2009

219
“So—by that logic”
Let’s just say I never liked the revisions that attempted to align the movie productions and actor aging with the ST universe calendar.

“Add that to the fact that Admiral Kirk is *asking* Morrow what is to happen to the Enterprise in the first place”
No, Sulu asks Kirk that in the apartment scene, prior to Sarek’s arrival.

”[She's] to be decommissioned.”
That’s Kirk’s line, delivered to Chekov Sulu and Uhura, again in his apartment . After which, Chekov asks, “Vill vee get another ship?”

Time to rewatch the movie, perhaps?

222. falcon - April 1, 2009

One could deduce from Morrow’s response to Scotty’s request to oversee the refit – “I’m sorry, Mr. Scott. But there will be no refit.” – that the Enterprise would be decomissioned. He never said as much to the assembled crew, but the assumption is that he told Kirk later in private.

As to the “twenty years” retcon, okay, if you want to make the argument that the “refitted” Enterprise was 20 years old, that’s one thing. But it doesn’t affect either Kirk’s first five year mission or Pike’s more than 11 years serving with Spock (and one could also assume Spock came on board shortly after the mission began, or one ended). That would make the ship anywhere from 36 to 40 years old (in toto) when it was destroyed by Kirk. If the hull was designed for a lifespan of 100 years, then that’s a short time indeed for a ship. (Heck, we’ve got B-52 aircraft out there that are over 50 years old and are still flying).

Fun to discuss, but ultimately unimportant.

223. Closettrekker - April 1, 2009

#221—“Time to rewatch the movie, perhaps?”

Always! But none of that alters the point—which is that Morrow’s dialogue suggests that he has been party to the decision-making process.

“We feel her day is over”—not “Starfleet feels her day is over”. Given the admission of intent by the filmmakers, any attempt to “explain it away” stands on shaky ground, IMO.

“Let’s just say I never liked the revisions that attempted to align the movie productions and actor aging with the ST universe calendar. ”

I didn’t care for the retcon either, and particularly, the ridiculous reasoning behind it. But it is–nevertheless–a retcon, no different from the one made by STII and IV with regard to acknowledging the time period as the 23rd Century and “late 23rd Century”, respectively (except that the latter retcon is *far* more impactful and challenging to the dialogue of TOS). The TSFS retcon affects only the dialogue in a single (albeit two-part) episode.

IMO, it wasn’t even the worst offense in that movie. I was far more disappointed that Kruge and his band of a dozen Klingons showed up in a “cloaked bird of prey”!!!

Contradicting a line or two of dialogue in “The Menagerie” is one thing—confusing Klingons with Romulans is something else altogether!

224. Closettrekker - April 1, 2009

#222—“One could deduce from Morrow’s response to Scotty’s request to oversee the refit – “I’m sorry, Mr. Scott. But there will be no refit.” – that the Enterprise would be decomissioned. He never said as much to the assembled crew, but the assumption is that he told Kirk later in private.”

Absolutely. But even without that “assumption”, Morrow has implied that he has been party to the decision to decommission her by using the second person term “we”. Furthermore, if Morrow is indeed the “Starfleet Commander”, as the charges against Kirk later suggest—-then why wouldn’t he be?

“Bureaucrats” or not—the decision to decommision a starship couldn’t be made without the parties involved being informed as to her age.

If not for the intent to retcon her age, the reasoning could simply have been that Reliant had damaged the Enterprise to the point that refitting her would be less efficient than building another ship.

The entire “20 years old” portion of the dialogue serves no other purpose in the story but to do what Nimoy and Bennett set out to do—retcon the age of the Enterprise to coincide with the upcoming 20 year anniversary of Star Trek.

I think that the fanon explanations for the contradiction make less sense than the horrid reasoning behind it in the first place.

225. Cardassiaprimera - April 1, 2009

Excellent Images. The ships of Spock is good.

226. Chris Basken - April 1, 2009

223: “IMO, it wasn’t even the worst offense in that movie. I was far more disappointed that Kruge and his band of a dozen Klingons showed up in a “cloaked bird of prey”!!!”

Sure, but just because they mess one thing up doesn’t justify something else messed up. And the whole Klingon BoP thing was mostly cleaned up by an explanation of shared technology between the Klingons and Romulans, something that was hinted at in The Enterprise Incident.

There’s really no way to clean up Morrow’s line without either assuming the character was an idiot or that they edited out a word (“The Enterprise is OVER twenty years old…”).

224: “The entire “20 years old” portion of the dialogue serves no other purpose in the story but to do what Nimoy and Bennett set out to do—retcon the age of the Enterprise to coincide with the upcoming 20 year anniversary of Star Trek.”

That was what they were trying to do? Did they actually think more than two people in the audience would make that kind of connection? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to connect Kirk’s tenure as Captain of the ship to the 20-year mark (which would have been about right) than pretend 1) the ship was 20 years old and 2) that 20 years was somehow “old” for a ship?

