More From Orci & Kurtzman On Star Trek Sequel Script Development August 9, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman, Star Trek sequel (2012) , trackback
Star Trek scribes Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman have another sequel update from the TCA event this week (promoting Fringe). Regarding the Trek sequel, they corrected Zoe Saldana’s recent estimate that the script was ‘half done’, again noting they haven’t started yet. They also talked about the balance of new stories vs elements of TOS, writing with Lindelof and more. Details below .
Finding the story and the balance
According to Bob, as noted in the last TCA article, the team are still in the "re-reading and taking-it-all-in phase" and have not yet began writing it. As noted before, much of the debate is between new storylines and revisiting TOS material within the new timeline, but apparently those can some time mesh, with Orci noting:
Even when you pitch stuff, sometimes someone will be like, ‘Wow, that’s like that one episode. So even in trying to stay away from it, you can crash back in there.
It also seems that the team are going to stick with the formula for the first film and try and make the sequel be accessible to a general audience, but still true to Trek. Kurtzman notes:
A lot of what makes die-hard Trekkers really focused on Trek are those details that can sometimes be alienating to people who are not on the inside. That leads us back to what are the big themes, the emotional ideas? That’s a language everybody speaks.
Inside The Trek Supreme Court
Bob also talked about how the five member Supreme court will work, with Damon Lindelof also getting more involved with the script this time around:
We’re going to come up with the story together, obviously, in consultation with J.J. [Abrams] and Bryan [Burk]. Then we’re going to write it up together, the story. Also Damon, and then Alex and I will go write the script.
So it appears that in the end Lindelof may only share a ’story by’ credit with Orci and Kurtzman
.
For more SciFi Wire.
Loading ...
Comments»
I guess, in the meantime, we have the collaborative comic books from Bob and Alex, et al… can’t wait for “Nero”!
Supreme Court? Sounds a wee bit arrogant, doesn’t it?
Now that’s better! Hopefully we’ll get some script details by the end of September.
Orci’s right.
Even when you try something new in Trek, it can mirror something old. TNG did everything. Granted, there were some things that could have been done better, and many that were done flawlessly, but TNG did do most of it.
For example, even when I’m rewatching first season BSG, there are a number of episodes that feel like a TNG rerun!
I absolutely hate it when you guys call them the “Supreme Court”
4. cagmar: ‘even when I’m rewatching first season BSG, there are a number of episodes that feel like a TNG rerun!’
If you’re talking about the 1970s Battlestar Galactica, then I agree with you!
The new BSG had the balls to push an idea as far as it could go and live with the consequences. TNG always wimped out and went for the safe reset button at the end.
My great frustration with TNG was always that it came up with exciting, killer setups that could change the nature of the show and it always, always chickened out!
I agree. I think the Supreme Court description should be retired. It was interesting before the movie in validating that some of the writers and producers had tangible knowledge of the franchise. But, I don’t think they have quite earned the title as ongoing legacy just yet.
I’m glad that Damon Lindelof is part of the writing team. The episodes he writes for LOST are the best of the series and I think he is a stronger writer that Orci and Kurtzman (see Transformers). ST09 was really great but I think Lindelof can help make the sequel better.
BRING BACK SHATNER!
Jeez! Why are some suddenly upset by the name “The Supreme Court”? I think kit’s kinda cute and besides, IT PERFECTLY DESCRIBES THEIR POSITIONS. IT’S WHAT THEY ARE. THEY MAKE THE DECISIONS. Perhaps we should quote W Bush and call them THE DECIDERS.
You may continue now with the usual minutia nitpicking.
Dom… be prepared how the nuTrek will chicken out. For example they had the chance to kill off Sulu in this movie, yet they didn’t. Lame.
Ok, let’s get beyond what the writer called them, please…
I think the story needs to touch on the new Vulcan colony and it’s establishment as it’s B storyline. Construction, terra (vulcan)-forming work, people doing things. And then the E and crew, perhaps Spock Prime as well, are pulled away for something something… or the E stops at New Vulcan before the five year mission… blah, blah…
McCoy needs more to do thing time… DAmmit, Jim.
I have never seen such a bad case of branding like today.
Did anyone even think of calling First Contact “Frakes-Trek”, was Nemesis “Baird-Trek”, was Deep Space Nine “Berman/Braga/Piller-Trek”? Yet with this new movie, the makers themselves put their names onto that movie. It’s “Star Trek from the creators of Lost and Alias”, “Star Trek by Orci and Kurtzman”, “JJ. Abrams presents Star Trek”, as stated by many posters and wallpapers all around the word. In Harve Benett, Ralph Winter or Rick Berman times it was ALWAYS “Based upon Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry”, there was never such a bad case of name branding going on.
Yeah, most of the fans wanted Berman and Braga to die because they screwed up Enterprise and Nemesis, but they were still just some gears in the grand machinery that was Star Trek.
But today, with Abrams, Lindelof, Orci and Kurtzman, it seems Star Trek turned into “yet another production of Bad Robot”. And the decision to call the 11th installment of that great big franchise just “Star Trek” was a concious one to let that connection really suck in. It truly is Abrams-Trek now.
Nobody would have ever thought about calling First Contact or Insurrection “Frakes Trek” or “Berman Trek”.
I sincerely hope they will feature what will happen to the scattered Vulcans. That’s a goldmine of material right there!
Nothing about Moore’s BSG reminded me of TNG. Nothing. That was a *good* thing.
#6 Dom – I mean the new BSG. Season 1’s LItmus = TNG’s Drumhead. And Drumhead was in every way more satisfying.
I loved TNG. I think it was the quintessential sci-fi program for the ages. It was obviously written at a time when Serials were not approved of, and everything had to be wrapped up and back to normal by the end of an episode…. but I think as a philosophy and analogy for humanity, the way it dealt with things was perfectly acceptable and thoroughly enjoyable.
And it would be hard, as Orci says, to write something that does not borrow from TNG in some way.
BRING BACK THE SHAT!!!
And here I thought that nitpicking was limited to the movie alone.
Nope.
It’s a nickname that describes the general duty of the writers and production staff. Nothing more.
Now if you want something to argue over, let’s go over the word “canon.” I guarantee you, others outside of Trek think we are psychotic for using a word that basically means “Sacred Doctrine.”
No Shat, no Khan pls. We all have the sets with them and memories are good and cozy, but we want something new. It’s as simple as that.
Here’s some great misunderstanding of what a Supreme Court does in real life.
old news.
trekweb.com had this story ages ago before trekmovie.com picked up on it. Coman Guys !
I just think it’s not a good way of describing the writers. It’s their movie… I don’t see any more of a reason to call them the “Supreme Court” than the writers of any other movie.
If I want Khan, Shatner, or any concept of TOS revisited, I know where to find them in my DVD collection.
New universe, wide open opportunities. Let’s not waste them, gentlemen.
Agreed.
I’m still waiting on a reason why these two are right for the job. ST09 didn’t convince me.
Jeyl, they are right, because they are the “Supreme Court of Star Trek”. They tell you what’s right and what’s wrong.
I think these guys can’t write dialogue.
I have a suggestion Mr’s Orci and Kurtzman: How about doing something involving a Brief Federation Civil War?
“Supreme Court” was coined here, I believe, and it was just meant to be a committee to put those who truly know Trek details, such as Orci and Lindelof, and those who don’t (Kurtzman, Abrams) in the room together to make sure things stayed more or less “Trekkish.” I remember the discussions, and I think it worked in the end, mostly (Spock and Uhura?).
I have to disagree with Kurtzman’s assertion that Trek’s ‘details’ alienate outsiders. If it’s the Riverside Shipyards, or blue nacelle caps, who cares? He should have another look at his movie, and see how many of those ‘details’ actually made it in successfully. Who thought two years ago we’d actually see Captain Pike in a movie?
The writers are coming up against Ron Moore’s nemesis, which is ‘canon.’ Too much history and details, so we can’t write a new story without getting trapped into something formulaic. Stop worrying. TMP was an expensive “Nomad” episode, and TNG filched Riker and Troi from TMP’s Decker and Ilia. TWOK was a TV sequel, TSFS was another sequel, as was the one with the whales, which had time travel and 20th century hijinks. TFF was again out looking for the Creator, TUC was a torch-passer, as was “Generations.” FC was a TV sequel, and the last two were hi-cost TV eps, the last of which was a re-hash of “Data has a brother” mixed with Khan-style bits and yet another passing of the torch.
ST09 passes the torch (again), but does so in its own unique way, and still has its genesis, perhaps coincidentally, in ideas Harve Bennett was kicking around decades ago. The writers should not re-invent the wheel for the next film, but consider it an advantage that Trek is so rich in history and details.
Good grief, the comments are full of well reasoned critique tonight eh?
To be fair, this is mostly a non story but since it refutes the Zoe reports then it’s worth mentioning. I think that the more salient point is that they’ve no desire to change the formula. Which is fine by me.
I’m as interested to see what they come up with this time as last time.
I hope the screen writers have an ear to the WOMEN who enjoy Star Trek–hooray for action and adventure but look closely at the vast majority of fan fiction being written–Spock and Uhura are getting lots of the attention. I know some of the geek boys are impatient with that ’ship–they are worried that it interferes with the triad of Spock and Kirk and McCoy–but come on, guys–times have changed and you can be in a meaningful relationship with a woman and still have your guy friends. Spock’s relationship with Uhura made for great comedy and irony and sympathy in the movie, and it would be a shame not to explore it and continue it. It would also be a great shame to jump several years ahead in the storyline–we need to see how all of these young characters develop. I also vote for putting the Enterprise to work helping Vulcan get re-established–lots of possible peril there.
Waterbury, I think you might be on to something. Maybe not like the similar DS9 storyline, but there may be something in that. Good potential for cool action sequences and character insight/development.
In any case, Star Trek 2011 should be to Star Trek (2009) what The Dark Knight was to Batman Begins- same style, but even more awesome!
I say there won’t be any dramatic changes in the next movie, it will play fair and save just like any other Trek episode you guys are bitching about “was too save, too formulaic”. What shall there be? Destroy yet another planet? Yeah, wow. Kill Spock? Been there, done that. Kill Kirk? Yeah, right. And I highly doubt they will kill off any of the other crewmembers. Destroy the Enterprise? Again?
I think the most single dramatic and totally unexpected thing that the sequel could have would be if they reverted the timeline back to normal.
Dear Mr. Orci & Mr. Kurtzman — or should I say: Your Honorable Justices? ;) — loved your film, hope you’ll be reading this,
#24 itzWicks wrote: “New universe, wide open opportunities. Let’s not waste them, gentlemen.”
I agree, and I have a proposition, although I believe you’ll eventually come up with much better ideas. It would not be for the next film, but for an arc that could span the films to come after that, but one that should then be established in the background of the next film’s plot.
The destruction of Vulcan and the decimation of the Vulcan people will have created vulnerabilities with regard to Vulcan-Romulan relations in the new timeline. Even before the Nero incursion there were attempts at re-unification, but now the balance is lost, and the Romulans would no doubt have the upper hand. They might even consider forcing the remaining Vulcans (or parts of the Vulcan people) under Romulan dominion. Maybe some Vulcan factions would openly join the Romulan empire and break with UFP. UFP’s/Starfleet’s role would radically change: Not only would there be a reverse deja-vu, in that Starfleet now has a kind of guardianship over the Vulcans that’s not completely unlike the one the Vulcans had over mankind in the Archer era… but there would also be a possibility for massive conflict, political, military, federal, social, even among the Enterprise crew (I’m thinking sabotage here etc.), coupled with a interstellar-cultural background, which is known to Trek fans from previous series, however with altered circumstances. Go with the idea that the Nero incursion will really jumble things. (In some ways you already did. Take it further!)
That’s the potential and opportunities which I would not like to see wasted. Take what we know, like the Vulcan-Romulan relations, but only as a starting point, then recalibrate it according to the realities in the new timeline.
Think big, as in trilogy, as in, well, yeah: Star Wars—hi there, Mr. Abrams. ;) In the third film of that hypothetical trilogy (which would then be your fifth film all in all), or in the second (fourth), Spock Prime could be re-introduced.
There’s potential to explore the two Spocks’ relationship: Old Spock from the prime timeline has lots of experience in Romulan-Vulcan relations, even at re-unification diplomacy, which might however be worthless (at least to some degree) in the new timeline. This could be expanded to turn him into a tragic figure, a person lost in a universe that appears more alien to him with every new development. I believe Mr. Nimoy would love to take Spock in a totally new direction, in a few years, in the 4th and/or 5th film. There is also possibility for a schism between the two Spocks—at least temporarily…we don’t want to lose the positive vibe now, do we? Big battles, big resolutions at the end. Etc. pp..
Then the Klingons… would they seize the opportunity, when UFP is shaken, because Vulcans start to lean toward Romulus?
Well… I know I know: 2¢, thinkin’ loud…
In any case, just do us one favor: No Shat please, and no Khan, no augments or whatever. I’d rather have Section 31, to be honest.
If you look at the hanging threads of ST09 from the standpoint, you can imagine the chaotic mess created by the appearance of Nero.
1. Klingons declare war on Romulus for destroying their armada..
2. Federation could also declare war, but will be more sensitive to the real story, which must be kept mum due to tech transfer from 24th century ships.
3. Klingons could ally themselves with the Feds, as both are victims. Klingon DF is weakened by Nero incursion.
4. Feds could mediate dispute between Klingons and Romulus, promising timely aid in the prevention of the Hobus star’s inevitable appearance.
5. Some Vulcans may decide to resettle on Romulus.
Lots of good tidbits which could be woven into a story,
Schultz, you realise that NONE of what you just wrote will EVER appear in a movie or a novel, because of copyright issues that would arise if the writers ever used one of the ideas that was written down here?
