Orci & Kurtzman On Star Trek Sequel, Fringe, Cowboys & Aliens & more + Pair Producing Hawaii Five-0 Reboot | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Orci & Kurtzman On Star Trek Sequel, Fringe, Cowboys & Aliens & more + Pair Producing Hawaii Five-0 Reboot October 8, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Fringe,Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

In addition to JJ Abrams (see previous story), writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman were also on hand at the Paramount Home Video press day. The pair took a lot of questions about the Star Trek sequel as well as their other projects, and we have full details on all of it below. Plus there is some late breaking news that the pair are producing a new Hawaii Five-0.



Bob and Alex on Star Trek sequel

Question: For the Star Trek sequel, is it more interesting to you to come up with a brand new adventure for this characters, or to reinterpret and revisit a previous episode or a previous situation? What would be more rewarding for you?

Alex Kurtzman: Every franchise has a different need, so you have to look at them differently, based on whatever the mandate is there. In the case of Transformers it was very important for us to have a sequel idea that stood on its own. You need to be able to not have seen the first movie to appreciate the second one. But, I think for us, it’s always about going back to the sequels that we loved as kids and asking ourselves why we loved them. So, Empire Strikes Back, Superman 2, Aliens, Terminator 2, Star Trek 2. What do all those movies have in common? Well, they’re amazing stories, all on their own. You didn’t have to see the first movie, and there was some incredible, emotional test of character in all of those movies. Superman has to give up his powers for love. The Spock and Kirk relationship being tested by Khan. Ripley finding a daughter. All of those things are such big ideas in and of themselves, and you really can’t tell those stories in
movie one, because movie one is very much about establishing a world.

Bob Orci: How would you classify the first movie? As an original or as a riff on an old story?… We’d want some kind of similar balance with the second one.

Question: Are there any concepts or notions, things you wanted to squeeze into the first Star Trek that you couldn’t, that you would like to revisit for the sequel?

Bob: We had a few characters in early drafts, [Nurse Christine] Chapel, maybe some friends at the Academy. But in terms of big concepts, there is nothing where it was "oh, we are not going to be able to fit that in."

Alex: We kind of threw it all in, in the first one.

Question: Is there anything from Enterprise or Next Generation or Deep Space or elements, like the Borg, Cardassians, Bajorans, anything on the top of your list that you might want to throw in to the next movie?

Bob: I think we’d think about it, just because we do love The Next Generation…I think our instinct would be to first look at The Original Series, before we considered that. But, all that is on the table.

Question: It has been reported that there is an idea of doing the 2 and 3 Star Trek movies back-to-back? Is there any possibility of that?

Alex: It’s very, very important to us to make sure that each movie is good, not “Hey, let’s do as many as possible,” but make sure they’re good. We feel like we’ve inherited this incredible honor and this mantle of Star Trek, and the most important thing is to make sure that we’re protecting that first. So, if the studio wants more than one, great. But, our thinking is going to be very much about the story and whether the story prescribes that there will be more than one. Part of what is great about Star Trek is that it’s a continuing adventure, so you naturally think that there will be many, hopefully, but we only focus on what comes next, and then build off of that. Right now, we’re not thinking specifically about making 2 and 3. It may come up, but it’s not where our heads are at right now.

Question: Recently Bob, you and JJ talked about allegory for the sequel and going back to that Original Series notion doing an allegory. I think you alluded to torture. How are you going to balance the allegory and still keep the positive future. 

Bob: The torture thing was just a for instance. Someone asked, “Modern day issues like torture?,” and we said, “Yeah, sure, modern day issues,” but, we’re not doing a story about Gitmo as  I read on some site that it was going to be about Guantanamo Bay. But, now that we’ve established the characters, we can have a more philosophical allegory, where what’s happening in the future represents our world, like the best versions of it in the ’60’s did, representing women’s rights, racial equality, progressive issues.

Question: And can you give a status update on where you are with the story and the script, etc.

Bob: We’re still just brainstorming, internally and are going to get together soon and bust our riffs out and see what happens, and start putting it together.

Question: So, you haven’t figured out a story yet?

Bob: No.

Question: As fans of The Original Series and mythology, have you given any thought as to how you could incorporate Khan?

Alex: Where we’re starting is, “Okay, where are our characters now? What are interesting complications that we can put in their lives? What feels like an organic emotional place for us to get to? How do we want to test them?” And then, you look at everything and start asking, “Who would be the best foe?”

Bob: There are mental exercises we play. You can’t be a fan of this and not sit around and wonder.

Alex: But, the short answer is that we haven’t landed on anybody yet.

Question: Have you guys decided how much time will have passed between the first Star Trek film and the sequel? Are they still going to be new on the job, or will they have some experience?

Bob: We’re actually debating that.

Alex: We don’t have an answer yet.


Bob and Alex on writing process and other projects

Question: Now that Cowboys and Aliens script is a go, how is that film developing and how is it to work with Jon Favreau?

Alex: It’s the greatest.

Bob: We just started and we’re getting along really well. We’ve sent ourselves back to school and we’re watching Westerns together and analyzing them. We’re just getting into it.

Question: Have you found any good references?

Alex: Oh, yeah.

Bob: We just watched The Searchers last.

Alex: We had a lot of these Westerns in our head, but Jon is an incredible fountain of Western knowledge.

Bob: And, Star Trek was originally pitched as a space Western, anyway, so it was a nice lead up to this, for us.

Alex: I think Jon also comes from a very similar emotional place and, because he’s an actor, he knows what plays and what doesn’t play very quickly. We’re having an unbelievably good time working with him.

Question: What is your involvement with Fringe this season?

Bob: We come in about once a week, and then we’ll oversee two or three episodes during the season, where we work with another writer. We all divvy up overseeing part of the staff, to generate episodes. We all sat around for weeks, early on in this year, to figure out what the overall season would be, and then we check in once or twice a week and oversee a couple episodes.

Question: Does JJ Abrams have the same schedule?

Bob: Yeah. We switch off. He’ll check in and oversee another episode when we’re not around. That way, there’s a constant stream of us consulting and helping the great showrunners that we have, Jeff Pinkner and Joel Wyman.

Alex: The credit really goes to them, honestly. Jeff and Joel are carrying the show right now, in an amazing way. They’re in there seven days a week. They’re there all the time, 24 hours a day.

Question: Do you have an update on the View-Master film

Alex: We’ve read a lot of the wildly cynical response to that. What I’ll say is that some toys should be movies and some toys should not be movies, and I’d like to believe we know the difference between those things. The movies that work, work when there’s a story there that you could take the toy out of, but then, when you put the toy in, it becomes an even more amazing experience, for whatever reason. Brad Kane, who was a writer for us on Fringe, came to us with an amazing idea, that had absolutely nothing to do with View-Master. We loved it and thought it was fantastic.

Bob: But, we said, “It’s missing one thing. I don’t know what that thing could be.”

Alex: And, along came View-Master, and it sounded like the perfect marriage of ideas. But, it’s because we started with a story that felt like it could be told, all on its own, before that came along. So, it’s like, “Bring it on!” If you want to be cynical about View-Master, great ’cause we’re so confidence in where it’s going to end up going that we feel like there’s nowhere to go, but up.

Bob: Spielberg actually told us once that his first draft story of E.T. didn’t have an alien in it. It was a family drama about a kid missing his father, and E.T. was born from that. And, that’s always stuck in our minds. You’ve got to be able to take out the thing.

Question: Because you are involved in so many projects at one time, how do you structure your time?

Bob: Fist of all there are two of us, and that is how we structure our time. And we have kind that we are never breaking the soul of the story at the same time. You can’t do two roadmaps simultaneously.

Alex: Television taught us a lot about muti-tasking. You are breaking a story while you are writing an outline, while you are writing a script, while you shooting a show, while you are posting a show, five episodes all at once. So you learn the discipline of figuring out how to focus on each thing as you go. In our partnership, one of the things we foundearly on, is is that one of the things we really liked is the energy that comes of of doing many things at once. You can step away from a problem and put your brain in something else, and come back half an hour later and have a fresh perspective. The other thing is to let as many voices into the process as possible, you want a sense of checks and balances. You never want to be dictatorial. It is a very open dialog, especial for something like Star Trek or Transformers, there are so many voices in that process, you have to let it in and let it be a part of what you do.

Question: You guys and JJ like surprises in your movies. What surprises you in the movies?

Alex: I was very surprised by District 9. I was surprised by it for a number of reasons. It was not the movie that was marketed, and I thought that was very bold. If I had read that script, I would have said there is no way this is going to work. Where it goes, it is going to be impossible to execute, and yet it was executed so brilliantly and so emotionally and I think that was my studio notes training, because a studio would never have allowed that movie to exist the way that it did. Yet, it became this massive success. I think that those kind of break-outs are truly surprising because they give you hope that you still be doing something different and be doing genre. It was an incredibly bold and great movie. 