227. Harry Mudd, Universal Man of Mystery - April 1, 2009

If you look at the pic of Young Spock he looks kinda like he’s thinking “You lookin familiar old guy” lol. So I think that Old Spock meets Young Himself but doesn’t reveal that it is infact Old Him lol. And was that really Robert Orci in message 83?? If so that’s really cool cuz I want am going to school to do just exactly what he does, and J.J. Abrams if I’m lucky. (as in direct not just write :)

228. BK613 - April 1, 2009

226
“There’s really no way to clean up Morrow’s line without either assuming the character was an idiot ”

Always been my assumption lol. Especially when you consider the patronizing and dismissive manner in which he handled the situation when a senior officer of Kirk’s experience brought a problem to him.

As for who would know how old the Enterprise is, I would submit that Spock would be intimately qualified to speak on the subject, since he was there on board 13 years prior to the “five year mission,” was there during the “five year mission,” and was captain of her 15 years after the “five year mission.”

“that 20 years was somehow “old” for a ship”

Exactly.

And if you factor in the refit that made her an “almost totally new Enterprise” less than a decade earlier, then retiring her after 20 years is doubly idiotic, battle damage not withstanding.

However, if the refit was “sitting” on a space frame that was 30-40 years old (the Okudas put her service life at 40 years in the Encyclopedia and Chronology (yep, that’s right, they ignored the 20 year remark as well)), a space frame that had seen a wide variety of stresses* over those decades, then retirement makes a bit more sense.

*(among which were tractor beams, nuclear warheads, would-be gods, time travel and the recent battle damage.)

229. Closettrekker - April 2, 2009

#226—“And the whole Klingon BoP thing was mostly cleaned up by an explanation of shared technology between the Klingons and Romulans…”

Cleaned up by whom? Certainly not canonically.

The fanon notion that Klingons and Romulans had somehow entered into an agreement to exchange technology is derived solely from a single line of dialogue in “The Enterprise Incident”.

“Intelligence reports Romulans now using Klingon design.”—Spock

There is nothing in that sentence which suggests that the xenophobic Romulans have suddenly decided to surrender their most prized strategic advantage (the cloaking device) to a rival power, nor that the proud Klingons have suddenly adopted the Romulan cultural practice of painting their ships “like giant birds of prey”.

The Romulans could just as easily have stolen a Klingon ship and reproduced its design as many times as needed (as the Chinese often did with Soviet assault weapons, armor, and aircraft designs throughout the 1960’s-80’s) without giving up their strategic advantage in the cloaking device.

Let’s see. One of these interpretations makes sense—and one of them doesn’t.

No—I don’t think this was ever cleaned up at all.

“There’s really no way to clean up Morrow’s line without either assuming the character was an idiot…”

I don’t believe it makes any sense to try and clean it up. It is what it is—a retcon.

“That was what they were trying to do? Did they actually think more than two people in the audience would make that kind of connection? Wouldn’t it have made more sense to connect Kirk’s tenure as Captain of the ship to the 20-year mark (which would have been about right) than pretend 1) the ship was 20 years old and 2) that 20 years was somehow “old” for a ship?”

Yep. There is no question that the reasoning is ridiculous, but it is there. But suggesting that Kirk was captain for 20 years by that point (15 years after “Space Seed”) wouldn’t make any sense either.

The thing about it is, what does it really mean in the grand scheme of things?

All it means is that Pike could only have commanded the Enterprise for about 5 years (depending upon exactly where you choose to place the events depicted in “Space Seed”, which are 15 years prior to the point when the “Starfleet Commander” suggests that the Enterprise is 20 years old). So the “fight on Rigel VII” and Pike’s visit to Talos IV do not occur 13 years prior to the events depicted in “The Menagerie”, but are in fact more recent at that point.

Is this all that significant? I don’t think so. It contradicts a line or two of dialogue in “The Menagerie”. That’s it.

Compare that to Kirk’s assertion in TVH that he comes from “the late 23rd Century”—which contradicts dialogue all over the place—and its relative significance is put into proper context, IMO.

The alternative seems to be that the “Starfleet Commander” (as Morrow is called when the charges brought against Kirk are announced) at the very least “participates” in the decision to decommission the Enterprise without even knowing how old she is.

As a former military officer, I find that very unlikely and wholly unbelievable—-and (quite frankly) not very flattering to Starfleet.

The bottom line is—the movies are every bit as “canon” as the series. It has always been that way—for better or worse (cue Sybok/Vulcan Princess/marshmelon joke here).

The precedent (as with the retcon of the timeline in TWOK and TVH) is to defer to the “later” entry.

230. Closettrekker - April 2, 2009

#228—“And if you factor in the refit that made her an “almost totally new Enterprise” less than a decade earlier, then retiring her after 20 years is doubly idiotic, battle damage not withstanding.

However, if the refit was “sitting” on a space frame that was 30-40 years old (the Okudas put her service life at 40 years in the Encyclopedia and Chronology (yep, that’s right, they ignored the 20 year remark as well)), a space frame that had seen a wide variety of stresses* over those decades, then retirement makes a bit more sense.”

The Okudas efforts are alot of fun—but they are no more “canon” than one of the novels. Like any other fans, they have merely interpreted what has been stated and shown on screen.

But you’re absolutely right about the idiocy of decommissioning the Enterprise based upon age. There was no need for that. She could (if the writers/producers/director needed a reason to slate her for decommissioning so badly) have simply incurred damage which was either beyond repair, or to the point where building another ship would be more efficient than expending the resources necessary to refit her once again (after all, she had already been relegated to training duty). Nevertheless, the people in creative charge of Trek at the time saw what they felt was some benefit (no matter how ridiculously conceived) to retconning the age of the Enterprise.