Wow. Schultz and I had almost identical brain-farts at the same time!
#37 (dude23276)
LOL. What copyright issues? Do you think that (a) anything of what I wrote is important (or worth putting in a film/novel), or (b) anything I wrote is “original”? That narrative sketch would not even have been possible without ST09, without episodes like Re-Unification, Kir’Shara etc. But hey, yeah, I hereby give permission to use that material, freely, change, adapt, write, film, refilm, reuse, new use etc. pp. No license fee, no buyout fee. Only royalties, incl. derivative products. LOL. ;)
37
dude23276:
I wonder if that’s true.
“Of Gods and Men” had Charlie Evans go back from the 24th century and kill Kirk’s mom in the 23rd, in Iowa, which created a new timeline. Could they sue?
Also, the argument is moot if they decide to actually pay a few thousand for a good idea. I think it was TNG that started taking unsolicited scripts, and some actually made it in some form to TV.
With all the ideas circulating on this forum, someone is bound to touch on something which may occur in the film as a coincidence.
I think it would be cool if they mixed some old schoolers in with the new team. Maybe something like this.
Producer: JJ Abrams
Director: Jonathan Frakes
Story By: Robert Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Ronald D. Moore & D.C. Fontana
lol
I thought Frakes did an awesome job on First Contact and they probably had less than half the budget of these new movies.
Just looked it up: First Contact = $45 million; Star Trek = ~$150 million. No fair.
I certainly hope nobody from here sues Orci, Kurtzman, or Abrams in the future because ‘their’ idea was used in the sequel. That would be ridiculous. Speculation doesn’t have copyright issues attached…there were those who speculated that ST09 would include time travel. And it did.
As for The Supreme Court…I wouldn’t say it’s arrogant, but I don’t really care for the name either. How about “Command Crew” or “Senior Staff”? That would be more fitting.
32…StarTrekGal, I agree. I was totally skeptical when I heard about Spock and Uhura, but it worked! One of my favorite parts is the look on Kirk’s and then on Scotty’s face in the transporter scene.
34, 37… dude23276, you make some good points. It doesn’t seem like there’s much left to do. As much as I ‘want’ a sequel, I have my doubts. Trek has done some things that simply can’t be topped. Just because Abrams thinks he can make it better (I’ll admit he had success with his idea the first time) doesn’t mean we ‘need’ another Star Trek movie. Maybe we should just let it rest, I don’t know…some of us can be content with reruns and DVDs of the old shows.
Damon Lindelof will likely be consumed by the out-of-this-universe expectations for LOST’s last season but I hope he does have an impact on the new script; he’s a darn good storyteller and dramatist.
I hope this “new Trek” is basically a trilogy with Abrams directing all three with a narrative/stylistic cohesion and sense of internal — uh, oh — canon, all its own, even as it touches on established “Prime” events and characters.
RedShark,
It is just personal preference for sure, but I would love more and more Trek. Reimagined Trek, old school Trek, I don’t care that much. I adjusted to TNG back in the day and eventually managed to greatly appreciate and enjoy DS9 and VOY.
My attitude is basically that if someone attempts something new with Trek and it sucks, that’s too bad, but not as bad as the prospect of an entirely dead franchise. Plus I’m open to new forms of Trek that haven’t been done yet.
When DS9 and VOY were still fairly new I refused to watch them because I thought the concepts were lame and that the TOS/TNG stuff was enough for me (DS9 was soap opera Trek and VOY was just superfluous and cheap). I’ve since watched all of DS9 and VOY multiple times and I believe my original assessment was way wrong to say the least. I love the fact that there are so many hours upon hours of Star Trek material to say nothing of the novels, comics, etc.
I suppose someone out there must thinking “get a life, its just a tv show.” No apologies.
Still waiting for a good reason. Orci & Kirtzman didn’t do a good job.
Will Damon Lindelof make that big of a difference? I was happy with what we got. I can rejoice in being a ST fan again after B & B slowly ruined ST for me.
47 Jeyl,
Go and watch Fringe. Personally, I think they do a good job with the dialogue in that. But I happen to like their style. If you don’t like the way they write, then you probably won’t like anything else they’ll do, including the next Trek.
It’s all a matter of opinion.
AJ & Shultz,
lol, I posted a few variations of the new timeline Romulan-Vulcan-UFP relations plot ideas on a thread like a day after the movie came out. I’m going to sue you both!! haha.
My favorite involved a split among the Vulcan survivors with one group dealing with the trauma by clinging even more to the Vulcan philosophy and another group who responds by embracing their passions and anger (being more reminiscent of Romulans- perhaps with a touch of Kahn and his peeps). I suppose you could compare it with the Jedi & Sith from Lucas’ franchise. haha.
Another story idea gave the Romulans a certain change of heart. I feel that the common roots of Romulans and Vulcans makes it impossible for the former to not sympathize with the utter genocide brought upon the latter (by rogue Romulans no less). Ultimately the dynamic results in the Romulans emerging not as villains in the alternate reality, but as an interesting race/civilization to be explored. Would be ironic anyway, in the prime timeline Romulus is destroyed which results in them being basically cool in an alternate reality. Still independent, but no more neutral zone, and relationship not marked by tension and hostility. Maybe Spock’s reunification dream materializes in this universe and perhaps many Romulans come to embrace the teachings of Surak, etc. and the Vulcan way of life is reborn on Romulus of all places.
Lots of interesting directions to take for Vulcan-Romulan loving geeks anyway… Back to daydreaming…
I disagree with Abrams’, Orci’s, et al ruling on Roe v Wade.
46 Major Shat Lover
I agree to a point. I will admit that I thought ST09 was a bad idea but was INCREDIBLY impressed by what Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman came up with. I’m a fanfiction writer too, so I do want Trek to continue in some way. I’m a recent convert to loving DS9…I thought I would hate it, but it’s awesome. Your comment about ‘if it sucks, that’s too bad’ nails it on the head. Some Trek episodes ’sucked’, but the series as a whole is very satisfying.
Besides, I change my mind about every 3.9 seconds…about a lot of things. :)
“A lot of what makes die-hard Trekkers really focused on Trek are those details that can sometimes be alienating to people who are not on the inside.”
Nonsense; most of those details alienate many of us on the _inside_ as well. When people start quoting the Technical Manual or whatever, it’s like a quintuple dose of Sominex.
Note that this does not excuse ripping of Khan again. Just saying.
Oh, and I already think Romulans are cool.
Ripping _off,_ even. Sigh.
#50 Nice variant. :)
Dear Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman,
Please put some Andorians in the film! it would be great! Also give some Screen time to Nurse Chapel as a memorial to Majel! Also Klingon’s or Gorn as villians sounds good, also maybe a bit of Harry Mud would be fun!
I love your work and LIve long and Prosper!
#49 – Fringe has some good writing in it. I cannot believe the same people who write for Fringe did Star Trek. Fringe is smart and crafty where Trek was dumb.
If they bring back Shatner,it as to be a brief cameo.Tiberius Kirk maybe…
@ That One Guy
It takes more than dialogue. Also, Fringe is TV, Star Trek is a movie. When you got a TV show, you can spend time developing characters other than the one character who is supposed to be the main focus. When it comes to movies, it’s all about the main character. Unfortunately they made Kirk into an unlikable a**hole and expected me to like him just because he’s Kirk in his young days.
And Orci & Kirtzman? You’re talking about two guys who thought testicles on a robot was a funny idea to the point that it was in the bloody script. Why would I want to hire writers who think like that for Star Trek? And what about the women? They introduce one of Transformers rare female character Arcee and they briefly show her and her sides getting killed off. The only female Transformer in the whole god dang movie. And Star Trek? Uhura is the only female character on board the Enterprise that matters and she doesn’t do anything when on the ship. Making her romantically involved with Spock in the most vaguest way possible does not add relevance.
And another thing I don’t like about these two is that they made the weakest Star Trek movie when it comes to equal and respectable representation of the female characters. What makes this sad is that nobody gives a crap. Kirk gropes Uhura and everyone laughs. That’s not funny. We went from a series that had the male/female crew members wear the same style uniform and actually had strong command positions (Janeway was a freaking Captain!), and now we’re back to female roles being reduced to skirt wearing fan service and useless background roles. While you may bring up that Uhura decoded the Klingon transmission, it still doesn’t change the fact that Kirk had to bring it up in order for it to be of any use. 47 ships destroyed in Klingon space and Orci & Kurtzman decided that Uhura wouldn’t tell anyone besides her room mate? That’s not good writing.
60,
I agree with you on some of those points. Kirk was a bit of a jackass for a while. They’re going to have to do a bit of work with him in order to bring his full character into focus. I feel the next one will be much better simply because everyone’s been brought together, through whatever bizarre circumstances.
As for the female roles, I completely agree.
And for Uhura telling only her roommate about the ships, I’m sure she told the higher-ups about it, too. It probably wasn’t common knowledge throughout the fleet simply because it happened so quickly and wasn’t really Federation business.
The next one WILL be better.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was stoopid and boring with endless and mindless action.
I sure hope the Trek sequel is not like that.
Also,
Transformers is an awful series because of Michael Bay, not because of O/K. The director is the one who tells the writers WHAT to write, then the writers are left to go about their business with the guidelines. Bay is an idiot and doesn’t know the difference between a story and special effects, so his concept of a movie is to put random jokes here and there with terrible actors who can barely deliver their lines.
Shia La-whatever-the-hell is an awful actor. Megan Fox….. not going there…. too much negativity already.
#63 Bay’s not an idiot. He’s just a clever business man. And a really nice guy. Period.
I liked the first Transformers and even Armageddon, but the T:ROTF was stoopid…and boring.
Some good ideas in the film, but it just went on…and on…and on…
You know it’s bad when you’re looking at your watch during an action movie.
Forgot to say — Megan Fox is hot as hell…but the poor girl can’t act. But, on the other hand…in a movie like this, I don’t expect great acting. So…meh…
57- Sounds good to me.
Some Tholians would be cool too.
Definately put in Harry Mudd
#43, Wow new Trek had with inflation at least double the budget of First Contact. I’m wondering what they spent all of that money on in the new movie? I’m guessing the cast and FX took up most of that.
I hope the “Supreme court” can come up with an official size for the Enterprise, there are people at other Trek online forums that are ready to kill each other over the size issue. Please throw your fans a bone, Mr. Orci.
I hate to beat a theme to death- 2 hours every 2-3 years- it better be BIG, it better be GOOD.
I don’t have many good 2-3 years left to go and I absolutely don’t want to waste any 2 hours of it on bad Treks.
#50–BRILLIANT!! Film *that,* JJ!
This movie’s budget can only be compared to TMP’s budget, I think, once you adjust for inflation. Also the studio’s expectations were just as high. Love this movie or hate it, (and I fall in the really like, though not my favorite Trek) at least it was better than TMP… the only Trek film Roddenberry had direct control over!
26. Jeyl – August 9, 2009
I’m still waiting on a reason why these two are right for the job. ST09 didn’t convince me.
47. Jeyl – August 9, 2009
Still waiting for a good reason. Orci & Kirtzman didn’t do a good job.
You have a vendetta going on? Yours is not the only opinion.
#64 – Wasn’t Megan Fox’s audition for Transformers washing Bay’s Ferrari?
#60 – Lighten up!
(`sides, Uhura got far more screen time than most of the other supporting cast, and was instrumental to the story at a couple of key plot points.)
To Mr. Orci and Mr, Kurtzman:
I understand that the Star Trek movie had to reach out to the mass audience in order to revive the franchise. I really do get that, and I am grateful to you both for doing just that.
That said, now that the franchise has been revived, I will be very disillusioned if the sequel also, like the movie that just came out, lacks any message, larger theme, and comment on something in our society. “Stopping Nero” while, exciting, was not a message that is worthy of Roddenberry. Star Trek has never just been about action, or even action with strong characters. It has been about strong characters going through various plots in order to comment on the human condition and on issues in our society.
It was essential to reinvigorate and defend the Star Trek franchise, and you both have done that. But it is also essential to have a franchise worth defending. Otherwise, we just have another typical, if enjoyable, sci-fi movie, and nothing more.
I’m still trying to figure out what purpose the “Supreme Court” carried out in the first film.
Too bad. I was hoping Lindelof would be more heavily involved. He’s an amazing creative talent.
2. lando – August 9, 2009
Supreme Court? Sounds a wee bit arrogant, doesn’t it?
5. John2460 – August 9, 2009
I absolutely hate it when you guys call them the “Supreme Court”
————————————————————————————-
The So-called Supreme Court have always been arrogant just you at past posts on this site.
I can see how some fans can hate when these guys are called the “Supreme Court”. It is a title that they named themselves, not trek fans.
Here is the thing with the JJ trek film. JJ and the So-called Supreme Court have to use tricks like making trek into star wars, viral marketing, subliminal messages (do not say no, before you really look for them. like vmorex or just Vx and so on), hype and so on to make money.
Even with all this….
still some fans and some non-fans hate this film.
http://comedyfilmnerds.com/weinhold_startrek
Still this new film is not and will not be a classic Star Trek Film.
Still this new film will not become a icon like TOS is.
I give JJ’s trek films to right after the 2nd and before the 3rd before people turn on all of JJ’s Trek world.
same thing to allot of films of today. (just type in “the dark knight sucks” into google or look at spider-man 3 or x-men 3 or the matrix 3 and so on)
once the hype for JJ’s trek dies, The So-called Supreme Court will run from Star Trek and move to the newest Hype thing.
The So-called Supreme Court know this already, but the fans seem not to. To The So-called Supreme Court, Star Trek is about money, not the fans.
I think people with get sick of JJ’s Trek B-universe bull-s**t and in time will want A Real Kirk and Spock (from the classic TOS) origin film.