Book em’ Dano: Bob and Alex producing Hawaii Five-0 reboot
In late-breaking news, tonight Variety reported that Bob and Alex are going to reboot another classic franchise, this time the 70s cop show Hawaii Five-O for CBS. A script is currently being developed for the pilot by Peter Lenkov (CSI: NY) under Kurtzman and Orci’s supervision, with Lenkov serving as showrunner (if picked up).

More to come
Look for more coverage on the Star Trek home video releases coming November 17th. You can pre-order your copy or copies below.

Title Blu-ray DVD
Star Trek 2009 3-disk set

3-disk set w/ replica

3-disk set w/ badges






1. Rocket Scientist - October 8, 2009

I hope they read JJ’s comment about there being “gift after gift” of connections with the original. Done right, that would really satisfy me!

2. Harry Ballz - October 8, 2009

These guys are still talking about “who would be the best foe”!

Wrong thinking! The villian/foe storyline has been DONE TO DEATH!

Why not have the crew encounter something in space that both threatens and challenges them without it being about an enemy/revenge theme?

3. dmduncan - October 8, 2009

Bob, Alex, I’m in the camp that wants to see a “Kirk begins” story line, which means I would rather see the second movie begin not too long after the first, before Kirk has really had a chance to be tested, when there are doubts about his ability, even among his own crew. The defeat of Nero was a fluke. Kirk is too young to be a Captain. He doesn’t have what it takes. And then he proves to the doubters that he deserves to be where he is by his actions in the second film. In that way you can also answer the objections so many people have made that you guys promoted him to quickly. Rather than run from the criticism, take it head on and show that he’s earned it, that Pike’s faith in him was well .

4. dmduncan - October 8, 2009

Placed. That Pike’s faith in him was well placed. Oopsy.

5. Devon - October 8, 2009

>>Why not have the crew encounter something in space that both threatens and challenges them<<

You mean like a foe?

6. Optimus Prime Despiser - October 8, 2009

In the sequel, please set the film a few years after the first one, where the characters are the experienced crew we love. MAKE IT SO… please.

7. SciFiMetalGirl - October 8, 2009

Make it a love story! Get Carol Marcus in there, and let’s involve Christine Chapel or Number One as well!

8. Harry Ballz - October 8, 2009


No, smartypants, I mean like in The Immunity Syndrome where the crew goes up against an entity in space. Have them go up against something in space that doesn’t WANT to kill them, but WILL kill them just because it exists! Have Kirk rise to the occasion as an untested captain and win over the situation!

9. captain_neill - October 8, 2009

Still toying with Khan I see. I don’t want Khan to be rehashed.

If they redo Khan it will be inferior to Space Seed and TWOK.

Do a story that is unique to Star Trek, not a film that will turn Trek into a Michael Bay style film. That is what I want

10. Sybok's Secret Brother - October 8, 2009

Would love to see Kang, Kor and Koloth…

11. captain_neill - October 8, 2009

The whole cadet to captain thing in the latest movie was so contrived.

12. Smilin Bob - October 8, 2009

Start out the movie with Kirk and Spock playing chess. Throw Gary Mitchell in there somewhere. Gotta have Carol Marcus in there, too, for a romance with JTK. Will she end the movie knocked up? Why not? Kirk leaves her at the end whether she be on a space station or planet, McCoy and Spock at his side. Read the TOS novel Faces of Fire. Good one.
On another note, I can see Paramount demanding a big name actor to get in there to try and increase international sales. Will we see Brad Pitt playing a Klingon? Lol, he’d be funnier than hell as, say, Apollo.

13. Jayb - October 8, 2009

I don’t know if the second movie would be the proper time, but I’d LOVE to see a story with Gary Seven and Roberta Lincoln. Because of his unique position as someone from the future there could be some VERY interesting stories written involving Gary Seven and other characters/races from the original series.

14. Harry Ballz - October 9, 2009

If Paramount insists on casting a big name at least get somebody WHO CAN ACT!

That means NO Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, etc.

15. Lord Ravenwood - October 9, 2009

#11: captain_neill:

I must concur. It was “bulls**t!

The BEST thing that could happen to the franchise now is if JJ and company would just walk away. Let them do their re-boot of “Hawaii 5-0″ and leave “Star Trek” to a competent team of people who KNOW “Star Trek!”
NOT “Star Wars!”

BTW! I recently purchased the Playmates Enterprise toy just to compare it to all the Enterprises before it.

It’s symmetry is ALL WRONG!

I did find a use for it though! I ripped out all it’s guts and lit my “War of the Worlds” Martian war machine with lights! I just disabled the sound board!

Works GREAT!

Best $30 dollars I ever spent!

16. stephen whelan - October 9, 2009

#15 and #11 Well if you didnt like the new film at least you havce the original show to wind your time away. Star Trek was, lets be honest, completely dead…JJ and the crew added some MUCH needed energy into it and what they delivered was the best film this past summer

Kirk was too young to be captain? so what!? Contrived? again so what!? its a film with a guy with pointed ears and green blood…let it go boys, enjoy and go along for the ride.

JJ and the crew…fantastic work…bring on the sequel

17. Spockish - October 9, 2009

How about Kirk and the lead guy in The Green Mile playing a Klingon (a old generation TOS version TOS one have there ships sucked into a black hole and they pop out in klingon space and the klingon comes out as a New style Klingon (ST:TMP) and because Kirk and the Enterprise saved the Warbird from becoming a singularity the Klingon helps get Kirk back to federation space. The trip takes months and when they get back the surviving Vulcans have started to remake a new Vulcan world. And Spock-Prime is now the Vulcan Counsel leader but uses the name of his yet to be and now never born brother.

18. ProperTrekkieUK - October 9, 2009

@ 15 – rolls eyes

19. kubrick - October 9, 2009

The real difference between them and Roddenberry is that these writers are character driven. They will deal with Kirk being inexperienced as captain, Spock rebelling against what Spock Prime said to him, etc, etc.

Roddenberry would take a stand for the future of humanity itself. He had a bold vision, he did not care about personal issues inside the crew; every choice came from the word Future, of what the Society wants to be. Instead of dealing with traumas from the past

We wont have a 5 year mission to explore strange new worlds, but in its place the unbalance of Vulcan destruction, bringing Klingons into war. And as we all already know, war is pointless, it just postpones the Future.

As much we all like Wrath of Khan, it wasn’t Roddenberry choice. His choice was the Motion Picture, where there is no villains to fight, but to understand, to connect with them towards the final conclusion that we and the villain are the same, so we can move on together to new worlds.

These writers have the biggest challenge because this old tune I just wrote was played so many times. Bringing War to Star Trek will have an obvious ending. It needs a third player, one above the war, and it cannot be Q.

20. Valenti - October 9, 2009

15: Tastes like sarcasm, I like. ;)

Anyway, can’t wait to see what they’ll do with the next movie.

21. cugel the clever - October 9, 2009

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is the best western ever made. Both Star Trek and Cowboys and Aliens couldn’t go wrong by borrowing elements of that film.

– a story set within a backdrop of war
– a “good” character (eg. Federation), a “bad” character (eg. Klingon Empire), and ambivalent character (eg. Cardassians or Ferengi or Breen or Gorn or Tholians).
– epic, cross-galaxy scope
– all parties in pursuit of a common “treasure” (eg. “The Chase” TNG episode), sometimes cooperating, sometimes conflicting

22. captain_neill - October 9, 2009

I liked the film, I had a blast watching it

but depite my enjoyment of the film I was not sold on the cadet to captian thing for Kirk.

I am looking forward to the next movie, even people who liked the film have admited that it was a bit silly Kirk going from cadet ot captain.

23. John - October 9, 2009

…and there was NO need for it as well.

24. richpit - October 9, 2009

Yes, we have Roddenberry to thank for Star Trek. He had a great idea that turned into a great show…with the help of a lot of creative people.

He was not a great writer and I don’t believe he is really the “visionary” that everyone seems to so romantically remember him as.

If Roddenberry had his way, which he really did with the first couple seasons of TNG, there would never be any conflict or any violence or anything bad happening to anyone. He was a utopian 60’s hippie. Nothing against his beliefs, but they make for pretty boring TV and movies.

All just my opinion.

25. Admiral_Bumblebee - October 9, 2009

The story should be about two universes colliding (the Prime one and the new one) – maybe because of the events in the first movie.
This way we wouldn’t have the old big-bad-villain-wants-to-destroy-everything-and-gets-killed-in-the-end-story. And this would be a perfect opportunity to bring old Kirk back.
And Prime Kirk and Prime Spock have to “fight” side by side with New Kirk and New Spock to save both universes from destruction.