The “20 years old” line serves no other purpose but that. And, whether we like it or not—it is the later canon entry.

231. BK613 - April 2, 2009

229 230
“The precedent (as with the retcon of the timeline in TWOK and TVH) is to defer to the “later” entry.

The “20 years old” line serves no other purpose but that. And, whether we like it or not—it is the later canon entry.”

Maybe you defer to the later canon entry but I defer to what makes sense to me. And Morrow making a mistake makes more sense to me than the combination of a 20 year old starship and Spock being wrong, twice. As I said before, you accept it as a valid data point and I do not. That is not likely to change.

So I guess we will just agree to disagree here.

(It is interesting that you defend this. You may be the first person I’ve “met” that actually sides with Morrow on this subject.)

232. Chris Basken - April 2, 2009

229: “There is nothing in that sentence which suggests that the xenophobic Romulans have suddenly decided to surrender their most prized strategic advantage (the cloaking device) to a rival power, nor that the proud Klingons have suddenly adopted the Romulan cultural practice of painting their ships “like giant birds of prey”.

The Romulans could just as easily have stolen a Klingon ship and reproduced its design as many times as needed (as the Chinese often did with Soviet assault weapons, armor, and aircraft designs throughout the 1960’s-80’s) without giving up their strategic advantage in the cloaking device.

Let’s see. One of these interpretations makes sense—and one of them doesn’t.”

But at least the line is there in TOS. So there’s evidence of SOME kind of tech exchange (via treaty or espionage, either way’s fine). And even if the line wasn’t there, it’s not a stretch simply to assume the Klingons stole the ship design sometime prior to ST3.

There’s no contradiction showing Klingons with a cloaking device. There’s just some information left out.

But there was dialogue to the effect that Space Seed happened 15 years prior to ST2 and that The Cage happened about 13 years prior to Space Seed. So say otherwise is certainly a contradiction.

“Yep. There is no question that the reasoning is ridiculous, but it is there. But suggesting that Kirk was captain for 20 years by that point (15 years after “Space Seed”) wouldn’t make any sense either.”

Why not? It’s not unreasonable to be told that Kirk had only held the rank of Captain for about 5 years at the time of Space Seed. It’s a little bit of a push — maybe he was only Captain for 3 years at that point and Morrow rounded up from 18. But the year Kirk made Captain is most likely a lot closer to 20 years prior to ST3 than the year the Enterprise was commissioned is.

“The thing about it is, what does it really mean in the grand scheme of things?”

Not at all. I’m not a continuity stickler myself. I’m all for retcons if they result in a better, cleaner story. I’m not sure how Morrow’s line in ST3 does that, though. It decreases believability, rather than increasing it.

“The alternative seems to be that the “Starfleet Commander” (as Morrow is called when the charges brought against Kirk are announced) at the very least “participates” in the decision to decommission the Enterprise without even knowing how old she is.

As a former military officer, I find that very unlikely and wholly unbelievable—-and (quite frankly) not very flattering to Starfleet.”

I find it infinitely more believable than Spock being in error regarding his own personal history with Pike. I’ll take Spock’s word over Morrow’s, for two reasons. One, because Spock is famous (within the reality of Trek) for his precision. Two, because Spock is a main character and Morrow has a grand total of two scenes in the entirety of Star Trek. Spock wins.

As for it not begin very flattering to Starfleet, well, you’ll have to take it up with the guys who gave us Captain Styles and Captain Cameron (or whatever his name was when he was taking first command of the Enterprise B).

There’s idiocy even high up in Starfleet command.

Of course, this leaves us with the possibility that it’s Kirk who was wrong, that Space Seed was significantly less than 15 years prior to ST2. While I wouldn’t expect Spock-like accuracy out of Kirk, I also wouldn’t expect him to actually mistake the years involved. He may round heavily — it might have been 12 years since Space Seed and he felt like exaggerating — but he wouldn’t have said “fifteen” if the real number was more like eight.

See, the problem here is that the Enterprise being 20 years old at the time of ST3 is supported by Morrow’s one line, while the evidence that the ship is older is greater, AND it has the benefit of being more believable. In the realm of extraordinary claims, the burden of proof is on the one making the extraordinary claim, and that claim is Morrow’s.

233. MC1 Doug - April 2, 2009

#8, 10, 18, 28, et al:

re: Captain Robert April as the first captain of the Enterprise…

The animated episode “The Counter Clock Incident” establishes that April was the first.

Furthermore, both editions “The Star Trek Encyclopedia” (page 18) state that April was succeeded by Pike as Captain of the Enterprise (and the photo of April is, interestingly enough– and perhaps cheesily, a photo of young Roddenberry himself).

To be fair, however, the book does state this is conjectural. So, what it all boils down to is whether we are to accept the animated series as canon. I know that Roddenberry asked that the status be removed. I, however, refuse to accept that.

For many years, Roddenberry proudly proclaimed TAS part of the official history. I do not know his reason for changing that status, but I would clearly say that you cannot tell me the hard work of writers such as DC Fontana, David Gerrold, Larry Niven, Samuel Peeples… and others, is to be dismissed just because it is a cartoon.