# 74
Spot on!
74:
Star Trek was developed strictly as an action show, a “space western,” and you can find many references from GR about his intention to stick to that format in order to get his messages across.
Also, many seem to be seeking some ‘holy grail’ of a message from the next Trek. Many took for granted the multi-racial/sexual international Bridge crew in Trek09, which in 1966, was quite revolutionary.
What do we want? An allegory for war? Global warming? Nationalized Health Insurance? The fleeing Vulcans as the “trash” of the galaxy? It’s all been done to death by everyone else. I think we need a good story with strong non-priggish values and an epic scale. Keep it left wing, where it’s solidly been for 43 years, but don’t bash it over our heads.
16. cagmar – August 9, 2009
Saith cagmar:
I loved TNG. but I think as a philosophy and analogy for humanity, the way it dealt with things was perfectly acceptable and thoroughly enjoyable.
******************************
TNG represented the sterile, calculated, planned and controlled world of the Technocrats. As for me, Give me Liberty or give me death.
And I mean that literally. In happy coincidence Abrams, Orci & Co would seem to agree.
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
#74 -
I’m amazed when I read opinions like yours. I respect your opinion, and your right to it. But I wonder if we saw the same film?
Did you miss the development of the two main characters, Kirk and Spock? Did you miss the “only you can choose your destiny” theme? Did you miss the Father Figure (George,Pike, Sarek, Spock Prime) and Son (Kirk and Spock) theme? Or the theme that your choices in life determine your destiny (Nero, Spock, Kirk)?
Father/Son/Destiny/Choices. How’s that for a theme Roddenberry would approve of?
For my money, quite a lot of comment on the Human/Vulcan condition in a 2 hour summer blockbuster popcorn movie that made Trek “mainstream” friendly.
^^ We can assume the “Supreme Court” approved or declined any decisions or details within the film.
On another front:
GI:Joe has grossed over $100 million worldwide in its opening weekend. It is one of the best August domestic openers of all time at over $56M.
It’s one of the most popular talked about movies at the box-office. I know many people who are excited to see it. Star Trek is nothing more than a memory for them now.
Paramount would be stupid to end a winning formula now with Transformers 2 approaching a billion worldwide, Variety is already talking about Paramount green-lighting a sequel of GI:Joe based on the strength of its opening weekend, which will likely continue strongly, beating Star Trek at the box office before its over. Maybe not Transformer 2 numbers, but likely Iron Man … If Paramount can make the most money by continuing an action-packed-thrill-ride-Trek, then they will definitely do so.
Is anyone truly surprised that the movie will still pander to a broader audience?
I guess one good question any fan can pose is…
Will they look to ‘The Empire Strikes Back’ or ‘Wrath of Khan’ as the guidelines for a dark and disturbed and emotionally gripping Sequel ? Will they do that ? Or will they go the complete opposite way… perhaps… a Voyage Home type of direction ?
#60: If you watch closely, he wasn’t groping her to feel her up. He was in the middle of a fight and just happened to brace himself on the nearest thing, and that was Uhura’s chest. If it was the bar, no one would have noticed it so much. He sheepishly smiled. Look at that scene again, and you will see that he wasn’t groping her to be sexual. It was a genuine mistake, though like any male who realizes where they’ve landed from a well laid punch, just happens to be a some place pleasant.
GET A GRIP!
Uhura was still portrayed the BEST in her class. AND ONLY THE BEST were allowed on the Enterprise. She may not have been handed the con at that point, but that does not mean she won’t be handed the con later. It depends on her rank. A COMMANDER ranks higher than a Lt. And Chekov was a Commander, by rank. And any good Captain is going to pass off command to the next highest ranking officer. HE OR SHE isn’t going to pass off command to a Lt., if there is a commander above them.
It has nothing to do with whether a WOMAN is getting the shaft. If you have any military background, RANK always supersedes over GENDER, or it should be that way, whether you are a man or a woman. If you are a Commander and you happen to be a woman, your RANK would require you to receive certain privileges because you are a Commander, not because you are a woman.
@2, @5, @7, et al:
See The Inklings (Tolkein), The Lovecraft Circle, Algonquin Round Table. Birds of a feather occasionally name themselves.
In use for years, that is the term for their creative team. The first I heard the term was after the 1st season of LOST. I find it neither arrogant nor sinister.
Whatever, as long as it keeps their creative juices flowing.
@75
To secure the future financially so that studios will pony up the dough for more Trek film and TV.
Mission accomplished!
#80 Not to mention that this was a group of people, especially Kirk and Spock, who at first didn’t want to have a whole lot to do with each other, coming together to form a crew in the face of utter disaster and coming out on top. Feelgood story of the year and a message of unity worthy of Gene Roddenberry. Remember, THAT was the founding ideal behind Star Trek. That in the 23rd Century, humanity has evolved, has united. Look at the bridge crew. An Iowa farmboy, a half-breed Vulcan, a southern technophobic gentleman doctor, an Asian pilot with an affinity for fencing and botany, a Scottish miracle-working engineer, a black woman communications officer with a penchant for singing, and a Russian whiz kid with a speech impediment.
Honestly, discounting the Vulcan, you throw that same bunch together in our time, do you think they’d work together? No, probably not. But in Gene’s vision, they do, they’d overcome their natural differences to become a unit, strong and capable of overcoming anything you can throw at them through ingenuity and skill.
That’s what I saw in the new Star Trek. That’s why I loved it and why I cannot understand why some criticize it for not being “real Star Trek”. Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, and all the rest did a fantastic job of bringing Star Trek back into relevance and back from the death that Berman brought to it. May this new Enterprise soar through the stars, and go boldly where no ONE has gone before.
Yes, I said “no one”. Even Roddenberry acknowledged how sexist “no man” sounded, that’s the reason it was changed for TNG, and that’s as good a reason as any. Plus, Spock’s not a man, is he excluded from that?
85:
Chekov is an Ensign.
Just a question:
Is the new timeline a completely new universe with completely new characters, places and things? Or is it a variant on the original universe where the majority of things are similar? Let’s take a look. Well we still have a Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Checkov and Pike. Check. There still was the Kobayashi Maru and Kirk’s unique solution to it. Check. There is still a U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701. Check. There was a planet Vulcan and Spock’s mother until they got destroyed, but they were there. Check. There’s still a Sarek. Check. So what I don’t understand is, how can anyone say this is a totally different universe and that the familiar things we come to know like the Talosians, Gorn, Tholians, Klingons, Romulans, Trelane, Mudd, Khan, the Horta, Tribbles can’t exist in the universe while all the other things I listed above still do? It would be illogical to assume otherwise.
#84. AJCrane wrote: “And any good Captain is going to pass off command to the next highest ranking officer. HE OR SHE isn’t going to pass off command to a Lt., if there is a commander above them.”
Unless of course you want to promote a cheating cadet to captain. Then you’ll pass over all the higher ranking, more experienced and deserving officers in line for a starship command.
You can’t bring logic into this. Orci & Kurtzman have already gone down the road of this is “fate”, the timeline is trying to correct itself, to justify the endless string of mind-boggling coincidences and unreasonable plot devices which populate Trek. Uhura could be made to do anything using their logic. The writers made a conscious choice to depict her as they did. Maybe it will improve, maybe it won’t. We’ll never know if she was the best because she is dating the guy who makes the assignments, and this Spock has already behaved vastly differently than any Spock we’ve ever known.
Im not as concerned that they change the details in teh new universe only that they be consistent with their own details and pay better attention this time. They want to bring in non fans but require you to read comic books to explain the stuff that doesnt add up in the movie (and those comics were full of holes as well). Just because movies like Transformers 2 and GI Joe bring in millions through imagery and mindless entertainment doesnt mean that we can get bought off as Trek fans and the new trend of form over substance in this years blockbusters doesnt bode well. Lens flares and shakey cam can only cover just so many flaws before we look to see who is behind the curtain.
87,
The basic law of the muli-universe theory is that for every event that occurs, there is an infinite number of universes that are branched off of that single event. An “event” being anything from the subatomic, so we would never know the difference in between universes even if we saw them, or something like a giant ship coming back in time from another universe and kill off your dad.
It’s just a branch off the “original” timeline that we know. The original, prime timeline STILL EXISTS. It has not been wiped out. We just aren’t focusing on it right now.
And no, the timeline can never “correct” itself. Things are already too different. They can eventually go into a “normal”ish kind of a state that we know, but they’ll never be the same.
All in all, it’s a plot device. And we should all be happy for plot devices. Because without them, no movie would ever be interesting. Because reality does NOT have plot devices. If we were to make a movie based on reality, it would be extremely boring. The random coincidences that happen in movies are for FUN and entertainment.
Let’s say that Kirk is marooned on Delta Vega, and instead of Spock Prime rescuing him, he’s eaten alive. Kirk is dead, Spock regroups with the fleet, Earth is destroyed, and that’s the end of the movie.
So plot devices:
Stupid: yes
Necessary: also yes
Could they have been used differently: again, yes
Would there have been other plot devices that you all would whine about just as much: yup
It is 1:30 AM. I have no life.
Good luck you guys! Make it smart, make it fun!
91,
Short, concise, to the point.
A smart man you are.
#59. BOOZBA wrote: “If they bring back Shatner, it has to be a brief cameo.Tiberius Kirk maybe…”
Oh God, I never considered that with Lindelof contributing, this could become a Lost-like flashback-fest … complete with Shatner playing Kirk’s grandfather!
Of course, those flashbacks are some of the best parts of ST:V TFF
I suppose Spock could also mind-meld more with Kirk and share moments with old Kirk as flashbacks also.
@92: Thanks! I figured general good wishes would be more appreciated than a painstakingly detailed battle plan of “why you’re doing it wrong”, by Random Internet Genius #5 million.
@90: It’s almost 2 am for me. And I have work tomorrow. I have less life. ;)
94,
Oh my, yes. There are a good few of those about. But do they sell multi-million dollar movies? Usually, no. The only time that a poster here actually DOES write multi-million dollar movies is when you see the name “boborci” in the name spot.
And just to one-up you simply because I’m tired:
I’m a college student on summer break. And I don’t work till tuesday. My life does not restart until september.
#13 “Did anyone even think of calling First Contact “Frakes-Trek”, was Nemesis “Baird-Trek”, was Deep Space Nine “Berman/Braga/Piller-Trek”?”
Come on, with all due respect, the names Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman have more professional and hollywoodian resonance than Frakes/Braid/Berman.
#30 “I have to disagree with Kurtzman’s assertion that Trek’s ‘details’ alienate outsiders. ”
As a hard-core Trek fan, I agree with Mr. Kurtzman. A lot of my non-trekker friends (who *loved* the new movie), really think that trekkers are somewhat dissociated from reality.
I talked to my girlfriend about ethics and morality in Trek, and she said that, in her opinion, these values were clear and present in ST09.
Then I told her that some fans complained about Kirk letting Nero die instead of bringing him to justice. She smiled, looked at me like I was some kind of freak, and said: “Oh, come on!”
Man, these guys are STILL full of shit.
#80, Brian Kirsch,
I agree with everything you said, actually, and we did see the same movie. And I liked the movie.
I still stand by my point, however. The Star Trek movie did involve father-son themes, and choices we make in life, sure. I have no problem with that, except that it isn’t really what Roddenberry created in Star Trek to make it special. Star Trek was special because Roddenberry was using sci-fi to slip past the network censors in order to make various social commentaries. “The Devil in the Dark,” for example, is one of many episodes about understanding the “enemy’s” point of view, instead of just villifying an enemy. “A Private Little War” was a commentary on the Vietnam War. “Let that Be Your Last Battlefield” was about racism, etc.
Father-son themes, and destiny/choices? That’s straight out of Star Wars stuff, Luke and Darth Vader, where JJ’s heart, and understanding of sci fi, seems to really lie. Star Trek was not only about the individual, but about how we face social issues in an enlightened manner in our future. I hope we see that in the next movie–or, yes, I will reiterate, we will.have merely another entertaining science fiction movie, without the essence of what makes Trek special.
Talking of “plot devices” … howabout “Q”… A plot device such as “Q” could turn reality as we know it upside down and inside out. Bring the new TOS timeline crew into a conflict that needs outside help… errr.. lets see now?… I got it!!…shiny robots that have a single red eye shifting back n’ too… starfleet decimated.. Kirk and crew left to defend Earth with a solitary Enterprise.. Along comes “Q”, he knows just the right crews and ships to help out… a new TNG crew aboard their Enterpise. .. a new Voyager crew dragged across the galaxy .. throw in the DS9’s Defiant, bringing up the rear Archer and the warp 5 Enterprise… and if that aint enough cavalry … maybe “Q” could throw in Battlestar Galactica as it arrives at earth after a generational trip… just in time to save all from the strange, shiny robots with single red eyes shifting from side to side. When the Earth is saved from Cylon extinction “Q” could easily just send everyone back with no memory of what happened and no change to any timeline… no trekkie canon broken and BSG back to their own movie … errr I mean universe.
#60
Completely diasagree with you. I thought that Uhura was a really strong character in the latest film – yeah, she got groped by Kirk, then she gave him a slap! Good for you, lass! I thought this latest film gave Uhura the most screen-time the character ever had and made her out to be a strong, career-led and ambitious woman who did a lot more that just say ‘hailing frequencies open, Captain’. I thought it was Uhura’s finest hour (or two)! In fact, in termsw of writing I thought she nudged herself into the ‘big three’ ahead of Bones.
And as for what Orci and Kurtzman did in Transformers er, well, that’s Transformers, not Trek… It’s a completely different audience, almost a different genre… the writers have a completely different approach when writing these films – I wish people would make the distinction between the two franchises.