26. Admiral_BlackCat - October 9, 2009

How to complicate our character’s lives and test them? Very nice approach. I hope by “foe” they are open to not only a “who” but also a “what”. The whale probe was a great test and complication for our characters. I guess as long as the situation created by the “foe” effects all our characters on a personal level, maybe even challenging their core beliefs, that is more important than who the foe actually is. Alot of great Trek comes from our characters being put in perilous situations that don’t always involve a “villian” or “enemy” in the traditional sense.

I think bringing in T’Pring would be a good complication for Spock and Uhura’s relationship, with Sarek forcing Spock to yet again choose between his human and Vulcan side.

27. CarlG - October 9, 2009

@15: “…It’s symmetry is ALL WRONG!”

And my keyboard only types out exclamation points! Oh noes!
THIS IS… wait for it…. A DISASTER!

Seriously, though. Let the new actors stand on their own feet. No holdovers, re-hashes, cameos, alternate universes, etc. You’ve got an entire new, blank-slate universe to play with. Go nuts.

28. Closettrekker - October 9, 2009

#2—“These guys are still talking about “who would be the best foe”!

Wrong thinking! The villian/foe storyline has been DONE TO DEATH!

Why not have the crew encounter something in space that both threatens and challenges them without it being about an enemy/revenge theme?”

I don’t think that means “enemy/revenge theme”.

“Okay, where are our characters now? What are interesting complications that we can put in their lives? What feels like an organic emotional place for us to get to? How do we want to test them?” And then, you look at everything and start asking, “Who would be the best foe?”

As is often the case in Star Trek, a “foe” may turn out to be someone or something which isn’t a “villain” at all. For example, the Whale Probe in TVH certainly isn’t a villain, but at one point, it is considered to be a “foe”. Kirk even mentions the option of destroying it, and only after being reminded that they lack the capability of doing so does he consent to exploring another option.

The Horta is another example which comes quickly to mind.

29. SebiMeyer - October 9, 2009

I am totally cool with Star Trek saying, ok, this is a new universe now where we tell fresh stories. But to then turn around and say, Khan (or other story lines that had been previously covered) is going to be part of our “new and fresh” world, dramatically undercuts what the whole point was: to start fresh.

30. Lando - October 9, 2009

Why are you guys even giving interviews if you have nothing to say?

31. Crusade2267 - October 9, 2009

Nurse Chapel did get a namecheck in the film though…

I hope they give these poeple some experience. Cadet to Captain makes for some very stretched imagination. If they’re in the middle of a 5 year mission, say in year 2.5, it makes it better though.

32. GO - October 9, 2009

#2/Harry Ballz – Hear! Hear!

As captivating as the 1st movie has been, as time goes by I find myself dissatisfied with its plot, which is flat and uncompelling – it’s more like a glorious exercise in fandom than anything else really.

Here’s hoping these guys finally toss their “Transformers” tendencies aside and show some REAL talent for engrossing sci-fi storytelling.

33. Seany-Wan - October 9, 2009

I’ve written it before and if the powers that be visit this website, here is an open letter to the crew behind the Star Trek movies:

I think for the sequel, instead if introducing Kahn, the next film should be like “Batman Begins”, but instead be “Kirk Begins”. The last film dealt with how the crew came together and worked as a unit. I think the next film should be about WHY Kirk should be in the Captain’s chair of the Enterprise. Like Batman Begins, the film should be a journey as to how he becomes the most respected captain in Starfleet. Face it, in the new film, he got his butt handed to him several times and he becoming captain (at first) because he emotionally compromised Spock is not exactly the way some saw history unfolding. I think fans need to see why he deserves to be in the Captain’s chair, specifically, the chair of the Enterprise. We need a true hero’s journey (no, not like Spiderman 2 where he quits, then has a change of conscience) where by the end of the film, he will show that he is competent and a force to be reckoned with (like Bruce Wayne / Batman did in Batman Begins.) Bringing Kahn into the mix so soon would not work. Save it for the third film the way Nolan saved the Joker for a later film. That way, when Kirk is challenged, audiences will feel like Kirk is in over his head, creating great drama the way “The Dark Knight” did.

I think the possibilities of a “Kirk Begins” are endless. The ending could even mimic “Batman Begins” with Kirk and crew on the bridge, basking in the glow of their latest victory, when Uhura says to Kirk “Captain, I am receiving a distress beacon from a ship identifying itself as the SS Botany Bay.”

Kirk just smiles, saying “Let’s look into it!” (Or words to that effect, don’t want to copy Batman word-for-word.)

As for Kahn, I know Javier Bardem is a fan favorite, but I think Antonio Banderas would be better. Banderas and Ricardo Montalbán played family in Spy Kids 3 and I feel that Antonio would bring the right mixture of charm and menace to Kahn. The Kahn fans remember the most is from “The Wrath of Kahn”. The Kahn we should meet is from Space Seed (Or “Kahn Begins”, sorry couldn’t help with that one!). Watching “Space Seed”, we see that Kahn was charming, suave and dangerous, qualities that I feel Antonio Banderas has. It is his banishment to Ceti Alpha V that turns him into the Kahn we know and love.

Any thoughts? Good idea? Bad idea?

34. Exocomp 4 - October 9, 2009

I just hope and wish that the next ST movie doesn’t have a exponentially larger amount of cussing in it compared to the last. I was really turned off by the last Transformers movie having way too much cussing…it was distracting and nearly embarrassing. I think good writers can make an interesting and captivating story without resorting to the lowest human common denominator. Sure, probably 75 percent* or more of this world thinks nothing of cussing, but there is the other 25 percent* that could totally do without.

*(These figures are just a very unscientific estimate. Don’t nail me to the wall if I’m not close on my estimates)

35. Davo67 - October 9, 2009

I loved the movie and am really looking forward to the sequel. However I still found the whole cadet-captain thing too hard to swallow. I agree with #3 that the next film should in some way explore how Kirk, a new inexperienced untested captain, gains the confidence and respect of his crew and Starfleet.

Alternatvely set the new film a few years on but with a weary Kirk, possibily considering resigning. The responsibility of captain so young weighing heavily on his shoulders. Thru the film we would see Kirk grow and become the Captain of the Enterprise that we’re all familar with.

36. Nodar - October 9, 2009

Hey I got an idea…instead of arguing over something that ISN’T EVEN ON PAPER YET…shut up and wait for a draft. If you don’t like the draft, don’t watch the movie. Problem solved!

37. OneBuckFilms - October 9, 2009

30 – They are giving interviews on other projects, and they keep getting asked about Star Trek.

They are simply keeping us updated on their thoughts and the current state of Trek while promoting other projects.

Are they going to say No Comment when someone asks?

38. Spockish - October 9, 2009

You have to remember Khan shows up in the middle of the TOS story line, and he is a geneticly enhanced Uber Alpha Male. Even being a Alpha Male you tend to want to be in charge of every thing. That power balances your Brain chemisty so you feel clam.

Beta Males like to do things but in an orderly mater, they know how all the parts work and try to get them all to fit into a working order.

Gamma Males are your submissive fools that always say whats wrong and beg others not to blame them for it.

Epsilon Males are only looking for fun or pleasure, Who cares if the World ends, lets party til it ends.

I know whom Kirk and Spock are, you can plug the others into what you think and feel are their Male type molds, as for Female there is a few other personality types also, like regenerator of the race or survivor of that races existence.

When creating new story’s, unless you want a dull movie two Alpha Males need to battle. Or you got the Ripley -vs- Alien type where most of the Men are Gamma types and the Beta type is machines and technology.

How about a total story flip, if you had Khan (no mater how much I hate the over use of old ideas) have Khan appear as a Female, you know like the Queen Borg type master of the Genetically enhanced humans of the past. But again that would be kind of reusing old ideas. We need a new idea that’s not been used before. The more New and different the story is the better the odds of newbie viewers and more money to fill their pockets with.

That is why Khan needs to be a past event. Using Khan again is just changing the frame around a painting. And very few care about the frame over the painting. Khan has a good history frame and doing Khan again would only be changing the picture frame around the painting.

The only good a new frame would do is add the paleness of repeated ideas, that’s unless the frame can convert a 15th century masterpiece into a holographic 3D window into that universe. And you need the tech toy before you make the idea.

39. falcon - October 9, 2009

Why can’t the story be about personal growth? Why can’t we see the various characters coming into their roles, and expressing the same doubts and fears everyone feels when thrust into a new situation?