A great deal of information from TAS has been referenced in later episodes, so I believe that whether Roddenberry liked to accept this is inconsequential.

So… who was first, we sure won’t answer that question here… and with Roddenberry gone we have to ask ourselves is anything outside of his authorial control really canon?

I, for one, would like to be a bit less restrictive on what is canon and what is not… Ron Moore once said, canon is hamstringing the ability to tell new stories if fans are out there, with phasers drawn, ready to pounce on canon-inconsistencies/violations… remember folks, we are talking about a movie/TV franchise.

It’s not real (ducking as some serious canonistas fire their phasers at me).

234. BK613 - April 2, 2009

232
Well said, sir.
One data point from TWOK; Khan also uses the value “fifteen years.”

235. Closettrekker - April 3, 2009

#232—“But at least the line is there in TOS. So there’s evidence of SOME kind of tech exchange (via treaty or espionage, either way’s fine).”

There is no evidence of *exchange* at all. Let’s revisit the line of dialogue again:

“Intelligence reports Romulans now using Klingon design.”—Spock (“The Enterprise Incident”)

“But the year Kirk made Captain is most likely a lot closer to 20 years prior to ST3 than the year the Enterprise was commissioned is.”

Kirk is an admiral 2.5 years after the end of the five-year mission (and has, presumably held that rank throughout that time, since he has been “Chief Of Starfleet Operations”). That much is made clear within the dialogue of TMP. Even if he was promoted to captain (as you suggest as a possibility) as many as 5 years prior to the 5 year mission, then he would–at the most–hold that rank for 12.5 years, and by the time of TSFS—he would have been an admiral for 10 years.

That is why the suggestion made no sense.

“I find it infinitely more believable than Spock being in error regarding his own personal history with Pike. I’ll take Spock’s word over Morrow’s…”

It’s not about “taking the word” of one fictional character over another. There is simply precedent for taking the latest canon entry over an established one which is seemingly contradictory, whereas there is none the other way around.

No one suggests that the TOS/movie era does not take place in the 23rd Century simply because dialogue in the Original Series contradicts that, nor does anyone suggest that 2270 represents the end of the 5 year mission for the same reason. These are all retcons, either done in the movie era or in the spinoff series. They have become “canon”, despite contardicting dialogue in TOS.

“I’m all for retcons if they result in a better, cleaner story. I’m not sure how Morrow’s line in ST3 does that, though. It decreases believability, rather than increasing it.”

The one point upon which we seem to agree is that it really did nothing to benefit the story, but I don’t see how that is relevant. Harve Bennett was, at the time, in creative charge of Trek. It was ultimately his, along with director Leonard Nimoy’s, toy to play with at the time. Moreover, no one in charge afterward saw any reason to “correct” it, if it were perceived an error. It remains the latest canon entry with regard to the age of the Enterprise. It was not the first contradiction to dialogue in the original series, particularly with regard to the “timeline”.

It is canon.

“Of course, this leaves us with the possibility that it’s Kirk who was wrong, that Space Seed was significantly less than 15 years prior to ST2. While I wouldn’t expect Spock-like accuracy out of Kirk, I also wouldn’t expect him to actually mistake the years involved. He may round heavily — it might have been 12 years since Space Seed and he felt like exaggerating — but he wouldn’t have said “fifteen” if the real number was more like eight.”

But it is not only Kirk who makes reference to the fact that it has been 15 years since the events depicted in “Space Seed”. Khan, who is a product of genetic engineering with superior intellect, also makes that assertion.

236. Chris Basken - April 3, 2009

235:

“There is no evidence of *exchange* at all. Let’s revisit the line of dialogue again:”

Ok, I think I’m done with this particular point. The Klingons in ST3 using designs apparently taken from the Romulans does not violate any continuity. It was never said that the Klingons DIDN’T take Romulan designs and the fact that the Romulans DID use Klingon designs at one point at least leaves the door open to the possibility of an exchange. But like I said, even if that line wasn’t present in The Enterprise Incident, Kruge & Co using a Romulan ship in ST3 doesn’t contradict anything we’d seen up to that point.

“That is why the suggestion made no sense.”

Gotcha, I thought you were saying it didn’t make sense to peg Kirk’s (initial) promotion to Captain at roughly 20 years prior to ST3.

I never claimed that to convert Morrow’s line into a reference to Kirk’s time as CO of the Enterprise was flawless, only that it made MORE sense than it being a reference to the physical age of the ship itself. I still believe it does.

“It’s not about “taking the word” of one fictional character over another. There is simply precedent for taking the latest canon entry over an established one which is seemingly contradictory, whereas there is none the other way around.”

Klingons and bumpy heads.

Initially, bumpy-headed Klingons were handwaved into an “oh, they were always that way” explanation. Roddenberry himself held to that point of view. TNG and later routinely showed pre-TOS Klingons (and some actual TOS Klingons later on) as having bumpy heads, with no explanation for the discrepancy with what we saw on the screen in the 1960s.

Then ENT came along and actually said “wait, no, they WEREN’T always that way, and here’s the explanation why.”

So there’s your example of a later explanation (“Klingons always had bumpy heads”) being reversed or otherwise shown to be untrue.