I also hate calling this team the Suprem Court.
And each update teels us nothing new. Each time I get the impression they are split between rehashing the good quality stuff or tell an original story.
If they do the former then I will not be a happy Trek fan. I beg them them to do something new and unique to Star Trek.
Is it so much to ask for something unique to Trek
I think a crossover between the prime universe and this new universe would be cool sometime.
Why does Abrams and these writers have so much respect when there are better people than them in Hollywood?
If these movies are to be some sort of trilogy, then the middle chapter is always the more dark and character-driven one. Somebody (or something) will have to be in serious jeopardy at the end of this one so they can be rescued or saved in the final movie. If this is not a trilogy or continuing story, then I would be very surprised.
At the end of the day Paramount want Star Trek to sell to make money so they will ask that Star Trek is more like Star Wars, like Transformers etc so they can get the big bucks.
Paramount will just want JJ and crew to make loads of money for them, so cue big explosions, girls and glitz.
The only thing I would say about the new films is do they know where they are heading with the alternate timeline, will there be some sort of conlcusion at the end of this run of films?
I would still have the last film have Kirk forced in to a decision to either save Alternate Spock or change history in that Vulcan isn’t detroyed, Nero fails and Kirk’s past will be changed to the real Captain Kirk.
Wow, downer day here.
Not every Trek episode was a Very Special Episode. And the message episodes — with a couple of exceptions — weren’t always particularly subtle… nor were they always particularly insightful. A few (Eden, Private Little War) were sort of like the Family Guy just referencing stuff for the sake of doing so. Just my opinion.
As far as the movies go, the Whales-message was pretty after-school-special, Nemesis tried to hammer home a message — and it didn’t work. Even Khan’s themes are a little overwritten and clumsy. And I love the flick.
People dealing with themselves, each other and the crap that happens to them can make for pretty smart stories too. And the best Trek, including Trek 09 (which was stuck with a lot of narrative housekeeping and could have gotten a little deeper into the characters), did that well. And the best Trek also has suspense, action and a few laughs.
91-94 = amen.
I want something new from this movie. Its not exciting if its something old like Khan or Mudd or whatever. As for nitpicking it, its what us Trekkies do, and if they were smart, they’d hire a couple well versed Trekkies to go through the script and pick out where something’s a big no-no and see if its simple to fix. In this movie I found roughly 60 things wrong, ranging from everything about the transporter to Nero’s ear being bitten off and then back again…and then gone. I think the truth is that if they make a good story that everyone likes, Trekkies and non, and get their minor stuff right, everyone’s happy. Not to say I wasnt with the last film, but I just saw so many places where the film could have done better without changing the story.
On the title of supreme court, makes sense to me. Abrams is the new president of Trek and thus gets to appoint that court. Its always been there, just in past generations it had names like Berman, Braga, Piler, and of course Roddenberry. Hopefully these guys wont be the last to hold that title, though.
And for everyone that is so against change and hates everything after TOS, well there are the DVD’s to watch, and these new movies are for those of us that are ok with change in Trek. Its not going back to what it was, nor should it. Classic Trek wouldn’t make it today, at least in my opinion it wouldnt. I just pray they dont do something stupid with this next movie. This new crew needs to be on their own now. I think the chance to have Shatner was missed in the first movie but it wouldnt be right in a later movie. Honestly, I loved seeing Nimoy but I dont think it would work in the next movie. Its like Generations, it was helped along by some of the old cast. Then came First Contact, which rocked Gen’s socks.
Orci and Kurtzman should do a consultation with Christopher Nolan on a story idea before starting the next script.
#11: re: ” they had the chance to kill of Sulu but didn’t…. lame.”
No why should they have killed off Sulu? or any of your characters, for that matter?
oh dear, I’ll check back in a year me thinks.
They can call themselves the United Association of Bowler-Hatted Parakeets if they want.
It doesn’t matter what they’re called, it matters what they do. And they’ll do fine.
#104 “Why does Abrams and these writers have so much respect when there are better people than them in Hollywood?”
There is always someone better, ok. But, at this moment, Abrams & co. are the fresh minds and, like it or not, what they do have a huge success.
#101 “And as for what Orci and Kurtzman did in Transformers er, well, that’s Transformers, not Trek… It’s a completely different audience, almost a different genre”
Yes, it’s kind of crazy how some people bring Transformers as an example of good or bad writing and compare it to Trek. Guys, those are giant robots fighting each other! Did you expect shakespearean drama or deep moral values? I mean, really? I switched off my brain when I went to see Transformers. And I liked it.
Saying a movie about giant robots fighting each other could never be great drama about deep moral values is pretty silly. Orci and Kurtzman could never do that, that’s true, but others could.
110. McDoug: because it would be fresh and new, unexpected, stuff they say they were going for when they rebooted. They said stuff like “We can’t do a normal prequel because we already know everybody survives.” So now I want them to go ahead and kill off some of the main characters. Otherwise their claims, and their so-called “new, fresh, exciting” universe are just a huge bubble of hot air.
It would have been absolutely great if Sulu was incinerated in the platform fight and the redshirt Olsen survived, for example. Stuff like that would have made that movie stand out. Stuff like that would have happened had Ron Moore rebooted it.
#115 “Saying a movie about giant robots fighting each other could never be great drama about deep moral values is pretty silly.”
Let’s see what the guys behind G.I. Joe can do :)
All this ‘making it accessible to a general audience while remaining true to Trek’ is the squaring of the circle. It doesn’t work. Films which succeed with mass audiences are films which appeal to humankind’s lower instincts, featuring one-dimensional problems which can be solved by simple violence, or violence for its own sake, or sex, and nothing else. Star Trek has always been about a little more complex problems (often ethical) and about intelligent peaceful solutions to these problems.
As long as the taste of the general audience is considered by moviemakers to be as primitive as is reflected in current blockbuster movies, forget about Trek being accessible to wider audiences. Doesn’t work. All you can do is produce some arbitrary standardized action flick and slap the name Star Trek on it.
#104: “Why does Abrams and these writers have so much respect when there are better people than them in Hollywood?”
These guys produce bankable product. Simple as that.
It’s the old dilemma of the marketplace: why go to the trouble of grilling a fresh, juicy burger and putting it with fresh veggies on a good kaiser roll when the schmucks of Joe Public are willing to line up with their wallets out for a chewy McDonald’s hockey puck of miserable mystery meat?
Deleted by admin
You know what the next Trek needs?
The return of Mr Arex!
C’mon Bob, make it happen (or rather, “so”).
Seems to me that these guys know more about Star Trek than the purists.
#120 “I hope that all the old crazies on here murder JJ. That would prove once and for all that they truly believe in the values of Star Trek.”
Yes, there is some real hate going on this board. You can feel the blood boiling and the rage mounting. Omg, devil-Abrams, what have you done? You immoral, unethical, McDonaldish money maker? Bring us his head on a silver plate ;)
#123: “Yes, there is some real hate going on this board. You can feel the blood boiling and the rage mounting. ”
Yeah! GRRRR! Grr. gr. [cough, yawn] grr.
I _wish._ A bit of hate (besides zhi, I mean) might wake the place up a bit :)
I *like* the new GI Joe movie, it’s exciting!
Arrrr. (And it’s not “Talk Like A Pirate Day” yet.)
Just let ‘em write the script.
Yes, let the bitterness about the new movie commence!!!!!!!!
Get Jeffrey Combs to play an Andorian in the next movie, he was great as an Anorian on Enterprise.
Well, I’m just hoping that the United Association of Bowler-Hatted Parakeets sees the same two “hanging chads” of TOS that I like to focus on:
#1, Garth. Timeframe is close enough to use him, and with Pike on the Enterprise, perhaps Garth was collecting the fleet at the Laurentian System to head to Axanar to engage the rest of the Klingon fleet.
#2, some cred to 50 above, who longs for Romulans *of the TOS era*: Remember in Balance of Terror, the Commander’s lines with Kirk… “In another time I might have called you friend”? Yikes, that stands out. So, in this altered timeline, make it so.
I don’t see the issue of the guys calling themselves “The Supreme Court.”
Based on the numbers of their first Star Trek film, I would hope that a wise Latino man with the richness of his Star Trek experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male such as Rick Berman who pretty much crushed our lives prior to the film.
Yes, I paraphrased Sotomayor, and yes I’ll still bash the old B&B for their blunders all the way up to a TNG episode on Enterprise.
dom
stop bitchingabout TNG, TNG was a great show and became a success in its own right.
79 – “TNG represented the sterile, calculated, planned and controlled world of the Technocrats. As for me, Give me Liberty or give me death.”
I couldn’t disagree with you more. The world of TNG seems to present the most free world possible, a place you can be whoever you want and do whatever you want. The so-called technocratic/socialistic/planned element of the society is what enables that. What exactly is it that you’d like to do that you wouldn’t be allowed to?
Just like to correct a little fact, Brannon Braga did not work on Nemesis.
Braga co wrote Genrations and First Contact. Berman was producer of Nemesis and Logan wrote script.
133:
TNG actually never gave us a view of life outside of the elite few who are in Starfleet. We heard Picard clumsily describing the lack of need or want on Earth. How would he know? He doesn’t spend time there, and he’s part of the ruling, or controlling, class.
The concept that the world is peachy keen is one the pieces of Trek I choose to ignore. Let it be a much better place, but the blather of a perfect socialist utopia in a Federation based on military power and commerce is ridiculous. You end up with North Korea, not paradise.
Thought “supreme court” was useful term in that it describes more than one person deciding, an interest in precedent (canon), an awareness of previous stewards or “courts”, and the fact that our decisions themselves, while we are here, become canon (or law). Not meant to be self aggrandizing — quite the opposite. Would those who hate the name prefer “Bridge Crew” or “Starfleet Command?’ Or “Menudo?”
132-
agreed
I am tired of the TNG bitching on this site
jt because I prefer the origial series Enterprise and its refit version over the new movie design does not ruin the film for me.
Just because I prefer to have a model of the Enterprise D and E in my collection along with the TOS Enterprise rather than the new movie version does not make me less a fan.
Just because I prefer TWOK, TUC and FC over the new movie does not make me less a fan.
I believe with TNG Roddenberry brought in stuff that he was probably not able to when he did TOS. Picard is very much like the way Pike was in The Cage, a more cerebral captain.
They are two great shows in their own rights. TNG added to the universe.
I am a fan who loves all five shows of Star Trek. I do like the new movie but it ain’t the best one
136:
Bob:
With no new film to bitch about (yet), we have to bitch about something.
“TPTB” is too generic, and “Menudo” only applies if you get kicked out at 18 and replaced.
I stay stick with “Supreme Court.”
I watched “Nemesis” the other day and enjoyed it. Characterizations are right on the money in a flat and derivative story. I kept hoping Ron Perlman would turn red, grab a stogie and start tearing stuff up, but he didn’t.
Bob,
How about Mighty Overlords of Star Trek? To me it symbolizes the complete power you have to change the fate of these characters, and to micromanage the entire universe. No one shall stop you! ;)
All kidding aside, “Supreme Court” is just a phrase, a nickname, an alias, a pseudonym. Data, shut up.
@32
I am a female Star Trek fan and I agree with you. I don’t understand why all the fanboy hate for Uhura and Spock’s relationship. Uhura is a smart, strong, and determined, Spock is brilliant. Why wouldn’t they fancy each other?
@44:
I too noticed the reactions on both Kirk and Scotty’s faces in the Transporter Room scene when Uhura enbraced Spock.
@84:
She is the best in her speciality and she knows it. Even Spock had to acknowlege her qualifications in the scene where the cadets were being assigned to the various ships. She deserves her place on the Enterprise.
@101:
Kirk was behaving like a real dick by chatting Uhura up and then groping her. if a man groped me in a pub like that, he would get his face slapped and then my husband would proceed to kick five colors of crap out of him. Seriously, Uhura is smart, strong and can take care of herself.
I hope the writers can come up with an intelligent and interesting script where the characters and their relationships are explored further. The first movie was basically a set up/get-to-know-you. Please come up with a story that is original and compelling.
Everything I say is entirely my own considered opinion…
Like most religions, Star Trek has its devotees and its fanatics. Fanatics tend to be the most vocal because they are the most angry, dissatisfied and righteous. Their “version” is the only acceptable one, in spite of the fact that they are a minority. Jealousy, envy and “sour grapes” are the background against which they construct their opinions. They can’t enjoy anything because they are too busy being “serious,” and critical. They are obsessed with dissecting things, reading into things, and finding fault, as when they take the humorously given title “Supreme Court” more seriously than it was ever intended. The Star Trek that we saw on the screen was not their Message, and so they must kill the Messengers who brought Trek back to life , and often use cruel and mean-spirited language to “state their case,” as when they make negative comments about writers who have, in fact, had some measure of success with the films they’ve been involved with — including several blockbusters. But for the fanatics, nothing these Messengers have done (or ever will do) is good enough, or up to their subjective standards. Fanatics are annoyed with the fact that others find pleasure and enjoy the things they do not. Therefore, they must constantly find ways to dismiss those who are having a good time. Whereas most people who dislike something move on to something else, fanatics are incapable of moving on. They are stuck with their dissatisfaction and the crappy mood it brings, and they have to verbalize it. And, of course, some fanatics simply enjoying bashing what others find enjoyment in. Since we all proclaim a right to free speech, they can justify saying whatever they want (or can), regardless how thoughtless, inconsiderate or even vicious it comes out. At the same time, they do not assume responsibility for their own opinion. They make statements as if they were stating the absolute, unequivocal truth, without acknowledging that their opinions are ONLY their own. There is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a film and stating, “I didn’t like the movie,” or “I thought this, or that.” What is wrong is making blanket statements like, “The movie sucked,” “the plot was stupid,” and other comments that presume to speak for everyone.