Oh, right…because then you couldn’t blow stuff up. :-)

I don’t like the alt-Kirk and alt-Spock fighting alongside the prime-Kirk and prime-Spock to save both universes, because it smacks of “Crisis on Infinite Earths.” In fact, keep the prime characters out of it completely. The alts own the universe now, let them play in it.

40. OneBuckFilms - October 9, 2009

Orci and Kurtzman – The Franchise Writers :)

– Transformers
– Star Trek
– Hawaii Five-O
– ViewMaster
– The Legend of Zorro
– Mission: Impossible III

I like what they’ve done on those I’ve seen.

41. G - October 9, 2009

I swear to God, if I hear those 2 guys use the word “organic” ONE more time in an interview, I’m gonna puke. They really need to buy a thesaurus.

42. Rick Carthew - October 9, 2009

Star Trek sequel-

To: Mr. Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof
As a fan of the Star Trek franchise since 1966; having watched every incarnation of Trek on television and all of the films (and read several of the highly regarded Trek books as well). – And, following the release of Star Trek, you have all stated you would welcome and had hoped for fan feed back… I offer my following comments, for your consideration, regarding possible script elements for the highly anticipated sequel(s).

 Reconsider formulating the arc… with the “Main Threads” established in your film, merged into the next two films creating a Trilogy. (As set-up for the forth film beginning the new 5 year mission).

Thread – The destruction of Vulcan has caused an immense power-vacuum within the Federation. Not only has Earth lost it most powerful allies within the Federation… Earth /Star Fleet Command, has also lost all the natural resources and advanced technologies provided by Vulcan. This plot element alone is ripe with opportunity for you to exploit. This power-vacuum is quickly ceased and filled by the Andorians. One of their many demands, outlined at the summit at UFP Council, Paris, requires a command rank Andorian to stand on the Bridge of all Federation Star Ships. i.e. [As other fans have suggested – the addition of a new strong (sexy) female lead character to the Enterprise bridge; to be the new in-house antagonist to play off our protagonist Kirk and to be a true rival to Spock, would allow for continued conflict on the bridge and greater exploration of all our human emotions.] > Lieutenant Commander “__?__ ”, a Andorian / Human hybrid > https://market.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1648565&member > graduated second in her class to Spock from Starfleet Academy – current posting, first officer aboard the Andorian Federation Flag Ship – but she has been obsessed with a command post on the Enterprise since her construction began.
{Possible Canon – This new character could be the great grand daughter of Commander/ General Thy’lek Shran- http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Thy%27lek_Shran the grand child of his daughter Talla Shran— and her human Star Fleet officer husband?}

As just one emample…

43. G - October 9, 2009

One key thing I’d like to see in the sequel (it’s a ‘must’, really) is the “triangle” between Kirk, Spock and McCoy. That was essential in the original series, and they definitely need to build on that now. And, Spock and McCoy definitely need one of their private one-on-one “humanity/emotion” debate sessions (arguments) that Kelley and Nimoy always did.. McCoy pushing and challenging Spock.

Some more general things I’d like to see..

– an “old style” staff meeting at the Briefing Room table, like we used to see all the time, perhaps with a classic “Kirk speech” to rally the troops.

– tighter uniform shirts (they don’t have to be “skin tight” like the old TV show, but I did feel like the were a bit TOO loose fitting in the movie.. too informal, they looked too much like pajamas, the neckline hung too much off the black undershirts)

– Engineering needs to “blend” better with the rest of the ship. I’m not opposed to all the pipes and the industrial look, but it looked too much like a cross between Titanic, and a brewery. Just blend it better, with some more recognizable “Engineering station” control panels added in there. The pipes dominated too much of the visuals in there.

44. Gigastazio - October 9, 2009

I think the opening scene to the new Hawaii Five-O film should be the remains of the Narada emerging from a portal and falling to Earth, completely destroying Maui.

45. SpocksinnerConflict - October 9, 2009

Question: As fans of The Original Series and mythology, have you given any thought as to how you could incorporate Khan?

-If Khan shows up i’m blaming Pascale.

He keeps bringing it up apropos of nothing .

“hey, speaking of star trek…what about Khan?”

46. Steve - October 9, 2009

#2 you hit the nail on the head! We don’t need a “bad guy” who is out for revenge. Let them be pitted against a Nomad, Doomsday Machine, or something like the entity in Star Trek IV (except a bad one).

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don’t turn off half of your potential audience by doing some lame alegory that so many people keep talking about. People want to have fun at the movies, not be preached to! If you have a political allegory you can count on half of your audience being turned off by it and therefore, half of the box office receipts.

47. DaveK69 - October 9, 2009

To all those who have negative reviews of what has been done by these guys with Star Trek and what’s to come….. Understand that you are all a far outweighed minority of the opinion of the last movie. Believe me, your arguments will carry no weight and will have no input as to what comes next. In every poll on every website you’re looking at about a 90% ratio of those that thought this new movie was fantastic. That is what the studios and writers and producers look at (and the box office of course).

The reason you go back and take the best of what has come before is because there have been over 700 hours of Star Trek produced and pretty much everything has been done. The movie still has to appeal to all. I don’t think doing a story about torture is the greatest thing in the world to promote in a sci-fi fantasy film. Nor should there be some really in depth love story. It’s about a foe that serves the story in such a way as to make all the characters have some sacrifice in what’s going on.

48. SpocksinnerConflict - October 9, 2009

Most people seem pro movie on this site.

On IMDB though, there seems to be a concentrated effort to write and post multiple negative reviews.

49. SpocksinnerConflict - October 9, 2009

Taste of Armageddon.

We’re getting closer and closer to fighting our own wars that way so…

50. Kathryn Janeway - October 9, 2009

I absolutely LOVED Hawaii Five-O when I was a kid and if anyone can reboot the series successfully, it’s these two guys. I have complete faith in them. :)

51. SpocksinnerConflict - October 9, 2009

Does Starfleet use drones to bomb other planets?

52. S. John Ross - October 9, 2009

On the very first question: Bob’s counter-question was legit but then ignored … leaving me to wonder if this was some kind of email Q&A, rather than a live FTF/telephone/chat/whatever interview. Kurtzman’s answer was downright creepy and icky, corporate-corporate-business-blah-blah-canned-emotional-beats-blah-blah-product-blah. Blah.

Actually, Alex just keeps on saying creepy things. Yikes. “And then, you look at everything and start asking, “Who would be the best foe?”” Holy crapcakes.

His comments about District 9 highlight the amazingly tiny box he has to work inside, I guess, so I suppose I should feel more sympathy, but … geeeeezus. Really. Just … wow.

53. AndrewW - October 9, 2009

@52. You keep saying creepy. I don’t think that word means what you think it means. I saw nothing wrong with his responses. Also, District 9 surprised a lot of people.

I kind of hope the next movie is more TUC than WOK. I’d like some more moments of fun/poignant character interaction instead of rapid-fire action-to-action.

54. Closettrekker - October 9, 2009

#48—-“Most people seem pro movie on this site.

On IMDB though, there seems to be a concentrated effort to write and post multiple negative reviews.”

People who take the time to post such reviews (negative or otherwise) represent only a tiny minority of the general movie-going audience.

Even at IMDB, ST09 has an approval rating of 83% among those who took time to rate it, and that’s probably about the same rating it gets among TM readers.

You cannot guage its success among audience members by simply attempting to count how many positive and negative reviews are posted online, as the overwhelming majority of viewers won’t even take the time to do so.

If a “Star Trek” film does $258 million in domestic gross—-people liked it. Period. And now that the proverbial ice has been somewhat broken with the stigma attached to the franchise in the past, the sky is basically the limit for what its sequel might accomplish financially.

55. Dr. What - October 9, 2009

I have the perfect ending for movie II… sets up a personal vendetta story for movie III.

The Enterprise has taken a battering at the hand of , unable to go to warp, a device will soon detonate that will consume the E along with much of the local system.

Kirk is desperately giving orders to try anything, but the mains are offline.

Spock, hearing the reports, quietly leaves his station without the captains notice.

The view shifts to other scenes: Uhura trying to contact star fleet, Checkov trying to pronounce the letter V, McCoy being a doctor, not an engineer. Kirk being captain.

Suddenly, the mains are back online, and Scotty brogues, “Capt’n, the mains are back, but you better get down here.” Kirk turns and realizes that Spock is gone.

“Sulu, best speed out of here. You have the conn”, Kirk exclaims.

He runs, slides down ladders and ultimately arrives in engineering to find Scotty and McCoy standing a looking at a small antechamber filled with smoke. Someone is in there. “It’s Spock, Cap’n. I told ‘im not to go in, but he dinna pay me any mind. You canna’ go in there, sir. You’ll flood the whole compartment.”