“No one suggests that the TOS/movie era does not take place in the 23rd Century simply because dialogue in the Original Series contradicts that, nor does anyone suggest that 2270 represents the end of the 5 year mission for the same reason. These are all retcons, either done in the movie era or in the spinoff series. They have become “canon”, despite contardicting dialogue in TOS.”

Perhaps, but the dates mentioned during TOS were usually ambiguous, or something written on a tombstone or other prop without offering context. The first time anyone in Trek ever gives the actual year using our current calendar system is a TNG episode where Data gives the year as 2364. Just prior to that, in ST4, Kirk does say “I am from what you would call the late 23rd century” (or somesuch) but never gives the actual year he’s from. And before that, in ST2, we learn that McCoy’s gift of Romulan Ale is from 2283, but we’re not told how old the bottle is (although his reply that “it takes a while for this stuff to ferment” suggests that it’s at least 2284, and possibly much later).

In TOS, we do see some vague references. Kirk’s tombstone in Where No Man Has Gone Before seems to have a date-of-death in the 2800s, although for all we know that could be a stardate of some kind. Then Khan is mentioned to have ruled in the 1990s and then been in suspended animation for 200 years, which suggests the show takes place in the late 22nd century or early 23rd. But that “200 year” line is hardly ironclad. For one, Spock makes a point to mention that records from that time are “fragmentary.” Khan could have been from a much later time, and the fact that, in the real world, the 1990s have come and gone without him suggests that it’s not so much the “200 years” that’s in error as it’s the “1990s” reference.

And then Squire of Gothos also suggests that Trek is something like 900 years after the late 1700s, putting it in the 27th century. But Trelaine was hardly infallible.

So yes, later Trek (TNG+) locked the dates down a lot better, and in retrospect that caused some of the previous, less definitive statements about the timeframe of TOS to be incorrect, but it’s not at all the same thing as the Morrow issue. No one in TOS said “this is AD2216 using the Gregorian calendar” only to be contradicted by Data in TNG. Data was free to give the date in TNG precisely because no one had locked it down previously. But we do have Spock saying 13 years and Kirk/Khan both saying 15 years, versus Morrow saying 20.

We all choose how to handle inconsistencies. You choose to adopt a “later overrides earlier” approach. I choose to adopt an approach that weighs the likelihood and credibility of the source (which is also how the Okudas did it). Neither one of us can be objectively right or wrong — it’s a fantasy world.

“Moreover, no one in charge afterward saw any reason to “correct” it,”

Michael and Denise Okuda did. Phil Farrand also pointed it out. And hell, we’re correcting (or at least addressing) it right here and now.

237. Closettrekker - April 3, 2009

#236—“The Klingons in ST3 using designs apparently taken from the Romulans does not violate any continuity.”

It is not that Klingons possessing a ship design of Romulan origin would be a violation of continuity. There is nothing in TSFS which actually definitively suggests that the “design” is Romulan.

It is the distinctly “Romulan” practice of painting a ship “like a giant bird of prey” which violates continuity established in “Balance Of Terror”. This is specifically stated as the way in which someone would know that the ship is Romulan, instead of that of another race—Klingon or otherwise. Not only is Kruge’s ship painted that way, but it is referred to as a “Klingon Bird Of Prey”.

“So there’s your example of a later explanation (”Klingons always had bumpy heads”) being reversed or otherwise shown to be untrue.”

Roddenberry’s behind-the-scenes comments have never been the criteria for determining what is and isn’t canon. It is simply what is depicted onscreen. Prior to ENT, there was never an onscreen explanation for the physical difference between Klingons in TOS and those in TMP and beyond. Nothing was actually ‘reversed’. The producers of ENT simply chose to create an explanation. Since it is the latest entry, it is, of course, canon.

“Michael and Denise Okuda did.”

Neither of whom are in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction, nor have they ever been.

“Phil Farrand also pointed it out. ”

Pointing out an inconsistency is hardly the same as “correcting” one.

“Spock makes a point to mention that records from that time are “fragmentary.” Khan could have been from a much later time, and the fact that, in the real world, the 1990s have come and gone without him suggests that it’s not so much the “200 years” that’s in error as it’s the “1990s” reference.”

Fragmentary records would not seem to affect Khan’s genetically engineered memory, as he clearly states that his people left abord the Botaby Bay in the year 1996. In both “Space Seed” and TWOK, he asserts that it has been 200 years since that time (this is a man who has absorbed half of the Enterprise computer library during his convalescence in sickbay). Obviously that places the events in “Space Seed” to be around the year 2196. Even if he is rounding down to 200 years, that still puts it in the beginning of the 23rd Century—in itself not a contradiction to TWOK (which begins—“In the 23rd Century”), considering that it is 15 years later by both he and Kirk’s recollection.

TVH, however, suggests that it is not only the 23rd Century—but the “late” 23rd Century (retcon).

The VOY episode, “Q2″ further pins down the exact year of the end of Kirk’s 5 year mission as 2270.

The bottom line is that, with regard to retcons and what is or is not canon, the precedent is that a later entry supercedes what came before.

James R. Kirk became James T. Kirk.

2196 became the 2260’s.

This issue is no different.

238. BK613 - April 3, 2009

237
“Neither of whom are in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction, nor have they ever been.”