The “Supreme Court” has been hired by, and is supported by Paramount Pictures. They don’t really need anyone’s help, suggestions, or blessings. The fact that Bob Orci continues to hang around here is, as far as I’m concerned, a gift that most of us appreciate and are grateful for. And, like others, I find it annoying and even embarrassing that he occasionally has to read some of the mean-spirited comments that come through here. I’m sure Mr. Orci doesn’t need anyone to defend him, and he’s enough of a class act that he doesn’t bother paying these mean-spirited fanatics any attention. But I’m one of those people who prefers to see thoughtful, considerate discussion, rather than a name-calling free-for-all, and my suggestion is for those un-happy people to simply choose their words more carefully and compassionately, instead of sounding like snotty, arrogant, condescending “experts,” or just head on over to another site. (Of course, I realize I’m living in a Trek-ian fantasy-world if I think anything will change…)
@135 boborci
No sir. Unfortunately, we tend (as Edward Jellico said) to “quibble over minutiae”.
You guys are money. Each time we get another “Supreme Court” complaint, your creative team should ratchet the grandiosity UP, not down.
Current: The Supreme Court
Next offense: The Old Gods
Next offense +1: Next Train to Awesometown
[please insert additional over-the-top suggestions here]
PS: Menudo? Oh dear.
#131. Daoud – August 10, 2009
“1, Garth. Timeframe is close enough to use him, and with Pike on the Enterprise, perhaps Garth was collecting the fleet at the Laurentian System to head to Axanar to engage the rest of the Klingon fleet.”
Stellar idea! No, really. It could tie into the first movie and launch the second.
“2, some cred to 50 above, who longs for Romulans *of the TOS era*: Remember in Balance of Terror, the Commander’s lines with Kirk… “In another time I might have called you friend”? Yikes, that stands out. So, in this altered timeline, make it so.”
Wow, TWO people who agree with me. See, writers? It’s not just me.
#99. Gary Seven wrote: “Star Trek was not only about the individual, but about how we face social issues”
… something this film failed to do on more than one level. I mean Kirk and Spock executed Nero! Then again perhaps this is commentary on how we currently face social issues – since they didn’t get a chance to waterboard him too, we’ll never know.
Father-son, destiny/choices pretty much sums up the themes of all movies, so there’s nothing really unique to Trek here.
But let’s be fair here: Aside from a minor cautionary tale about beneficial technology being used as a weapon, one of the most popular films in the franchise: TWOK wasn’t very Trek-like either under the social commentary heading. The greatest, best final message: “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one”, only comments on the individual’s role in society – something this new movie turns on its head as Kirk and Spock put their ship at risk to blow the hell out of Nero, but then they are young and inexperienced, so … I am not surprised that the movie echoes the self-centered views of modern society, which the most successful films usually do.
If Trek was really about cutting against the grain of society with veiled commentary, then it’s no wonder it was not very popular as entertainment. Nobody wants to go see a movie where they are lectured to, or told their lifestyle or political views are wrong. Keep the themes broad, don’t pin down the consequences of decisions or choices and let the audience read into it whatever they like without contradiction. That way everybody’s happy and nobody feels bad because the film points out the ethical holes in their lives.
122. I may be old, but you’d have no JJ Trek without people like me. As far as the rest of your statement–
Anthony, are you no longer moderating these discussions? If I had written this, I’d be banned.
Questions for Orci–Austin and your uncle
1. Was it your idea to premiere ST in Austin? (Great idea from whoever, though it made me (more) homesick).
2. Did your uncle like the movie?
148 – I think that Anthony has been pretty busy at the convention.
Althought I felt Simon Pegg Was too comedic as Scotty he did have a few scenes I loved.
I loved the scene where he says”Now if the ship was designed with common sense there should be no one in sight!” and then proceeds to beam them into a crowded section of the ship.
I loved this scene but I hope they dont make him comic relief next time.
Star Trek has been the best film I have seen this summer and look forward to getting it on blu ray.
I just don’t think it is the best ever.
BobOrci- I was at the convention in Las Vegas and listened to Nimoy and Shatner on stage. Nimoy was very complimentary to you and the “Supreme Court” for “getting Star Trek”. Bill still hasn’t seen the movie. Leonard was also very clear the new movie resides in another timeline, not the same as the original series. Will there ever be a moment in a future movie that will make it clear in canon that the Prime universe still exists?
#152 – LOL, don’t hold your breath! There is absolutely no need to ever discuss the nature of this universe again and serves no one to clarify it further.
After reading #137, I am convinced that Orci is the master of non-canon retcon.
Star Trek did have its moments of social commentary. The show did take an ironic view of war in its better moments.
1. We must see to it that a social worker is killed. Otherwise, this social worker will found a peace movement in the US which will cause that power to pull out of WWII, hence allowing the Germans to use nukes in a first strike, and create a different world order. The founding of the peace movement is moot.
2. We must force two planets to abrogate a centuries-old agreement to ‘fake’ casualties in a now virtual interstellar war so that their cultures can be preserved. The ‘casualties’ are voluntarily incinerated by their own governments based on computer generated ‘hits’ on the planets. Now, the warring parties must truly destroy themselves or think about a truce.
‘Star Trek’ also did not hesitate to relish a bit of “Cold War” shenanigans. “The Enterprise Incident” makes no moral judgment with regard to Kirk’s methods for stealing the cloaking device, or Spock’s role-play with the Romulan Commander who will now go home in disgrace.
Trek has a good track record on ‘human’ rights, or the right of every living being to life and self-determination. There are some great ones (”Measure of a Man,” “Requiem for Methuselah,” “Devil in the Dark”).
The point is, the message should be in the story, and not tossed at the viewer (which Trek often did, in speeches or debates, or silly ‘terrorist’ debacles). We’re smart enough to “get it.”
#147 “Kirk and Spock executed Nero”
Kirk and Spock have been killing enemies since TOS in the 60’s. It was a sometimes necessary part of their jobs. What’s your point?
152
It would be cool to make it clearer that the two universes still exist, but thend of Countdown confirms the Prime Universe is still intact.
My gripes with the film is not canon since it is a diff universe, I just did not seem to think the design was as good and felt it was dumbed down. However, I did love the opening sequence on the Kelvin.
The movie is great in the way it gets characters right and the nods where great for the fans. I did find the latest movie very thin in the plot department.
Parts of it felt generic for me and other moments captured those TOS moments I loved. Also the film did suffer from coincidences such as Kirk being dumped on the same planet as Spock was dumped onto by Nero, which also happened to be the same planet Scotty was ‘marooned’ on and being able to use beaming technology that is not even developed in the late 24th Century.
Could Scotty have developed this theory after “Relics”? You know that in Best of Both Worlds the Enterprise had to match warp speed with the Borg cube to beam a team over?
It suffered from the contrivances to get the crew into their positions, no cadet jumps to being captain before graduating.
Other than that I thought it was a fun movie
#147 “Kirk and Spock executed Nero”
And didn’t Kirk offer Khan Junior, I mean Nero, the opportunity to surrender. Much like all of the overwrought villains of the franchise he refused.
157:
I think the fact they fired on a sinking ship is kinda crappy.
Just realized:
If Pike had shot the chain holding the drill over Vulcan instead of dropping off the parachuters, the film would have ended there, no?
@143: “She is the best in her speciality and she knows it. Even Spock had to acknowlege her qualifications in the scene where the cadets were being assigned to the various ships.”
Ah, yes. Spock understands that Uhura is the best in her specialty so he assigned her below decks as the boiler room receptionist! Makes perfect sense.
#155. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “Kirk and Spock have been killing enemies since TOS in the 60’s.”
You missed the debate that this post references:
#99. Paulaner wrote: “some fans complained about Kirk letting Nero die instead of bringing him to justice. “
http://trekmovie.com/2009/08/04/trek4kids-how-star-trek-is-playing-with-kids/
In both cases you both rephrase my words. I used the word “execute” which is what Kirk and Spock did. They did NOT merely “kill” the bad guys as part of their jobs, nor did they just “let him die”. They carefully debated exactly what their motives were, neither of which were humanitarian, and then acting as judge, jury and trial, they executed Nero while laughing about it. It is pure Arnold schwarzenegger action-film blood-lust. Trek is above it IMHO.
AJ,
Pretty much. But my reasoning for why they didn’t is because who would honestly fire on something attached to a giant ship that destroyed a fleet in a matter of seconds? They had no idea that they were going to suck the planet into a black hole.
A minor, more covert operation was preferable to blowing the crap out of something and possibly destroying the ship. In reality, this was the worst choice, simply because Vulcan was destroyed.
But in the end, the argument is moot because they could’ve launched the red matter anywhere near Vulcan, and the planet would’ve still been doomed, so they didn’t “have” to drill to the core to obliterate it.
#137 boborci……Menudo??…not sure what’s funnier, the thought of you guys being in a boy band or all of you simmering in a big pot of stew. Either way, the gag works! Thanks for the laugh!
And yeah, stick with Supreme Court, as it DOES effectively and accurately depict the position you guys hold when it comes to Star Trek, as it exists, today.
#161 “They carefully debated exactly what their motives were, neither of which were humanitarian, and then acting as judge, jury and trial, they executed Nero while laughing about it. It is pure Arnold schwarzenegger action-film blood-lust.”
What debate about motives? Kirk offered Nero a chance to live. Spock was honest in responding that he did not enjoy the idea of sparing Nero. But BEFORE they could debate about it, Nero refused help and said he wished to die. Even after killing billions of people, he was given a chance and a choice. The Enterprise then fired upon the Narada, which was necessary in order to prevent Nero from emerging alive in a different time again after going through the black hole. And I missed the part where they “laughed about it” too.
“Trek is above it IMHO.”
In Star Trek VI, Kirk and Sulu could have stopped firing on Chang’s Bird of Prey once it became visible and disabled, couldn’t they? But they blew it to hell. You’re only seeing what you want to see.
#160. Jeyl wrote: “@143: ‘She is the best in her speciality and she knows it. Even Spock had to acknowlege her qualifications’… so he assigned her below decks as the boiler room receptionist!”
This is the obscene beauty of Orci & Kurtzman’s abilities … NOTHING in any of those scenes confirms how good Uhura is. And thanks to Spock & Uhura’s clandestine relationship, no way to know the real reason why Spock actually re-assigned her (afterall this is not your father’s Spock). Uhura can either be seen as a shrewd, rank-climbing power-whore, or a smart, savvy, independent woman – empowered by her short skirt or using her sexuality to manipulate the men around her …
It is sheer, awful beauty is what it is … these guys are freaking geniuses.
#160, 165…
Without Uhura backing Kirk up on the Romulan sneak attack theory, the Enterprise might have been destoryed like the other ships. Pike wasn’t buying Kirk’s story until she stepped in. Soon after that, she was chosen to relieve the Communications Officer because she could speak Romulan and he couldn’t.
Personally, I think this movie made more of an effort to establish Uhura’s competence than TOS did.
#164. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “What debate about motives?”
This was already thoroughly debated at the other link I gave you by better minds than mine and the consensus is that the message was amoral and unethical, or at least poorly executed in the film. Read it. I’ve debated it to my satisfaction there.
#164. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “You’re only seeing what you want to see.”
Ah the standard Trekmovie catch-all defense. And you sir, are only seeing what you want to see. It goes both ways. Besides, we are not talking about sins of the past (I would have to go back and watch TUC to see exactly how it transpired anyway to debate you, since you not only summarized the events of Nero’s destruction for your own bias, but also assumed things about the need for it which are presented nowhere in the movie) – my comment is what I expect from Trek: not what it has given me, but what I hope it will give me.
Yeah I’ve got to admit, I failed to see how this new film empowered any women that were in it. Alot was made by JJ and others about how the women in the film were going to be strong characters. She uses her relationship with Spock to get the assignment she wants and then spends the rest of the film comforting him. And let’s not forgot the bimbo Orion chick that Kirk seduces.
I would’ve loved to see Uhura in a leadership role where she takes control and leads others and is TRULY empowered. Tossing around some attitude and blowing off a guy in a bar is not my idea of empowerment.
125 Paulaner: Did you refer to my #120 by mistake?
#161 “They carefully debated exactly what their motives were, neither of which were humanitarian, and then acting as judge, jury and trial, they executed Nero while laughing about it. It is pure Arnold schwarzenegger action-film blood-lust.”
Well I don’t think they were exactly laughing, but the audience was. It’s the way Kirk operates. He can only take so much. Remember Kruge? He offered his hand, briefly, and was rewarded with an attempt to pull him down into the fiery lava below. It was, at that point , when we get the great line…”I…have had….enough…of YOU!” At which point Kirk promptly stomps his starfleet issue size 10 into the face of Kruge, sending him to his reward. The same with Nero and his band of misfits. Kirk can only take so much….and this is a younger Kirk, no doubt a MUCH less tolerant Kirk. They got what they deserved and I’m glad Jim Kirk was the one dishing it out.
148, 150: Or maybe our discussions here made Anthony surrender… ;-)
#167 … “summarized the events of Nero’s destruction for your own bias”
No, in post #164, I described events exactly as they happened in the film. There was NO “debate” between Kirk and Spock. And certainly no laugh, as you claim. They exchanged a few lines of dialogue, at which point Nero interrupted them, stating that he preferred to die. You are the one showing bias with your comments about things that didn’t occur – blood lust and laughter.
And while it may seem out of character for Spock to even question Kirk’s decision to spare Nero (this is important to remember: he merely asked Kirk why, he did not attempt to override Kirk’s decision), Spock was emotionally compromised. Nero had destroyed his mother and his planet. Something like this would make even Spock’s logic uncertain.