“I’m sorry, Jim, there no way he could survive that.”

Reaching for the comm panel, Kirk shouts, “Spock!”

A raspy voice replies, “Yes, Captain. You know I never took my Kobayashi Maru test. What do you think of my solution?”


“It is for the best. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. I am, and ever shall be… your friend.”

(A person crawls toward the glass barrier… It’s Spock Prime.)

“Live long … and prosper.”

A moment later, young Spock comes from behind one of the engine components. “He disabled me, then joined his Katra to mine. I must get it to the Vulcan colony…”

What do you think?

56. Closettrekker - October 9, 2009

#53—“I kind of hope the next movie is more TUC than WOK. I’d like some more moments of fun/poignant character interaction instead of rapid-fire action-to-action.”

It’s funny, because I certainly don’t think of “rapid-fire action-to-action” when I think of TWOK. The strength of TWOK was always, IMO, the character interaction.

ST09 certainly had more action, but I think alot of people overlook the fact that the original films featured actors quite a bit older than they were when they did the series—-which was full of action!

Personally, I have no doubt that if Shatner and company would have been 15 years or so younger, the original films would have featured more action too.

57. S. John Ross - October 9, 2009

#53: “You keep saying creepy. I don’t think that word means what you think it means. I saw nothing wrong with his responses.”

You are correct. I was not aware that the definition of “creepy” is “something that AndrewW sees something wrong with.” I’ll pencil your correction into my dictionaries immediately.

“Also, District 9 surprised a lot of people.”

This may come as a terrible shock, but his _surprise_ wasn’t what my post was referring to.

#54: “Even at IMDB, ST09 has an approval rating of 83% among those who took time to rate it, and that’s probably about the same rating it gets among TM readers.”

A further point to consider is that people like me, who liked the film in general and gave it respectable ratings (I think I rated it 7/10 or 8/10 on IMDB) are sometimes the ones posting criticisms, that some of the more … fannish … fans choose to interpret as “negative” reviews.

58. AndrewW - October 9, 2009

@56: I should’ve been clearer, ST09 certainly had more action than any other TOS film. WOK –> TUC was the only way that I figured could compare to the change of pace I’m looking for.

I also want to see Lindelof talking more about his ideas for the film coming up. I think he could really help bring the writing up a notch or two.

59. AndrewW - October 9, 2009

@57: I was remarking more about the fact that your use of the word creepy means nothing in the context of your post. You’re saying a lot without actually saying anything.

60. RD - October 9, 2009

43. G wrote: “One key thing I’d like to see in the sequel (it’s a ‘must’, really) is the “triangle” between Kirk, Spock and McCoy.”

Uhura has replaced McCoy as the third point in the triangle. She’s even marketed in place of him, despite Urban being the bigger name. Better get used to it now.

I fully expect to see a deeper exploration of Spock and Uhura’s relationship, especially some explicit sex between them (well as much as PG-13 will allow), and possibly a story that centers around Uhura being put in peril so that Spock must decide between saving his one true love or “the good of the many”. Sort of an Edith Keeler story – the most popular episode in all of the TOS franchise.


61. S. John Ross - October 9, 2009

#59: “your use of the word creepy means nothing in the context of your post.”

It means his comments creeped me the f**k out. I’m sorry if that was unclear, and am happy to have clarified it for you.

62. RD - October 9, 2009

#52. S. John Ross wrote: “Actually, Alex just keeps on saying creepy things. Yikes…. Holy crapcakes.”

Couldn’t agree more. On the one hand he says:

“Bring it on!” If you want to be cynical about View-Master, great ’cause we’re so confidence in where it’s going to end up going that we feel like there’s nowhere to go, but up.

But then he says:

If I had read that script, I would have said there is no way this is going to work. Where it goes, it is going to be impossible to execute, … I think that was my studio notes training, because a studio would never have allowed that movie to exist the way that it did.

Sure hope he can get over that “studio notes” mentality in his own writing, because it suggests to me he would have never written a movie like “District 9″.

63. Rusty0918 - October 9, 2009

Ah please no Christine Chapel. She was a wuss of a character. My favorite appearance of her hands down was TMP, when she actually got her act straight and became a full MD than some wussy nurse.

And no Janice Rand either.

If you put another female character in, I suggest (as mentioned in previous posts) that you put her in charge of security, or kill off one of the other crewmembers and replace him with her. Make her a lieutenant commander (or higher), DON’T have her wear one of those minidresses (you can keep Uhura and some of your background women in ’em), and have her be someone who is not gonna take any womanizing crap from Kirk.

As with Khan, it depends on how he’s used. I’d prefer not…

64. zan - October 9, 2009

I say Klingons, as another poster said Kor, koloth, or kang – or all three! We havent had a klingon enemy as the primary villain since star trek 3 (well I guess 6 too w/ chang but with 6 being a mystery type of movie it he didnt have the same effect as khan, kruge or others like soran who is a personal favorite of mine)

People want to have some TOS so bring on the Klingons! Lets see what Kirk did to the Klingons to make them hate him so much!

65. S. John Ross - October 9, 2009

#62: “Sure hope he can get over that “studio notes” mentality in his own writing”

Exactly, yeah.

66. Boborci - October 9, 2009

You opinions are genuinely and duly noted.

67. dmduncan - October 9, 2009

@36: Kirk’s quick promotion is still a question mark in my mind.

I mean, I do understand it. Bob and Alex covered the bases and provided the logic for it to happen: In the Hella Bar scene Pike tells Kirk he ought to join Starfleet because he (Pike) thinks Starfleet has lost Kirk’s “leap without looking” attitude, an attitude we may infer Pike himself has some of.

An inference which is supported by Pike’s decision to promote Kirk to first officer under Spock. Pike is taking a risk by doing that, but then he has Kirk to thank completely for realizing first that they were heading into a trap. So Pike is himself practicing some of that “leap without looking” decision making he admires about Kirk.

So when Kirk manipulates Spock—a classic Kirk technique which he uses time and again throughout TOS and the movies following, Kirk automatically obtains a field promotion to Captain as next in command.

And since his leadership literally saved the Earth from destruction—it would have been destroyed, remember, if Spock had remained in command and went to the Laurentian system—it is less incredible to see him officially promoted than it otherwise would have been.

But that said, there ought to still be questions about Kirk’s leadership ability. There should be resentment by more senior officers, there should be serious doubts that he can handle the job. There should be widespread opinion that the defeat of Nero was a fluke which he will not be able to perform again, EVEN among his own crew.

And rather than avoid questions about Kirk’s leadership capacity, why not make that one of the themes of the next movie? By doing so, by showing that Kirk is a prodigy of leadership and strategy, we not only quell the doubts of the naysayers within the movie, but we definitively answer the objections that he was too quickly promoted by fans outside the movie.

And you could establish with a line of dialogue that one of the reasons he got the promotion was because Pike lobbied fiercely for Kirk behind the scenes. You can hint, if not outright declare, that a lot more went into the decision to make him Captain of the Enterprise than we saw at the end of ST.09, which I think is needed, and which won’t take a lot of time to express.

But I think it’s important to see Kirk come into his own, to see him earn the respect and faith of those around him as being someone out of the ordinary, because in TOS we know that his crew is very loyal to him.

Where does that loyalty come from? How did he earn it? We need to see that happen.

68. Captain Dunsel - October 9, 2009

Hawaii Five-O? I’ll watch, as long as you promise me one thing: Wo-Fat WINS! (Gawd, how I hated Steve McGarrett!)

69. RD - October 9, 2009

#68. Captain Dunsel wrote: “Gawd, how I hated Steve McGarrett!”

Good thing Jack Lord turned down Gene Roddenberry when he was Roddenberry’s first choice to replace Pike as Capt. Kirk.

70. dmduncan - October 9, 2009

“Bob: We just started and we’re getting along really well. We’ve sent ourselves back to school and we’re watching Westerns together and analyzing them. We’re just getting into it.”

Re Cowboys and Aliens, a special request: Please don’t just watch old Westerns and get the cowboys right. Get the Indians right too.

If you need a Hollywood technical adviser on Indians, Larry Sellers won’t be beat. He’s also a Heyoka.

71. ROBERT - October 9, 2009


72. stephen whelan - October 9, 2009

why not start the movie with khan…first 5/10 minutes of new film to be funked up ending (with added lens flares) of space seed….this makes the pro-khan camp happy…move onto villian of the week who unleashes some sort of thing (ie the whale probe) onto galaxy…hey presto you’ve covered all your marks and everyone is happy…oh wait…internet fans…no one will be happy…back to the drawing board

73. Spockish - October 9, 2009

#55) Dr. What, all your missing is Kirk screening Spock instead of Khan and the Genesis Machine.