ROTFLMAO

From wikipedia:

“Michael Okuda is a graphic designer who is best known for his work on Star Trek. In the mid-1980s, he designed the look of animated computer displays for the Enterprise-A bridge in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.[1] This led to a staff position on Star Trek: The Next Generation in 1987 as a scenic artist, adding detail to set designs and props. His most famous contribution to The Next Generation is the GUI of the fictional LCARS computer system used throughout the Enterprise-D and other Starfleet starships. In homage to its creator, this visual style has come to be known among fans as “okudagrams”.

Okuda also served as a technical consultant on the various TNG-era Star Trek series along with Rick Sternbach, advising the script-writers on the technology used throughout the Star Trek universe such as the transporters and the warp drive. This work resulted in a technical manual which was distributed to prospective script-writers along with the series bible. The manual was later published in revised and updated form as the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual by Pocket Books. Michael then went on to write a number of Star Trek books with his wife, Denise. Okuda continued working at Paramount Studios on the Star Trek series that followed The Next Generation, until the cancellation of Star Trek: Enterprise in 2005. He also worked on the Star Trek movies that were produced while the various television series were in production. Okuda is currently working to digitally remaster and update special visual effects for the original series.”

239. Closettrekker - April 3, 2009

#238—-None of that information means that either of the Okudas have ever been in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction. It is no secret that he has written books and “worked” on Trek series/movies as a consultant.

He has worked under Harve Bennett, Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman, Brannon Braga, and to a lesser extent—-Manny Coto.

*They* are people who have been in charge of Star Trek’s ‘creative direction’ in one time or another.

Michael Okuda has never so much as written an episode, so I fail to see why this statement has you rolling on the floor and laughing your ass off——-““Neither of whom are in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction, nor have they ever been.”

It is absolutely true.

240. Chris Basken - April 3, 2009

237:

“There is nothing in TSFS which actually definitively suggests that the “design” is Romulan.”

…contradicts…

“It is the distinctly “Romulan” practice of painting a ship “like a giant bird of prey” which violates continuity established in “Balance Of Terror”. This is specifically stated as the way in which someone would know that the ship is Romulan, instead of that of another race—Klingon or otherwise.”

But it’s still workable. So sometime between the end of TOS and ST3, Kirk, Sulu, etc, all learned that Klingon ships are called Birds of Prey and also use the bird painting thing (whether they came up with it on their own or stole it from the Romulans or had a “technology exchange”). No contradiction, just left out info.

“Fragmentary records would not seem to affect Khan’s genetically engineered memory, as he clearly states that his people left abord the Botaby Bay in the year 1996.”

Good point, which then brings me back to my system of resolving inconsistencies — credibility and likelihood. It’s not credible that Khan came from 1996, since we’ve long passed that year and no evidence that a genetically-engineered tyrant took over 1/4 the world appeared in the news (unless CNN was too busy covering the Clinton/Dole election at the time). Ergo, Khan is unambiguously wrong when he says “1996.” This means he doesn’t have to be wrong when he says “200 years,” since 200 years prior to Space Seed would put him in the 2060s somewhere. Interestingly, about the time of Zephram Cochraine.

On a side note, it’s interesting that “200 years” is used in both Space Seed and ST2 — stories that were separated by almost 20 years. This points to a lot of rounding.

“The bottom line is that, with regard to retcons and what is or is not canon, the precedent is that a later entry supercedes what came before.”

It can’t be that simple. If a single, later entry tells us that Kirk’s first name is John, are we expected to pretend ALL the times we heard his name as Jim are wrong? There’s no recourse there? We can’t reasonably say “well, there’s 94 instances of him being called ‘Jim’ and one instance of him being called ‘John,’ so John must be wrong and Jim is right”?

This is exaggerated, but it’s basically what’s going on with Morrow’s line. There are a number of references to the Enterprise’s age that wouldn’t allow it to be 20 years old at the time of ST3, and only one that says otherwise. Add that it’s not really logical to retire a ship after only 20 years and the case for Morrow’s validity gets weaker. In fact, the ONLY power it has is that it came later. You’re saying that’s ALL that matters?

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, then.

Can anyone find an instance in canonical Trek where a later assertion over an earlier one was subsequently ignored and reversed without bothering to acknowledge the “wrong” assertion?

241. Closettrekker - April 3, 2009

#240—“No contradiction, just left out info.”

I suggest you revisit “Balance Of Terror”. It’s made very clear that it is a distinctly “Romulan” practice. In TSFS, it is depicted as a “Klingon” practice. That is the very definition of “contradiction”.

” It’s not credible that Khan came from 1996, since we’ve long passed that year and no evidence that a genetically-engineered tyrant took over 1/4 the world appeared in the news.”

That’s completely irrelevant.

The Star Trek timeline is a “fictional” version of the future from the 1960’s onward. It doesn’t have to be reconcile with actual history since that time. That’s the difference between fiction and non-fiction. Non-fiction is reality, while fiction is not.

“it’s interesting that “200 years” is used in both Space Seed and ST2 — stories that were separated by almost 20 years. This points to a lot of rounding.”

Indeed. A lot of rounding, or yet another “retcon”, depending upon how you look at it.

“There are a number of references to the Enterprise’s age that wouldn’t allow it to be 20 years old at the time of ST3, and only one that says otherwise.”