Furthermore, as for the need for Nero’s destruction being “presented nowhere in the movie,” yes it was. By that point in the film, the audience understood that being sucked into a red matter black hole could send you to another time. If Nero had simply drifted through the black hole again, many people would be asking where he wound up.
136 AJ: Which evidence is there in TNG which supports your extreme interpretation?
Is there really one person *offended* by the use of the term supreme court? But it made boborci make a Menudo joke, so I guess it was worth it! :) Maybe if someone can’t handle non-Trek references, then they’d live with “The Arbiters of Successive Trek”?
Okay, so take a page from Inglourious Basterds and call it “The Siouxpream Khordt”. I still say “United Association of Bowler-Hatted Parakeets” from CarlG is an excellent choice!
#146 Glad that you agree with me on the Big Two untouched TOS concepts: (1) Garth and (2) The Commander portrayed by Mark Lenard.
That I’ve never seen boborci mention either one helps me keep my fingers crossed that there’s a good reason I’ve never seen him mention them.
#170 – seriously read the other thread to understand why none of your arguments apply:
http://trekmovie.com/2009/08/04/trek4kids-how-star-trek-is-playing-with-kids/
But I will say this is yet another case of the mastery of Orci & Kurtzman having their cake and eating it too. The fact that the same scene can be seen in two completely different and unwavering points of view only underscores the mastery with which this “Court” execute their craft – they truly are “Supreme”.
The best part is, who knows what they originally intended? I bet these guys have NEVER gotten a speeding ticket …
@166: “Without Uhura backing Kirk up on the Romulan sneak attack theory, the Enterprise might have been destoryed like the other ships.”
Huh? First off, the Enterprise was in no real danger from the Narada when it first entered Vulcan. They had a whole bloody minute before the Narada even open fired on them. And in regards to the debris being a danger? Shields didn’t help in that department.
“Soon after that, she was chosen to relieve the Communications Officer because she could speak Romulan and he couldn’t.”
And that helped out how exactly? You think the Romulans are going to openly discuss what they’re doing on an open frequencie for everyone to hear? Sure, she could understand Romulan language, but guess what? The Romulans spoke perfect english! So the entire reason why she got her bridge post was utterly pointless.
And that’s not even covering how many times other crew members are tasked with handling communications that in no way applies to the freaking communications officer!
- In Balance of Terror, Kirk has to order Uhura to signal all decks for his ship wide briefing on the neutral zone situation. In this movie, Pike just tells the navigations officer Chekov to do all that work just from his console. No communications officer needed.
- After Uhura is at her post, Spock orders Starfleet to be informed on what has transpired at Vulcan. This is a very big deal since an entire fully populated planet was just destroyed, but is it Uhura who handles this task? She is after all manning the communication’s post. No, it’s done by some character off screen.
- After Kirk and Spock have successfully made it back from the Narada, Chekov informs Kirk that the Narada has lost shields and is losing power. Kirk than gives the order to “Hail them now.” Uhura, you are officially the communications officer. You going to take this one? No? Oh, please don’t tell me it’s- “AYE!” GOD DANGIT CHEKOV! You are not the communications officer!
So in reptrospect, you can brag about how Uhura knows her stuff, but that won’t matter if you keep giving her assigned duties to someone else.
#172. – LOL whatever. You didn’t read the other thread did you? It’s not just me, many folks weighed in on exactly how that scene went down and the consensus differs greatly from your summary.
What the audience infers from the screen has nothing to do with what was depicted.
Wow, all this bickering makes me wish I was a Star Wars fan.
I got it! Let’s change it from “The Supreme Court” to “The Jedi Council!” That will certainly ruffle some feathers in their Starfleet costumes and toy phasers.
178-lol
178-heh. lol
#175 … I read it. Stop referring me to another thread just because you can’t defend your misstatements here.
#176 … “Huh? First off, the Enterprise was in no real danger from the Narada when it first entered Vulcan. They had a whole bloody minute before the Narada even open fired on them.”
The fact remains, the Enterprise was the only ship that knew of the Romulan attack. They were the only crew that wasn’t caught totally off guard and destroyed. Uhura was responsible for that. Without her, Kirk would have been removed from the bridge and ignored.
Whether anyone thinks Uhura was “empowered” in this movie or not, this was a better role for the character than Nichelle Nichols ever got. I’m sure Nichelle would’ve loved to have received a script like this.
LOL @ boborci
Menudo! Oh jeez, now if Spockboy is around, he should make a video having the supreme court’s faces pasted on one of the Menudo Boys’ videos.
@181: Whether anyone thinks Uhura was “empowered” in this movie or not, this was a better role for the character than Nichelle Nichols ever got.”
Ya, Nichelle Nichols as Uhura taking command of the Enterprise and rescuing all the male officers including Kirk, Spock and McCoy doesn’t hold a candle to supporting Kirk’s theory.
173:
Holger, the appearances on Earth were rare: SFC, SFA, Picard’s home, etc.
We saw Picard shout out the “paradise” view to those 20th century sleepers when the Romulans show up for the first time in TNG.
My view of North Korea is based on the whole population being brainwashed into thinking they are building an enlightened society by a ruling elite, which usually incorporates the military. Not far from what Picard spews to the stockbroker on the Bridge.
Maybe “Wall-E” is a good cynical example of that society in action. No needs or wants. Everyone does what they want, and gets fat, forgetting what they’ve left behind.
I am sure Earth is a great place to live Star Trek, but it is the capital base of a major military power (”Sector 001″) in a hostile universe of diverse cultures whose ideas of ‘paradise’ probably differ from those of Earth. The only way humans can live in a massive collective like that is if they are managed by a benevolent ruling elite which allocates resources to the people. Been tried, and failed.
#183 … That’s a TAS reference, right? Oh, brother. Yeah, I’m sure Nichelle would have preferred that over being utilized as a main character in one of the films.
@185 “I’m sure Nichelle would have preferred that over being utilized as a main character in one of the films.”
Does make for a sad comparison. Uhura’s role in one half-an-hour Saturday Morning Cartoon episode did more for her character than being a main character in a film for more than two hours.
WOW. You guys get bloody. I think I really do mean guys (some, not all) because the few writers who identified themselves as female were not as “emphatic” in their views. I am a long time female fan of Star Trek and Gene Roddenbury so perhaps I have a unique perspective on the franchise.
First, I loved and adored Star Trek 2009 mostly for the character development and excitement evoked by the special effects and the pacing of the story. Casting could not have been better. It had that Star Trek feel.
I love the whole genre of science fiction for many reasons. One is for the science. Please tell me all of this arose because of the principles of string theory or “brane” theory as I believe it is now called which result in multifple universes. Don’t bring in fantasy, magic or Jar Jar Binks. Of course, the line between magic and science gets more and more blurred every day. Yesterday’s magic is today’s reality because of SCIENCE. The movie brought some of that with it but could have used more.
The science allows us to speculate on the fate of humankind. What’s more awesome than that? Will we ever get off this planet? Are there habitable planets or just an immense hostile void? What happens when our sun goes nova? What about the expanding universe? There are lots of things “out there” to threaten our existence or at least our progress in exerting some sort of mastery of our situation. The universe including our planet is dynamic and we are vulnerable sitting here on one lone planet if we do not continue to “go where no one has gone before.” Besides it looks like fun. Star Trek says that 1) there is a future for mankind and 2) that future is generally positive even though there are a lot of obstacles to surmount.
The other thing science fiction allows us to do is comment on our existing civilization, mores, etc. That was what Roddenbury did so well. I think he actually affected the future of our culture. Star Trek is more than just an exciting, adventurous ride. It affects reality.
I can’t wait for the saga to continue. Make it so.
85,
That stuff you say about everybody on the ship being best of class … how does that jive with the guy doing all the ‘going to kick some rom ass’ stuff in the tv promos? Is HE representative of SF’s best too?
All this sniping because the make believe space people in the fictional future aboard the made-up spaceships don’t act the way you wanted?
I like Trek a lot. But when they make a show that doesn’t entertain me, does it ruin my day? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.
Perspective, my brothers and sisters. Perspective.
#186 … “Uhura’s role in one half-an-hour Saturday Morning Cartoon episode did more for her character than being a main character in a film for more than two hours.”
Same applies to Uhura’s previous six film appearances, right? You can’t blame JJ & co. for being the ones who slighted her. What exactly did all her live action appearances before ST 09 do for her? Like I said, as an actor, Nichelle Nichols would have relished having the role Zoe had in this movie. It sure beat the glorified cameos Uhura was given in some of the TOS movies.
You know what I’d like to see in the next film, come to think of it? A reimagined Janice Rand — tougher, less of a sap. Of course, I’d also like to see a FLYING LEG KICK!!
156.
I accepted everything in the new movie knowing it took place in an alternate universe. Star Trek has done alternate universes before, (Mirror, Mirror) (Yesterday’s Enterprise, etc.) What I don’t get are the haters out there who want to dismiss the Prime universe altogether. Well the sequel won’t be constrained by contrivances to get every crew member into their positions. The ship and crew are pointed towards adventure which will be welcomed. Instead of some fans looking at the Prime universe with hatred, they need to look at it as an opportunity or yet just another tool in the toolbox to be used in future adventures.
Nichelle Nichols’ role in Star Trek was far more important than what her character did in any given episode. The history is well-known.
Zoe’s Uhura combines the character’s feistiness and ambitious self-confidence with a sort of hyper-intelligence (3 dialects of Romulan?) that makes her an asset to the future best crew in the fleet.
I imagine the character was beefed-up a bit when the fil turned out to be a sausage fest. I think it integrates well, though, as more or less a TOS purist, I think she would have fallen for Kirk first.
193. AJ – “I think she would have fallen for Kirk first.”
Yes indeed. While I didn’t mind the Uhura-Spock business in the new film, I always thought the original series buzzed with Uhura-Kirk sexual tension. Nichols and Shatner played their relationship like ex-lovers coming to grips with working together.
Dear Menudo:
You guys are extremely talented, funny, and exciting writers. Your talent is all over the new Star Trek movie. I am urging you however, to do something very courageous. Despite the pressures you will receive from the studio, and despite the success you will get for making the next movie as popular as possible:
Please give us a slightly more message-oriented, social commentary, thinking person’s movie next time around. Mr. Orci,I believe youdo know what makes Star Trek special. You have a fleeting, yet wonderful opportunity to carry Roddenbery’s torch. Make it so!
Dear Bob and Alex,
Please go to new story lines. Do not go back to revisit TOS story lines. To me that is history and in a different time line. This is a alternative time line and everything should be a new adventure. For example, there is a story to tell why the whole fleet was in that other system ( I believe it was called the Orencin System? I do not remember. ) and only the cadets was sent to stop Nero. You should stick with new story lines. You guys are talented and have a very good idea what us fans would like.
Why suddenly all the bashing of the new Star Trek movie. Why? I don’t get it. It was a great movie, why does anyone care about the rest of it. I don’t remember if Gene Rodenberry got any screen credit for anything, he should have. But other then that, what’s the big deal about the rest of this. Just lay off, and let them write another great star trek movie.
Great in your opinion maybe.
#181. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “#175 Stop referring me to another thread just because you can’t defend your misstatements here.
Fine. Let me point out why yours are all misstatements.
1) I don’t believe Kirk killed anyone he didn’t have to. In fact he often went out of his way to avoid killing, even if he was not entirely out of danger. He gambled on winning his opponents over with his rhetoric. That is part of one’s character, not something one arrives at after a youth spent killing bad guys for revenge.
2) The Jellyfish crashed into the ship, exploding and igniting the red matter inside the ship. At the time the Enterprise opened fire on it, the black hole was literally pulling the ship apart from the inside out. Even if the pieces of the ship were pulled through a black hole, Nero and crew would have been completely unprotected and exposed to space, not fully shielded and protected as during the first time they went through, and crushed by the gravitational forces within.
3) There is nothing on screen that indicates the red-matter itself caused the quantum event which led to the splitting off of the universe. I believe Spock explains it was an accident resulting from detonating the red matter inside a dead star gone Supernova – an unusual Supernova at that. There is no gurantee that the red matter would have the same effect in other situation, or indeed even in a similar one. By your logic Vulcan is safe and sound in yet another alternate universe.
4) Time travel would not affect Kirk and crew anyway, they would have only been protecting an as yet unformed alternate branch of their universe.
5) After Nero’s ship is disabled and imploding upon itself, during the “few lines of dialogue” you so casually dismiss, Kirk offers to rescue Nero and his crew. Spock asks why and the first thing Kirk says is because that’s what he thought Spock would want – the logical thing to do to curry political favor with the Romulans. He does not say because it is the right thing to do, or the human thing to do. Spock then smiles and says not this time. Kirk smiles and then …
FREEZE
If this were TOS, that exchange may have happened, but both men would have come to their senses and Kirk would have said something like, “maybe next time” and ordered the transporter room to start beaming over survivors. Instead …
RESUME
Kirk obliges Spock’s base need for revenge, without so much as trying to dissuade him, and then enthusiastically opens fire on the Narada, hastening its destruction. This is not only inhumane, immoral and unethical, not to mention going against the majority of Trek’s history, but it is also foolish. They have no idea what further explosions will do to the formation of the black hole, which appears to hasten its expansion and trap them. And rather than obtaining prisoners to interrogate for knowledge of what they have done, to the Klingons and others for the last 25 years, they would rather execute them all for their crimes, even though some of Nero’s crew may have been innocent? If this had happened in the modern military during a battle in a war, there would be a massive cover-up by the ship that behaved so abominably.
6) We have no idea what Orci and Kurtzman were thinking when they wrote this scene, but it is clear Abrams played this for bravado and laughs based on the theatre’s response. There was no humanity involved in it at all. This is the stuff of Summer blockbuster action films: “get revenge on the bad guy” – not what I expect from Star Trek.