All your doing is changing the frame around the painting. And I do not think Lenard only has a few years left, but age ages people, even if Vulcan’s live on average 2.3 times as long humans. Thats based on humans at 120-140 and Vulcan’s at 260-290 years.

I still like the idea of the New Kirk and Spock Prime’s mind meld giving the new Kirk subtitle data/hints on what can happen in the next 150 years. This power can be used to give Kirk the powers his public image of him portrays him as. And the only valid why this gift should be used is in those Only GOD can save us now, but Kirk saves them making him a Demi-GOD like he gets refrenced as in TNG/DSN/VOY and the TNG based movies.

74. Thorny - October 9, 2009

I’d prefer to see a movie with a non-standard villain, too. Doomsday Machine, Cloud Entity from “Obsession”, giant amoeba from “Immunity Syndrome”, something along those lines. Something that really says “science fiction” and not just another insane enemy out to get Kirk/Spock/McCoy on a flimsy excuse.

But if we must have a human-like villain, make it Kor.

75. Captain Dunsel - October 9, 2009

#69 RD “Good thing Jack Lord turned down Gene Roddenberry …”

Amen to *that*!

76. VeratheGun - October 9, 2009

The hard work of setting up the next movie has been done.

The only “organic” path to take is the one that explores the aftermath of the events of the first film. Shoot, I could sit down here and pound out a two page treatment based on intergalactic war, Vulcan sex and torture in a couple hours, flat.

The possibilities are endless: Genesis device, Klingons, Khan. Aliens, mysterious sentient clouds, dilithium crystal crisis. Prime universe, slavery, green sex goddesses.

–Did Kirk earn that promotion or was it handed to him? Nepotism vs inate abillity. I don’t believe in manifest destiny or primogentiure, and there must be some others in Starfleet who don’t, either.

–Spock is still going to be confronted with his dual nature, as his relationship with Uhura progresses. You know this affair is doomed. The only question is: how will it end? Delicious. Not to mention the whole Vulcan situation.

–Uhura needs more fleshing out. She has been elevated to female lead in the series and should be treated as such. What is her challenge–and it must be completely separate from her relationship with Spock. Women do think about things other than their love lives, guys. You know who she needs a scene with: Sarek.

McCoy–His greatest strength is his compassion and concern with the human condition. One of my favorite TOS episodes is THE EMPATH. McCoy gets a chance to shine, when he chooses to sacrifice himself for his friends. Hint. hint.

As far as sci-fi Westerns, ahem. The late, great FIREFLY did it the best. Hence my moniker. Check it out, boborci.

77. VeratheGun - October 9, 2009

And in the spirit of today’s rather unexpected events, how about a theme of diplomacy? After all, that’s supposed to be Starfleet’s true purpose.

Kirk and Co are sent on a diplomatic mission at some podunk end of the universe and it turns out there’s more to the situation than meets the eye.

See? Easy.

78. Chingatchkook - October 9, 2009

I often wonder why there is such a backlash against a second coming of Khan. Orci and Kurtzman have demonstrated in movie after movie that they have the ability to tell a great story without rehashing or ripping off someone else’s story. Their story writing abilities are kind of like looking forward to a cold beer on a hot day…you know it’s gonna be good.

So Roberto and Alex, put Khan in the next movie. Or don’t. I’m pretty certain that whatever story you decide on, it’s gonna be good, Khan or not.

Keep up the good work, gentlemen.

79. G - October 9, 2009

Can’t have Genesis device. Created by Kirk’s (unborn) son.

80. VeratheGun - October 9, 2009

79. Uh, no.

Genesis was the life’s work of Dr. Carol Marcus, mother of David Marcus (who happened to be Kirk’s son).

81. G - October 9, 2009

But, who was the one to use “proto-matter” in order to make it work? David Marcus. Remember the lecture he got from Saavik on Genesis, about “changing to rules” and using the dangerous substance?

82. G - October 9, 2009

I loved the behind the scenes picture of the Klingon that wasn’t used in the movie, with the battle helmet/mask with the ridges. THAT is something I’d like to see! Very animalistic and primal. Made me think of 300/Bravehart/Planet of the Apes, all in one. I’d like to see a more ruthless and barbaric version of Klingon warriors in the next movie, for sure.

83. VeratheGun - October 9, 2009

81. The Genesis device worked in the cave before David ever met Savik.

I am not sure we’re on the same page on this.

In the end, the device’s process was unstable, but we have no way of knowing if that was IN SPITE of David Marcus’ work on it, or BECAUSE of it.

84. G - October 9, 2009

One theory (or, fact) of the movie was the premise that, after Nero altered the timeline, the “universe” tried to correct itself (i.e. Sulu became Helmsman after the real one got sick with lungworm. The Enterprise was spared destruction with the rest of the fleet because Sulu left the parking break on and made them fall a few minutes behind. Prime Spock ending up with young Kirk on Delta Vega, etc, etc).

In the next movie, Bob Orci, my question to you is.. Is it safe to assume that the “universe” will continue trying to correct itself? Bringing (forcing) the crew to meet people like Khan and the Botany Bay ‘again’ in the new timeline (just an example). Or, is the universe now “satisfied” that the crew is simply together on the bridge of the Enterprise?

Just curious if you guys have even decided on that yet, one way or the other.

85. G - October 9, 2009

83. VeratheGun

No, we’re on the same page. I hear what you’re saying. My point is only that it’s my feeling that David and his mother are a “package deal” when it comes to Genesis, that’s all.

But, either way, Genesis is (should be) decades away. I just think that plot would be “forced” if it was used in the next movie.

86. G - October 9, 2009

They could certainly make it part of the plot somehow (“Genesis Begins”) LOL. That’s no problem . They just can’t have a working Genesis device so early.

87. Terence - October 9, 2009

A new Hawaii Five-O could be very interesting. I look forward to seeing their efforts!

I just hope they’re able to use some local talent to fill some of the roles (and some of the guest characters). That’s what helped make Hawaii Five-O really feel like Hawaii (I’ve been there many times to see my relatives). Typically most Hawaii based TV series use too many mainlanders for their roles. The atmosphere doesn’t feel right. Even the guest characters are mainlanders. Often the only locals we see are the background actors who stand behind the hotel front desk and hardly say anything. Those shows are only using Hawaii as a backdrop.

I wish them success.

88. cagmar - October 9, 2009

Personally, I’m a huge fan of Five-O and McGarrett + Danno … But reboot it? They’ve rebooted it a million times already on every modern detective show that makes use of updated investigative technologies. I’m not sure what really made it Five-O except for Jack Lord (who was also considered to play Kirk at one point).and the luscious scenery. Help me out here someone… How do you reboot a show like that ?? Seriously.

Maybe like a James Bond sort of fun / sun detective story except with a team? I don’t know.

89. Captain Dunsel - October 10, 2009

Re: Hawaii 5-0

Actually, it seems they tried to re-start a new version of the show backn in 1997, produced by Stephen J. Cannell


90. captain_neill - October 10, 2009

83- Why would the timeline need to correct itself since the new movie is a parallel timeline that runs alongside the prime universe?

I thought that was what these writers had devised so they can ignore canon and also to allow our canon to continue.

91. paul - October 10, 2009

90- The Prime timeline has been erased within the reality of this new movie. Don’t allow the writers to try and fool you with their alternate timeline hogwash, think for yourself!

92. captain_neill - October 10, 2009


I choose to accept because I am not allowing these writers and JJ Abrams tell me that the show I have loved for 20 years is now the equivalent of the dream season from Dallas.

Alo Uhura uses the line “Alternative Reality” The movie exists as a parallel to the Trek we love.

If it chose to rewrite the timeline rather than create this parallel timeline then I would rather ignore the film as canon than accept the fact that 40 years of history has been undone.

I say that Nero travelled into a parallel universe in the past, a la like the Defiant in the Enterprise two parter, In a Mirror Darkly.

91- I am not being fooled, I choose to accept the thory because its possible and I will not allow the over rated producer that Abrams is tell me that my fav shopw never existed.

I will love the other shows for years to come.

93. Odradek - October 10, 2009


94. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

No, do NOT bring back Khan! Something original would be nice!

95. Holger - October 10, 2009

By the way, why do we have to reboot Hawaii Five-0? That’s a nice typical 60s/70s show. Can’t we just leave it at that?

96. screaming satellite - October 10, 2009

Vicious Trek III style Klingons for Trek 2 (forget the TNG era klingons)

Khan for the end joker style – leading on to Trek 3 with Khans methods pushing the PG13 rating to its limit

be abit much having had Nero in movie 1 and then Khan for movie 2…

97. Lord Ravenwood - October 10, 2009

As I’ve said before: If Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman can’t come up with anything more original or entertaining than that last piece of crap they released, then they simply need to walk away from the franchise.