Actually, the only canonical entry that I can recall it contradicting is “The Menagerie”. It is pretty much one-for-one, unless I’m forgetting something (and in 5 live action series and 10 previous films, that’s quite possible).

“You’re saying that’s ALL that matters?”

I’m saying that—to my knowledge—that is all for which there is any precedent.

Any ‘fan’ can make any interpretation he/she wants. All I can do is offer support for mine.

Don’t mistake my own interpretation for lack of respect for the possible validity of yours.

I also believe it wasn’t a good creative decision. I think it was totally unnecessary. But I also don’t think that “explaining away” contradictions is necessary either.

As I said before, Morrow could have suggested that the Enterprise is being retired because the battle damage she sustained against Khan and Reliant was either too great to be repaired, or not worth the effort vs. the option of building another ship to replace her.

*That* would have made more sense, and not been contradictory—but it is what it is—an “intentional” retcon.

Is that (as far as making any sense) any worse than (in STV) the notion that 2 captains and 5 commanders are assigned to the same starship?

Talk about “credibility” issues with storytelling! Come on.

242. Chris Basken - April 3, 2009

241:

“I suggest you revisit “Balance Of Terror”. It’s made very clear that it is a distinctly “Romulan” practice. In TSFS, it is depicted as a “Klingon” practice. That is the very definition of “contradiction”.”

Why can’t it be a practice of both races? Where did we see that only Romulans are known to put animals on their ships, or (prior to ST3) that Klingons would never put animals on their ships?

You can’t assume a contradiction. It has to be outright established that either ONLY Romulans do the bird painting thing or that the Klingons would NEVER do the bird painting thing. Just showing the Romulans with the bird painting and then later showing the Klingons with it as well doesn’t mean anything was contradicted anywhere.

“The Star Trek timeline is a “fictional” version of the future from the 1960’s onward. It doesn’t have to be reconcile with actual history since that time. That’s the difference between fiction and non-fiction. Non-fiction is reality, while fiction is not.”

Trek also intends to be our future. The Trekverse isn’t, say, the Star Wars universe, where there’s no explanation for how humans got to another galaxy in the distant past. Trek is quite specifically trying to show how we — you and me and everyone else on the planet who actually exist in reality — are going to progress past all our problems and survive as a species. While Trek certainly is fiction, the fictional universe must map to the real universe as much as possible. And it must continue to map moving forward if it’s to remain relevant. Since 1996 had no Khan, that means an unrevised Trek universe isn’t our universe and that connection to our future is diminished.

So it serves the purpose of Trek to revise it such that the Khan contradiction goes away. The simplest answer is that “1996” is wrong and Khan is yet to come. Let people in the 2060s deal with how to fix it when the time comes, but at least for now, Trek remains a speculation about our actual future.

“Actually, the only canonical entry that I can recall it contradicting is “The Menagerie”. It is pretty much one-for-one, unless I’m forgetting something (and in 5 live action series and 10 previous films, that’s quite possible).”

Accepted. I was combining the “13 years” and the “15 years” references, but as you imply, only one of them has to be incorrect.

So I still fall back on likelihood and credibility.

“*That* would have made more sense, and not been contradictory—but it is what it is—an “intentional” retcon.”

This brings up another issue. In Star Trek Nemesis, Data mentions that he’s not aware of Dr. Soong creating any other androids, aside from himself. This is a clear contradiction to those TNG episodes that feature Lore. Did Nemesis retcon Lore out of existence? Would you now argue that moving forward, Lore should not be mentioned and those episodes that featured him never happened? Wouldn’t Occam’s razor come down on the side of just omitting or amending Data’s line?

“Is that (as far as making any sense) any worse than (in STV) the notion that 2 captains and 5 commanders are assigned to the same starship?”

Two or three? Wasn’t Scotty a Captain at that point, too? And what was Sulu’s rank in ST5?

I agree that it was silly. But having two captains and five commanders — while illogical — doesn’t contradict anything we’ve seen. It’s not like it was established anywhere prior (or since) that it violates some Starfleet regulation to have that many high-ranking officers serve together for a mission. Silliness is silliness and it should be avoided, but it’s not the same thing as a contradiction.

243. BK613 - April 3, 2009

239
“It is no secret that he has written books and “worked” on Trek series/movies as a consultant.”

Hello, “staff position.” Scenic artist at first on TNG and then scenic art supervisor on TNG, DS9 VOY and ENT. Plus the TNG movies. The guy has more Trek cred than almost anybody so I find your dismissive attitude extremely hilarious. On a par with dismissing Matt Jefferies’s influence on the creative direction of Trek.

“It is absolutely true.”

Only in the narrowest of terms. For example, GR might have been The Man but Gene Coon, Matt Jefferies, D.C Fontana, et.al, were just as influential as he was in the creative direction of Trek.

The same for Mr. Okuda. And part of his influence was the creation of a chronology that was used on TNG, DS9, and VOY whenever a date was needed. That date from “Q2″, 2270, comes from from this very same chronology and the chronology entry predates its use on the air by eight years.

240
“Good point, which then brings me back to my system of resolving inconsistencies — credibility and likelihood. It’s not credible that Khan came from 1996, since we’ve long passed that year and no evidence that a genetically-engineered tyrant took over 1/4 the world appeared in the news (unless CNN was too busy covering the Clinton/Dole election at the time).”