Nevertheless you saw what you wanted to see, inferred other things, and present that here as fact, when nothing could be further from the truth.
197:
I think it was the best Star Trek movie since TWOK, and the fact that it can generate moral debate and healthy discussion is actually a GOOD thing.
I’m quite high on “the Trek” right now, having attended one of the conventions, and I am optimistic about what the writers will come up with for ST 2011. I think, as far as we fans are concerned, all our messages have been received and processed. And if you think about it, Orci and Kurtzman are going through exactly the same debates we are.
The “origin” story gave them an “out” to create something new out of Star Trek, but now they are stuck in their universe, which encompasses all of “Enterprise” and any events which were set in motion before Nero appeared. The goal is to write a real TOS film that will pull in over half a billion, and be worthy of the ‘Star Trek’ brand.
I was pleasantly surprised by how satisfied I was by ST09, so I think the boys will pull another great one out, for sure.
199:
It’s certainly a “180″ from the Kirk we met in “Balance of Terror.”
Taken at face value, it could mean that Quinto’s Spock will evolve into quite a different person than Nimoy’s did. He has been told repeatedly to not suppress his feelings, first by his grieving dad, and then his older self. A tragic story of a once promising young hero consumed by grief and anger….
Oh, crap. He’s Darth Vader. Please, God, no.
#83 –
Sorry, but not so fast there guy!
GI:Joe actually “only” made 54.7M, with a rather large 18% drop from Friday to Saturday. The studio estimates went from 60M to 56M through the weekend, with the lower actual released today. Not typical behavior for a blockbuster. Also, with it’s target audience (males under 25) moving into back-to-school mode, “beating Star Trek at the box office before its over” seems highly unlikely. And with the darkhorse District 9 opening this weekend the chances get even slimmer. I still remember you predicting that Ice Age, Public Enemies, and Bruno(?!) could “give Trek a run for it’s money”
ST09 seems safe at #5 domestically, until the Holiday Season releases, and in the top 10 for the year. Not bad for a dead franchise.
(Sorry to interupt, continue the re-hash of the faults of the movie, once again)
Ice Age: $736m worldwide (Trek at $382m)
Transformers: $819m, worldwide
Harry Potter: $767m worldwide
Foreign take is, for most films, over than 50% of revenue. For Ice Age 3, it is 74.5% according to BOM. For Transformers 2, it’s 52%, and HP, 64.3%.
Trek is trending at around 33% internationally. Lots of work to do.
149. LH – August 10, 2009
I believe the amazing team at Paramount came up with that idea.
My Uncle loved the movie.
#101 –
Cool. I was just reacting to your post which seemed to imply that the film was simply fluff and action, with no “meat”. BTW, racism was clearly portrayed in Spock’s origin scenes at school, and before the Vulcan Council, and with Amanda. Ironically, The Vulcans were portrayed as much more racist than the Humans in the film. Projection, to make a point perhaps?
Cardassians is what we need. Bad ass Spoonheads.
Some Caitians or Kzinti in cameo roles would be awesomeness also
Not enough of the Alien thing going on in ST09 for me.
M’Ress from TAS. Yesssssssssssssssssssssss
Shatner_Fan_Prime: Completely and absolutely RIGHT.
RD: Completely and absolutely WRONG.
Final take on Uhura’s role. She’s assigned to the coms position. The coms position is useless. Why do you think do you think that in TNG and after that we never saw a dedicated coms station again? It was always mixed in with some other station like tactical and navigation. The same thing applies to this Trek when we see more communication related work being done in other positions BESIDES the communications post!
189,
Not that you probably know this, but in one of the first CAGE outlines, it opens with Pike kicking a crewmember off his ship because the guy shot an alien due to its ugliness, which equalled must-be-bad. If you don’t have standards for starship duty, you’d get these kind of assholes. The other poster I responded to seemed to think it was MiB-like bestofthebestofthebest that got onboard this abramenterprise, but just based on the clips I’ve seen, that is NOT the case. The other poster can either idealize this notion of who crews the ship, which is very TNG-like (moronically utopian IMO), or acknowledge these AIN’T perfect people. My take, based on the bits I’ve seen of the abrams, is that this has precious little to do with TOS, period, like if you’d just decided to call STARSHIP TROOPERS by the TREK Moniker and change the name Johnny Rico to Jim Kirk. (or give this KIrk the callsign Maverick, to really point up how they seem to be missing the Kirk character.)
#203 -
I think we all agree that Trek has a large mountain to climb internationally. That wasn’t my point though. For whatever reason, Trek hasn’t caught on globally. Maybe it never will……..
(Here comes RD with his numbers for his beloved TMP….)
BTW – AJ, are you related to RD?
#208. SChaos1701 – and I thank you for your thorough, logical and thoughtful point-by-point rebuttal to my arguments. Of course, how foolish of me – now that I see it so clearly presented, I see how wrong my analysis of the situation is. LOL
#201-
Here’s a thought, using your degree scale. The Kirk we saw in the OS movies was “a 90″ from the OS. The Kirk we see in the new film is”a 90″. The Spock we saw in the OS movies was “a 90″ from the OS. The Spock we see in the new film is “a 90″. Maybe they just got the balance right this time. Hope this makes sense, LOL!
#143: Not all us fanboys hate it. I thought it was the one really worthy story fragment floated in the film, and wish it had gotten some level of development (I assume they’ll pick it up and jog with it, if not actually run with it, in the next two films).
Of course, many of my complaints aren’t very fanboy. I didn’t mind the brewery, liked Keenzer just fine, liked all the casting, don’t care what size the Enterprise is, etc. My complaints are more at the story level.
My only complaint about Uhura is that she’s been made part of a new, replacement Trinity by kicking McCoy out. Had the Trinity been ditched for a … whatever you call that when there’s four of them (”Quadrity?”) with Uhura _added,_ I’d have been fine with that. Heck, I’d think that rocked. Ditching McCoy was not fine (and there is a right proper fanboy complaint).
#147: “Nobody wants to go see a movie where they are lectured to, or told their lifestyle or political views are wrong.”
You’re conflating substance with lecturing; you can have one without the other. And check the box office on Wall-E if you think audiences reject science fiction that (very pointedly) explores the folly of modern man (and insert dozens of other high profile examples; Wall-E is just fresh in the mind).
210
Brian:
No, I do not know RD. We have alternately clashed, and agreed with various aspects of the franchise as hosted here on Trekmovie.
I assume he and I must be similar as being in businesses which count daily/weekly/monthly tallies, and want to make sure Trek09 is hitting the necessary performance indicators at PP to give it a chance for revival.
I don’t fully understand what puts a film in the black vs. the red, and this whole summer there have been many contributors, including the site itself, tracking the film’s performance. It’s because we care, and because we’re used to gauging success or failure on sales to plan (I don’t mean to speak for you, RD, but I assume you look at it similarly).
To your main point, PP seems to be happy with the US performance of ST09, and it will be telling if they do something once the DVD is released internationally, i.e. release toys, or relaunch some of the series on foreign pay channels. Despite the PR, many markets were ignored either due to unfavorable cost/benefit analyses or ignorance (I choose the latter).
211
Why go point by point when everything you wrote is completely wrong. But at least you know enough to realize that. ;)
In TOS, Uhura was part of a 1960’s era ensemble cast. She was, frankly, more of a symbol than a character, for a lot of that time. Not all of the time, but for enough of it. The men were allowed, even expected, to chew the scenery a bit, and her role was to look good and serve the plot to the least extent possible. Make note, I am not defending this practice, it is just the way it was. Nichelle Nichols was a pioneer and she deserves a huge amount of credit for making Uhura the memorable character that she became.
But times have changed. In Trek 2009 the character was elevated to female lead, and deserves the consideration as such. To the writers: too often, women in movies like this are not given the full range of human behaviors or consideration as people in their own right. The new movie was a terrific start, but going forward, more thought needs to be given to female characterization and motivation. Please do not fall into the trap of making Uhura a REACTOR. She needs to be an independent person, with her own motivations, fears and strengths, with these traits completely separate from the fact that she may be in love. In real life, women don’t base their every action on supporting a man, or rushing to his aid at any given moment. I may love my husband but I don’t always think he’s right. And sometimes I have my own problems to deal with.
Probably sitting down with the actress is a good place to start, since she has given the inner life of the character much thought. Good Luck, guys!
215. SChaos1701 wrote: “Why go point by point when everything you wrote is completely wrong.”
Exactly. I’ll let you get over to Memory-Alpha and Wikipedia and update it accordingly.
@178: Why stop there? We can start calling them the “Time Lords of Gallifrey” and tick EVERYONE off. :D
@213: It must be tough, though, to write for such a large ensemble as a Star Trek cast in a way that everyone gets something to do. Maybe each movie should spotlight a different group of characters, or something. *shrug*
@136, 184: “Ruling elite”? “Socialist utopia”? Whaa–?
Were we watching the same show? Cause I’m pretty that’s not what Gene R. was shooting for…
My thoughts are that anything they try is going to mirror SOMETHING in Star Trek. Over 700 episodes were made, for gosh’s sake, everything’s been done!
But let’s hope that they can make a deeper villian than Nero. He was pretty cool, yeah, but more-or-less 2-dimensional.
Still, I’ll be psyched about any sequel coming out in the future. :3
218:
I don’t think GR was shooting for anything except a surface description of life on an idyllic future Earth. If you just glance at the show, and try to wonder how its world works, it calls up all kinds of potential scenarios. It may even be a benevolent form of national socialism which was hinted at as a desirable thing in “Patterns of Force.” He kept it vague to allow the stories to be told without getting bogged down in it.
Let’s go to the shopping mall. Menudo.
For me a big part of the Star Trek thrill is in the gadgets and science (not TNG technobabble) but, yeah, that whole coming up with plausible, imaginative, nifty futuristic technology, ideology etc. — but not dwell on it all too much or get bogged down with explanations…
I LOVED the last film… I was 100% wrong in my fear that ST was going to turn into 90210 in space. I can’t say enough good things about the entire production.
Here are some things I would like to see in the sequel as well as some things I would not want to see.
- No love triangle between Kirk, Spock + Uhura.
- No Khan
- Kirk + Spock vs a very nasty version of the Borg would rock. The Borg were made for the big screen. I would love to see how Kirk handles the Borg as opposed to how Picard dealt with them.
- Give McCoy more to do
- Scotty should not simply be comic relief.
- Bring back Leonard Nimoy (he was the highlight of the film for me)
- BRING BACK WILLIAM SHATNER AS CAPTAIN KIRK.
- Bring in a major name to up the ante. I’m thinking Marlon Brando in Superman or Jack Nicholson in Batman. I want this film to do $300 million at the domestic box office. KEEP THINKING BIG.
- Touch on the remaining Vulcans.
- Throw the audience a curve ball + kill off either Scotty, Sulu, Checkov or Uhura.
- If J.J. doesn’t direct (I hope he does) be sure to bring in a big time director.
- More Bruce Greenwood as Admiral Pike.
- DO NOT KILL OFF LEONARD NIMOY’S VERSION OF SPOCK UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!!!
- I want to see both Kirk (Shatner) prime + Spock (Nimoy) prime walk off into the sunset as heroes. I don’t want my last memory of Kirk prime to be falling off a bridge. I don’t care if this is done in a 30 second bit as the credits roll. Give these two the ending they deserve + give the prime universe a happy + satisfying ending.
” This film would be better if William Shatner was in it”
- Leonard Nimoy
More whine anyone?
I am reminded why I don’t read comments much anymore.
Shatner, Nimoy, Kelley, Doohan and the original actors could miraculously be made young and act again in a Star Trek feature and some of you would still find fault.
Some of you have called the writers and directors liars and worse. Scorn and needless insult are not the “Price of Fame” as some would believe.
Have an opinion, but please don’t assume you know these people, who they are or how they operate.
Judge the work, not the artist
223. VOODOO – August 10, 2009
Good to see you, bud. I don’t agree with all you said, but 90% of it is dead spot on.
X
@223: “Throw the audience a curve ball + kill off either Scotty, Sulu, Checkov or Uhura.”
Ya, there’s a good idea. Kill this group’s sole female character. That’s freaking brilliant. I’m sure that Star Trek as a series had way too much female potential and needs to have it toned down a lot. And I doubt she’d be missed because she can’t do anything now that the communications detail is handled by everyone else BUT the communication’s officer.
You want something different? Who here remembers the first “New Voyages” collection of fanfic, I believe collected by Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath?
There was one great story where the ACTORS on set are actually transported to the ‘real’ Enterprise for a confrontation with the Klingons, and have to deal with it. In ‘Trek’ character.
THAT’S something new ;-)
@221: It could also be that the setup on 23rd century Earth doesn’t even resemble anything that we traditionally think of as political parties. You never know.
@227: I have those books! That story’s funny as hell.
#199…
“Spock asks why and the first thing Kirk says is because that’s what he thought Spock would want – the logical thing to do to curry political favor with the Romulans. He does not say because it is the right thing to do, or the human thing to do.”
Actually, you have that backwards! Kirk’s initial reply is, “It’s logic, Spock.” He then explains that it might lead to “peace” with the Romulans, and THEN, almost as an afterthought, he ends his comments to Spock with, “I thought you’d like that.” Peace is quite a different concept from “currying political favor.” And the desire for peace strikes me as a very human (and Kirk) thing to try for.
Spock replies that he would “not really” like it. Out of character? Perhaps. But not much more than the Spock who wanted to flatten Kirk in This Side of Paradise, or the Spock who strangled Kirk “to death” in Amok Time. Spock was indeed capable of violent emotions, and murdering his mother and billions of others provided sufficient reason for his rage, IMO.