They finally killed “Star Trek!”

98. the dogfaced boy - October 10, 2009

How about someone getting the bright idea of finding the Botany Bay and reanimating Khan to fight the Borg?

This could cast Khan in a new light and maybe even add him as a supporting character. He would have an on-going cause that would make him an ally to Kirk. We insiders would know that eventually Khan’s ambitions would lead to a clash with Kirk but it might not happen until the time of Genesis.

99. Closettrekker - October 10, 2009

#60—-“Uhura has replaced McCoy as the third point in the triangle. She’s even marketed in place of him, despite Urban being the bigger name. Better get used to it now.”

Marketing-wise, Zoe has taken more center-stage than Nichelle ever did, but to say that Uhura has now “replaced” McCoy as the third member of the major character triumvirate is a bit of a stretch. No doubt she has become a more important character, but only perhaps as important as Scotty (a secondary character at best) was to the original series. Uhura would have a long way to go as a character before making it to “Bones status”. Simply giving her more to do than before does not accomplish that…not even close.

100. Closettrekker - October 10, 2009

#97—“As I’ve said before: If Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman can’t come up with anything more original or entertaining than that last piece of crap they released, then they simply need to walk away from the franchise.”

Perhaps you should walk away from the franchise….if you feel it no longer has anything to offer you.

As far as I’m concerned, the franchise has been sleepwalking for a couple of decades. This film was more “Star Trek” to me than any of the lackluster 24th Century spinoffs.

Star Trek (TOS) was sexy, fun, humorous, romantic, and unafraid of a good old-fashioned visceral action sequence (bare-knuckled fistfight)…ST09 didn’t reinvent the wheel….it just took Star Trek back to its roots—-and I’ve been waiting for 20 years for that to happen!

If you don’t like it, just do what I did in the late-80’s——-stop watching!

101. RD - October 10, 2009

#99. Closettrekker wrote: “Marketing-wise, Zoe has taken more center-stage than Nichelle ever did, but to say that Uhura has now “replaced” McCoy as the third member of the major character triumvirate is a bit of a stretch. Uhura would have a long way to go as a character before making it to “Bones status”.”

I base that statement on what I saw in ST09. You know I respect your opinion despite sometimes disagreeing with it. That’s why I honestly and earnestly ask: show me how Bones was anything more than barely equal to Uhura in this film, if not less so. It does not matter at all the relationship which existed between these characters before ST09. All that matters is how they will be treated going forward.

What I saw was a McCoy who ran around shouting catch phrases equivalent to “hailing frequencies open” and acting as comic relief, while Uhura acted as the conscience to both Kirk and Spock. I would not be surprised to learn Uhura had not only more screen time than McCoy, but more lines, not to mention more important lines at that.

While that can easily change in the next film, I have seen no evidence thus far that the producers intend anything other. To be fair, every character in this film, excepting Kirk and Spock, were generally relegated to secondary character status, so the opportunity to correct this imbalance is there in the next one. Given what I’ve seen though, I’m not sure how they are going to have time to elevate McCoy further and keep Uhura in the same role she has currently assumed, or even that they want to.

102. P Technobabble - October 10, 2009

Alright, since everyone is offering plotlines for the next film, here’s mine:

JJ is en route to a meeting with Bob and Alex when a car pulls out in front of him, nearly causing a collision. Emerging from the other car is a man carrying a gun. He quickly storms into the passenger seat, slams the door and aims the gun at JJ. It is William Shatner.
“Alright, Abrams. Drive.”
“To where?” asks the frightened filmmaker.
“Just drive,” says Shatner. “I’ll tell you where to go.”
And the car takes off.

Meanwhile, Bob and Alex are becoming impatient, waiting for JJ.
“I’ve tried his cell four times, ” says Alex.
“Well, four times is obviously not enough,” says a frustrated Bob. “Let me see if I can get Nimoy on the phone.” Bob dials Leonard Nimoy’s cell, only to hear the following message: “If this is Bob Orci or Alex Kurtzman, I’m not available right now. Please feel free to leave a message. And, no, I do not know where Bill Shatner is.”

But little do Bob and Alex know, Shatner has guided JJ to Leonard Nimoy’s house.
“What are we doing at Leonard’s house?”
“You’ll find out soon enough,” says Shatner, holding the gun squarely at JJ’s head. Shatner directs JJ to the front door, where Nimoy is waiting.
“What took you so long?” Nimoy asks Shatner.
“Sorry. JJ drives like an old lady.”

The men step into the house and go directly to Nimoy’s office.
“The reason you are here, Mr. Abrams, is because we are going to tell you what the next Star Trek film will be about.”
“Well, guys,” says JJ, “I’m afraid Bob, Alex and I have already begun to work on the next script.”
Shatner pulls back the trigger. “I didn’t hear that, Abrams.”
“Uh….” JJ is clearly unsettled. “Alright, what did you have in mind?”

and then something happens, yada yada yada…… I’m sure you guys can figure it all out….

103. SpocksinnerConflict - October 10, 2009

You know, we can see whatever we want in a movie.

as an art, film is open to interpretation.

And a lack of screen time does not necessarily denote importance.

Brando was on screen very little, compared to the rest of the Godfather cast though he is remembered more so.

and sometimes a lack of what you want skews perspective. Then you start filling in blanks.

104. RD - October 10, 2009

#103 – screentime is but one tiny factor. What Brando’s character did with the time he spent onscreen established the importance of the role in the movie, not how much time he was visible.

105. Closettrekker - October 10, 2009

#101—-“I would not be surprised to learn Uhura had not only more screen time than McCoy, but more lines, not to mention more important lines at that.”

There is no question that the characters of Kirk and Spock were the focus of the story, and there is also no question that Uhura’s character was elevated in importance beyond what it was in the past….However, we did see the genesis of the Kirk/McCoy dynamic from the very moment Kirk arrived aboard the shuttle for transport to SFA. That dynamic continued to develop through the Academy scenes and through their integration into the Enterprise crew. To me, it does not matter that McCoy’s lines were more “comical” in nature. I think he did begin to take his rightful place as “Kirk’s conscience”, and as the person closest to the ear of James T. Kirk. So his lines (all of which, regardless of the level of humor in them, contributed to setting up that dynamic) were quite important, as far as I’m concerned. I also saw him begin to develop that more confrontational dynamic with Spock, particularly after Kirk’s exile. I think what the writers did with McCoy set the stage for his traditional role in future stories.

What I anticipate for Uhura in the forseeable future is that she is more important than Scotty (who, in the Original Series, was always next in the line of importance after the “Big Three”), but it remains to be seen whether her role is as substantial as that of Dr. McCoy.

106. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009


maybe RD thought it should have been McCoy hugging and kissing Spock, not Uhura…..now THERE’S a storyline!

107. Closettrekker - October 10, 2009

#106—-Probably one that belongs in 69 Forward….Denise, AJ, Spockanella, Beach, Liz, CmdR, TOG, and the rest of the gang would eat that up!

108. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

Hey, there’s 8 tickets sold already! I smell blockbuster! :>)

109. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

97: “As I’ve said before: If Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman can’t come up with anything more original or entertaining than that last piece of crap they released, then they simply need to walk away from the franchise.”

“They finally killed ‘Star Trek!'”

You got it bass ackwards, dude. If you think Star Trek was alive and well prior to ST.09 you are living in Zombieland.

110. S. John Ross - October 10, 2009

#97: “They finally killed “Star Trek!””

Nonsense. These guys are just basically well-meaning, harmless corporate hacks, punching out product. That makes them _irrelevant_ to Star Trek. They haven’t the clout, the courage, the talent or even the interest to put a _scratch_ on it, much less kill it.

Star Trek lives on, and will continue to do so no matter how many more products these guys cut-and-paste together. It’s just tie-in merchandise, man, no more “harmful” than a Star Trek shotglass or trading card (and with about as much emotional investment).

It’s fun to rag on ’em, but geez, they’ve done no real damage, and couldn’t if they tried.

111. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

And it’s been explained time and again that this film’s main purpose was to lay the groundwork, build the foundation of a new universe with new possibilities for an unknown, uncertain, open future.

Yet too many people complain about it as if this one film should have accomplished everything at once. As if this one ST movie should have been the equivalent of all 79 episodes of TOS.

Highly illogical.

112. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

110: “Nonsense. These guys are just basically well-meaning, harmless corporate hacks, punching out product.”

(Sarcasm alert) Yeah, they didn’t have any personal investment in Star Trek at all. Bob comes in here to answer questions and listen because he’s a masochist and likes to flog himself with hyperbolic nonsense like the above.