Presupposes, does it not, that the trek universe is our universe.

There is also no McKinley rocket base, no orbital nuclear warhead crisis, no Voyager 6, no Cetacean Institute. And no Trekkies hounding Shatner and company for autographs when they appeared on the streets of San Fran in 1986, dressed atypically for the times.

Trek doesn’t occur in OUR universe and therefore, there is not need to these kinds of inconsistencies. IMO

244. BK613 - April 3, 2009

^^^^
left out reconcile in that last sentence

245. BK613 - April 3, 2009

242
“This is a clear contradiction to those TNG episodes that feature Lore.”

Not to mention TNG: Inheritence, which featured Dtat’s “Mom,” Juliana Tainer a.k.a Juliana O’Donnell a.k.a Juliana Soong.

246. Closettrekker - April 4, 2009

#242—“Why can’t it be a practice of both races?”

Because when Kirk asks how they would even know what a Romulan ship looks like (as opposed to any other), Stiles replies that they will know because the ship is painted like a giant bird of prey. If it had been a practice of *both* races, then this really wouldn’t be an answer to the captain’s question.

But alas, the practice of painting ship like giant birds of prey eventually became a Klingon practice—-which I maintain is a retcon of the dialogue in BOT.

“While Trek certainly is fiction, the fictional universe must map to the real universe as much as possible. ”

I don’t see why. It’s all make-believe. As entertaining as it is for me, I cannot say that I am under any illusions that any of this is prognostic.

“Two or three? Wasn’t Scotty a Captain at that point, too? ”

No. Even after Scotty is told by Morrow to report to USS Excelsior as “captain” of engineering, he still later identifies himself as “Commander Montgomery Scott”. Moreoever, he isn’t depicted wearing Captain’s braids at any point forward in either STIII, IV, or V to my recollection. I always assumed that Scotty’s “promotion” to captain was never actually formalized.

“And what was Sulu’s rank in ST5?”

Since there is a five-year gap between TFF and TUC, it isn’t clear when he is promoted to Captain—beyond being within that window.

“I agree that it was silly. But having two captains and five commanders — while illogical — doesn’t contradict anything we’ve seen. ”

And it wasn’t my intention to suggest anything other than the notion that it really doesn’t make sense, just like decommissioning the Enterprise simply because she is 20 years old. But you’re right. It doesn’t contradict anything (other than common sense).

247. Closettrekker - April 4, 2009

#243—“The guy has more Trek cred than almost anybody so I find your dismissive attitude extremely hilarious. On a par with dismissing Matt Jefferies’s influence on the creative direction of Trek…For example, GR might have been The Man but Gene Coon, Matt Jefferies, D.C Fontana, et.al, were just as influential as he was in the creative direction of Trek.”

“Only in the narrowest of terms.”

What?

At no point—-I repeat—*at no point*, was Michael Okuda *ever* in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction, particularly with regard to “story”—which is what this conversation is about. Having “influence” isn’t even close to the same thing as “being in charge”.

And the only thing I am being “dismissive” about with regard to Michael Okuda is the notion that he has ever been “in charge” of Star Trek’s creative direction. Working on Trek, even to the point of being “influential”, is not the same thing as “being in charge”. Period. There is nothing “narrow” about it—it is simply being clear and literal.

“That date from “Q2″, 2270, comes from from this very same chronology and the chronology entry predates its use on the air by eight years.”

Curious.

I recall the “Chronology” using the year *2269* as the end of the 5 year mission, and in a previous conversation, that is what Alex Rosenweig recalled as well. If the “Chronology” was such a concrete source—then why the discrepancy (no matter how minor) between that and “Q2″?

Even if Alex and I are mistaken in our recollection of that, it wouldn’t matter. The “Chronology” is a fictional reference book. It isn’t canon. That category is reserved for what is depicted onscreen in live action Trek television and feature films.

Okuda interprets it one way—-and I interpret it in another. His treatment (and apparently yours as well) is based upon selective reasoning, while mine is based upon precedent. None of it really matters in the end.

From what we have seen of the trailers, it seems to me the Enterprise is being built according to the retconned timeframe submitted by Bennett and Nimoy in TSFS—-and not the one suggested by the dialogue in “The Menagerie” (convoluted fanboy explanations about the effects of altered timelines notwithstanding).

In the end, all this means is around an eight-year discrepancy in the age of the Enterprise between what is suggested by “The Menagerie” and the TSFS retcon.

We’ll know in a month whether those “in charge of Star Trek’s creative direction” (aka the “Supreme Court”) have gone with Okuda’s selective reasoning with regard to the contradiction, or the “precedent”—which is to defer to the later canon entry.

248. michael - May 2, 2009

everything william shatner’s kirk had done in TOS and the six films that had kirk in seven if you include the one where kirk dies have hapend but nero has messed up the timline so that all the things william shatner’s kirk did dont happen

249. He Was On Me Like Cheese Be On Macaroni // 05.18.09 « A & H - May 18, 2009

[...] sources as follows: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, [...]

250. Queen Traphagen - April 21, 2011

Does your site have a contact page? I’m having problems locating it but, I’d like to shoot you an email. I’ve got some recommendations for your blog you might be interested in hearing. Either way, great site and I look forward to seeing it grow over time.

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