“Kirk obliges Spock’s base need for revenge, without so much as trying to dissuade him”
You’re making it sound like Kirk acted immediately after Spock spoke his mind. Not true. As I already pointed out, Nero interrupted them, REFUSING HELP and saying he wanted to die. At that point, sure, Kirk could have attempted a rescue anyway…but with Nero doing whatever he could to resist rescue/fight back, it could’ve definitely lead to the Enterprise not being able to escape the black hole in time.
Your recall of events is skewed. Otherwise, I suppose you’re also disappointed that TWOK didn’t end with Kirk and Spock saving Khan? It would’ve been possible to do so.
#223 … Always good to see you posting, VOODOO! You and I see eye to eye!
I would say don’t kill off any of the Main Characters! That would just be bad! Also More Klingon’s and more Nurse Chapel and also more Scott y Miracle Working!
230
Dude, there’s not poin debating with people who are so set in their biased, base, and wrong ways. Let’s just say this. He can believe what he wants to believe and we’ll KNOW what we KNOW.
The sequel will be a tough one for sure, but I’d have expected a bit more slack to be cut after the first film. If a lens flared action film with Universe changing scope and a ship with oversized nacelles does well, then be prepared for another one in a similar mold.
I’d like a character driven story with more Uhura, Bones, Sulu and the gang but Kirk and Spock still have some demons in there (I hope) so there’s a good chance we’ll focus on them again.
If we can have a subtle message about the current destruction of our environment or the dangers of abandoning the enlightenment and shunning science, then all to the good. These things can’t be too overt as we still live in times where studios are run by the establishment. Just like in the 60s.
True Supreme Court would include Rick Berman!!!
#234: “These things can’t be too overt as we still live in times where studios are run by the establishment. Just like in the 60s.”
The main difference is, in the 60s, the establishment ran the studio but didn’t write the show ;)
dont forget in TWOK he did ask Uhura to order Khan to surrender.
#237 … No one is forgetting that. The same offer was made to Nero. Kirk told him the Enterprise was “willing to provide assistance.”
The only difference is that had Khan told Kirk to go to hell, Kirk still would have boarded the ship and, if possible, taken Khan prisoner. That guy offered Kruge a hand, although he killed his son, damnit.
@235: What are you smoking? Beam Berman out! http://www.cafepress.com/beyondthetech/1153768
#239 … I fail to see the difference. In both TWOK and ST 09, Kirk was faced with a situation where he had to get his ship out of the vicinity as quickly as possible. And he did so in both instances, without rescuing the bad guy. Also, he offered Nero a chance to be saved by the Enterprise even though Nero had killed his father, planet Vulcan and thousands of Kirk’s Starfleet classmates, damnit.
So much for Pike’s “humanitarian space armada.” If Kirk were a policeman, which he essentially is, he would have no choice but to do everything in his power to rescue Nero and his crew. They are helpless at this point.
Imagine a cop attempting to rescue a mass murderer whose car is about to fall off a cliff. The murderer tries to hasten the fall, so the cop and his partner begin shooting at him with deadly force.
Dramatically, it ends the Nero menace decisively, but in “old school” Trek, Kirk and Spock would most likely have gone to prison.
184 AJ: “The only way humans can live in a massive collective like that is if they are managed by a benevolent ruling elite which allocates resources to the people. Been tried, and failed.”
I really doubt that it’s the *only* way. And after all, the optimistic vision of Trek is exactly that humankind has found ways of fair resource allocation, fair including: without authoritarian rulership. The fact that there are matter replicator in the TNG era is a major factor here, I think. But anyway, it’s a SF show. It doesn’t need to offer detailed workable plans of how to actually realize such a vision – the same as with warp drive. The show just presents the vision as something desirable.
There’s really no evidence in TNG for an elitist rulership. In fact, during the run of all Star Trek installments we have seen several Federation presidents, suggesting democratic elections.
#230. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “but with Nero doing whatever he could to resist rescue/fight back …Your recall of events is skewed. Otherwise, I suppose you’re also disappointed that TWOK didn’t end with Kirk and Spock saving Khan?”
You will recall in TSFS Kluge tells Kirk to kill him, he does not deserve to live. Kirk replies, “fine I’ll kill you later”. Merely because a bad guy asks to be killed doesn’t mean it is the right thing to do. As long as we’re dragging up the past, there’s your precedence for this. My remembrance of events may not be as accurate as yours (only the DVD will clear that up), but skewed? There’s no evidence on screen that Nero could have done a thing to fight back. Not only that, but what fighting back? Press a button and beam as many of the crew aboard before the Enterprise had to clear out. There’s no fighting back. It is a sinking ship! There are survivors. Kirk’s actions are like Nazi sub-commanders who machine-gunned survivors of enemy ships they torpedoed in the water. Saying that taking the time to beam aboard as many survivors as they could would delay them any more than taking the time to blow the hell out of the Narada for no reason whatsoever makes no sense. If anything the Enterprise should have taken a cue from TWOK. Kirk attempted to get Khan to surrender, when he started up the Genesis device. With no way to stop it, they had to get the hell out of there as fast as possible. Unlike ST09 there was no discussion of Khan whatsoever. Spock wasn’t even a part of it, as he was busy selflessly saving the Enterprise. If the end of ST09 had played out anything like that, we would not be debating this. The fact is not only did they make it clear they were taking out their revenge on Nero, played to the delight of audiences, but delaying the escape of the Enterprise in the process – almost to its peril as a result (if not for Scotty). And what do they do then? Promote Kirk to captain.
Don’t want to rescue Nero & crew? Fine. But don’t stand around gloating about exacting your revenge, when you could be escaping or otherwise being humanitarian. Nero was dead already, blowing the Narada up was tantamount to the movie gangster who walks up to his dead victim to empty his entire clip into his head in a quest for vengeful satisfaction.
Guess I must be the only one who does not have bloodlust for Rick Berman.
Anyone else heard this news? He sounds serious.
Nimoy Quits Trek
http://mystartrekscrapbook.blogspot.com/2009/08/leonard-nimoy-quits-star-trek.html
244 RD: It was Maltz, not Kruge, who wanted to be killed and to whom Kirk lied.
But good point!
#247 – nor was it “Kludge” LOL, if I had typed it on my iPhone I could blame it on auto spell … yikes! I’ve never been good with the Klingons.
245. I would have rather seen Berman’s Romulan War Trilogy with Kirk’s great grandfather than this pile of whatever it was.
#245: I have nothing against Berman at all. Of course, I didn’t watch much of the Trek he made, so I have no investment in the matter.
#248: It might have been Kludge in the Mad Magazine version. In fact, if it wasn’t Kludge in the Mad Magazine version, someone at Mad Magazine should be slapped.
244
Too bad your wrong.
Sequel— Klingons, JJ style.
THAT’S what would be appropriate at this point.
#251 says “Too bad your wrong.”
Your inability to punctuate aside, I agree. RD is wrong, because when a gangster pumps a clip into the head of his victim, it’s almost never played for laughs – and ST09 played it as a laugh-and-cheer moment.
Yeah…I saw that after I clicked the say it button. Too bad we can’t edit.
Here is my thoughts on the sequel:
Use NERO! Start the sequel by showing flashbacks. They already filmed a bunch of scenes of him with the Klingons! Might as well get their money’s worth… It could help to explain how the Klingons change from a technological standpoint. It would also help tie the first movie in with the second film. Would be nice to have a perfect trillogy of films ala II-III-IV
#254: Yeah. While I understand the no-edit policy in general, it would be nice to have one of those deals where you can edit your comment sometime in the first 120 seconds or so, just to correct those “Oh my god I spelled it GARN … Kirk didn’t fight a frickin’ GARN” errors.
256
For me….it’s being able to change “teh” back to “the.” Because of the frequency of that typo, it’s become a part of our lexicon. Sadness….
#257: “For me….it’s being able to change “teh” back to “the.” Because of the frequency of that typo, it’s become a part of our lexicon. Sadness….”
DEFINATELY!
(d’oh!)
253:
Nero’s death scene was not “played for laughs.”
Kirk did offer Nero & Co. the chance to be rescued. He then deferred to his new best bud Spock before hearing Nero’s irrational rant. And then, as Nero’s ship sank and disintegrated, the E came in with full phasers to make sure everyone was stone dead.
Implications in the “Star Trek” universe:
1. The Vulcan High Council is deprived of the ability to meet and try those who destroyed its people’s homeworld. That is pretty crappy.
2. Kirk, as a stowaway on the E, who was then promoted to First Officer, and then who coerced its acting Captain to try to kill him so that he could replace him, murders Nero and his remaining crew. This, after he had the chance, on board the Narada to take Nero into custody. The Enterprise was fully capable, during the film’s denouement, of transporting unconcious Romulans aboard for incarceration before trial. This is proven by Kirk’s ease of escape with Pike.
I think, the older, more detail oriented “Trek” would have thought this out, and perhaps Messrs Orci and Kurtzman thought Kirk’s request to save Nero’s crew fulfils the “moral” obligation to observe the law. But it’s not the same as a violation of the Prime Directive. Kirk and Spock actually murdered wanted and untried criminals. If Nero had self-destructed, it would have been different.
I assumed that the Narada was fired on in order to prevent Nero from time traveling again. But apparently enough fans are unconvinced to the point where this is an issue.
Hence, Bob Orci should weigh in.
260:
Assuming the “Jellyfish” has a warp core, I’d assume that Spock set it to explode upon impact, which I think is what the Kelvin did (based on the actual size of the explosion before the film’s credits).
That being the case, it was already proven that 23rd century weaponry had little or no impact on the Narada, so the dramatic shot of the E shooting at it is just that: dramatic. Shooting at a sinking ship with rescuable people on board.
#259 … “The Enterprise was fully capable, during the film’s denouement, of transporting unconcious Romulans aboard for incarceration before trial.”
First, a denouement takes place after a climax. The scenes following the final battle (Kirk’s promotion/two Spocks/Enterprise launch) would have qualified as denouement, but not the battle itself.
Second, I’m still seeing a double standard from some fans. Are you also displeased that Kirk and Spock didn’t beam Khan out of the Reliant before it blew? And was it really necessary for Kirk and Sulu to completely destroy General Chang’s Bird of Prey once it became visible and was damaged? How many Star Trek films before ST 09 ended with the bad guy being ‘brought to trial?’ That’s right – none.
As I said, only Orci can say for sure why the Enterprise fired on the sinking Narada…
#259: “Nero’s death scene was not “played for laughs.”
Then both audiences I saw the film with howled with laughter in error. I’l be sure to pass along your correction to them if I see them at the cinema again. “AJ says you laughed wrong.” I’m sure they’ll take care to be very somber next time, and probably send you thanks for your expert correction of their mistake.
#262. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “The scenes following the final battle would have qualified as denouement, but not the battle itself.”
Perhaps it is a matter of perspective but, I believe the battle was concluded by the time Kirk discussed saving and then opened fire on Nero. In Scotty’s immortal words, he was dead already. Technically speaking, the “climax” of the film was the defeat of Nero, which had already happened and the reason for this debate. The escape of the Enterprise was an “encore”, but part of the downward slope of the narrative away from the defeat of Nero. So technically I think this part of the film qualifies as dénouement, and though debatable is certainly not deserving of a literature lesson.
#262. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “I’m still seeing a double standard from some fans. Are you also displeased that Kirk and Spock didn’t beam Khan out of the Reliant before it blew? And was it really necessary for Kirk and Sulu to completely destroy General Chang’s Bird of Prey once it became visible and was damaged? How many Star Trek films before ST 09 ended with the bad guy being ‘brought to trial?’ That’s right – none.”
I don’t see a double standard. I see a one time offense in this film, that is not repeated in the others. Justifiably killing anyone is a fine moral line that will likely be debated as long as the practice continues. Nevertheless, there are ethical standards by which human beings attempt to conduct themselves, which are voided in this film.
1) TWOK is NOT the same thing. Khan was actively trying to destroy the enterprise. The only thing they were doing was putting as much distance between the Reliant as possible. They never discussed saving Khan, nor even discussed Khan again, and they certainly didn’t blow the Reliant out of the sky to get even.
2) I don’t think you are remembering TUC correctly. Spock & McCoy modified a photon torpedo to target the BOP’s exhaust in order to locate it, once the torpedo impacted it revealed the ship, and without knowing how much damage it had caused, or how long they would have their edge, both ships immediately fired on the revealed target to prevent it from returning fire.
3) There was no bad guy to rescue in TMP or TVH. Kirk repeatedly demonstrated his humanity in TSFS and Maltz quite likely was brought to trial. I don’t believe the bad guy was destroyed in TFF, in fact the Klingons ended up apologizing to Kirk. GEN’s bad guys were both killed actively fighting. FC faced a foe that will never give up … you can’t save a Borg. INS once again dealt with a bad guy who died fighting as did NEM – both trying to use their awful weapons decisively. Did you do ANY research before you wrote that statement?
4) Nero was dead in the water. A sinking ship – doomed to die as he and his ship were ripped apart in a black hole. No threat whatsoever. He and his crew were summarily executed after a short deliberation. Plain and simple.
And anyway, what previous films or episodes did is not the point, it’s what this film chose to do when they could have taken a higher road. Nevertheless, I am seeing a higher standard of perceived ethics in previous Trek, which I have come to expect.
#262. Shatner_Fan_Prime wrote: “only Orci can say for sure why the Enterprise fired on the sinking Narada”
While that may be true, like many other things Orci has said off-screen, they are not canon if we can’t see them in the movie. The casual audience is unlikely to ever hear Orci’s explanation, so it is moot. What is evident on screen is that Kirk & Spock conspire to show no mercy to Nero and essentially kill the survivors of a sinking ship out of revenge with grins on their faces.