113. Lando - October 10, 2009

I love how they say that they love The Next Generation when they were the ones who effectively killed it off. Stuart Baird might have directed the worst TNG movie, but he didn’t kill TNG. NOT DOING a TNG movie killed TNG. Bryan Singer wanted to do a final, big budget TNG movie. A final, epic send off that this cast and crew deserved. Apparently he loved TNG more than you guys.

114. AJ - October 10, 2009

Star Trek is a corporate product. Like a cigarette, a can of Coke, or a Lexus, it is the product of “corporate hacks,” as someone here called them. It has been since “The Cage.” It is created by hired teams of people, and its success is determined by return on investment and contribution to corporate profitability.

Having grown up as a “Trek” fan, I remember when I first realized this, and thought, at first, how it must be impossible. But, then I realized that the Grateful Dead were corporate, Led Zep was corporate, KISS was (extremely) corporate, and that, essentially, everything in our life is imbued with reality of someone’s corporate bottom line.

Taking that into account, everything resets itself, and the question becomes can these corporate hacks make something good? “Star Trek” has varied wildly in quality since 1966, always flirting with ‘cancellation’ or ‘budget cuts/limitations.’ But it has survived because it is genuinely good product. It has benefited from the rise of genre entertainment these last 22 years (brought on by TNG), and it died in 2005, having lost sight of the standard it helped create. JJ&Co. have reset it successfully.

Hopefully, it will be nimble on its feet these next few decades, and not lose site of its why the original corporate product was so good to begin with.

115. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

114: “Star Trek is a corporate product. Like a cigarette, a can of Coke, or a Lexus, it is the product of “corporate hacks,” as someone here called them. It has been since “The Cage.”

“Hack” is not a flattering term, it’s an epithet meant to skewer someone for lack of talent.

116. AJ - October 10, 2009


I agree. But it is also used by those who don’t understand corporate structures or mentality. O & K are most certainly not ‘hacks.’ Nor, I think, are most of those who worked hard on the last “Trek” film.

117. Spockish - October 10, 2009

115. dmduncan, “meant to skewer someone for lack of talent.”

My question is who is the one that sets the rank of talent? Maybe the hack’s frame of existance is not parallel to the one whom judges, his talents make be far greater than the one who judges, but since they both have diffrent phased views of the world these lines of talent may be 180 degrees out of phase and invisable to the other.

Many have labeled me a crazy, but I tend to see views that many never see and I come up with solutions that are simple, easy, and quick that the other person would never have seen with therir eyes wide open.

That is how this world progresses and survives. Terrorists have the right tio their views and they may be just as correct as us. It’s just they do not have any value for life that does not mold to there ways of life.

It take people of all kinds to make this world survive, be they hacks, corperate beans, or terrorists. It’s how you value life and not just yours that lets us survive.

118. S. John Ross - October 10, 2009

#112: “(Sarcasm alert) Yeah, they didn’t have any personal investment in Star Trek at all. Bob comes in here to answer questions and listen because he’s a masochist and likes to flog himself with hyperbolic nonsense like the above.”

My apologies; I didn’t mean to suggest that these two men aren’t personally passionate about their product. I was speaking of it in terms of Star Trek (broadly and conceptually), not specifically commenting on their work ethic. Their success, dedication, and obvious concern for the fans speak of people genuinely concerned about the success of their product, and I’ve said on many occasions how much I respect Bob, in particular, for facing the fires of fandom on many occasions. That respect (and gratitude, come to that) is genuine.

I meant what I said, but I didn’t mean what you took me to mean (but the fault is mine for being unclear).

#114: “Star Trek is a corporate product. ”

Many things – most things, certainly – branded Star Trek are corporate products, certainly including most of the TV episodes themselves, and a handful of things with my own name attached, even. But given that Star Trek lives on and thrives even in periods where _no_ such products are produced, and remains enjoyed by people who are not consuming such products, “Star Trek” is, objectively and demonstrably, something more than _just_ the bean-counter portion of it. Or, put another way, there is Star Trek, and there is Star Trek: The Franchise, and to some extent the two do _not_ depend on each other for their existence.

119. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

Star Trek is an ideology/philosophy/mythology which has, long ago, broken free from any corporate restraint. Paramount may own the legal right to Star Trek as an entity, but we own the idea of WHAT IT IS in our hearts. Ours is, by far, the more powerful position.

120. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

Before ST.09 I didn’t know who Bob Orci or Alex Kurtzman were. They weren’t on my radar. If I had seen their names in the credits of anything I forgot soon afterwards.

After Star Trek I became impressed with what they were aiming for and with how well they achieved it. What they did wasn’t easy, and the whole team of them pulled it off. I mean I can imagine some nightmare scenarios that were avoided by what they did that involve a mob of Los Angeles Star Trek fans holding pitchforks and torches and a Homes of the Stars map.

So I think the franchise is in really good hands and I realize that more each time I watch an episode of TOS, all of which are imperfect in one way or another. So I think it’s reasonable to ask that they be cut some slack the same way you’d cut TOS some slack when you see Sulu freezing his nuts off in The Enemy Within and Kirk can’t beam him up because of the transporter problems, and you refrain from shouting “LAUNCH A SHUTTLE TO PICK HIM UP!” at the screen. I mean that’s a really good episode, but the Enterprise didn’t suddenly grow a pair of hangar deck doors after it aired.

121. S. John Ross - October 10, 2009

#119: “Star Trek is an ideology/philosophy/mythology which has, long ago, broken free from any corporate restraint. Paramount may own the legal right to Star Trek as an entity, but we own the idea of WHAT IT IS in our hearts. Ours is, by far, the more powerful position.”

And the more enduring one – the one that has _proven_ to endure when the ratings go south, the movies flop, the comics dry up and the action figures get the rank-stripes wrong.

And don’t get me wrong … I think the franchise is fun and all (I like a Burger King glass as much as the next geek, and still eagerly await the McCoy one so I can have a Trinity set), but if the franchise ceased to exist this instant, Star Trek – the larger concept that lives on among those whose lives it has touched, enriched, and even saved – would live on still … it might even benefit.

I do respect that, to some fans, the two things are either the same or so bound together that to harm or enrich one is to harm or enrich the other (and such fans often measure the life of Trek by the visibility in pop-culture of the franchise). But I also hope that those fans also acknowledge those of us who (respectfully) see a clear difference between the fate of the franchise labeled Star Trek, and the fate of Star Trek itself.

122. AJ - October 10, 2009


Harry, you bring up a good point: Just when does the corporate property begin to overtake the borders that the corporation has created/maintained for it? And, can the corporation actually lose site of where such a property is going?

Paramount/CBS yelled “we are incompetent” when they blamed Star Trek Enterprise for the franchise’s death in 2005. You don’t blame the brand. Ever. You change the management. Star Trek has always been fine, and that was a classic example of corporate ass-coverage at the expense of something they failed to manage effectively. And ‘Star Trek’ is far more significant to the world than Paramount/CBS will ever be.

Some clueless dolt in Hollywood canceled it in 2005 rather than ask his people to look at why it was failing, DS9 was the beginning of the fall in ratings, and the collective might of Paramount just couldn’t see why.

The end result? Star Trek itself is the problem. It’s “tired.” Gets all of us execs off the hook and onto the golf course. Shame, really.

123. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

Somebody at Paramount was smart enough to realize that Star Trek needed new blood, a fresh touch by people who were on the way up not on the way out.

124. AJ - October 10, 2009


No. Manny Coto was on his fast track up in the last year. It Paramount had been that smart, they’d have fixed the issues much earlier.

Back to Harry’s point, if the Empire State Building has a major fall-off in visitors to the top floor, do you blame the building? No. You improve the experience associated with it.

Also, the “new blood” is Kirk and Spock!

125. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

AJ, are you saying that for the next movie we should bring on King Kong?

126. AJ - October 10, 2009


Harry, only if you’ll finance it!

Kong is certainly the king of the Hairy Balls. And what a great way to introduce Nurse Chapel!

127. Screenwriting Best of the Web | The Story Department - October 10, 2009

[…] So what’s happening with the Star Trek sequel? […]

128. AJ - October 10, 2009

King Khan

(someone kill me now)

129. AJ - October 10, 2009


Kirk: “I’ve never seen…BALLS like that. Sulu: Extra mag on his balls.”

Spock: “Indeed. Nor have I.”

McCoy: “Guys, they’re attached to that giant ape down there! Hello?”

Spock: “Fascinating!…”

McCoy: “Will one of you do something? Jim! He’s got Chapel!”

Kirk: “Bones! How do you explain those BALLS of his? Never seen ’em so big.”

Spock: “Indeed. Nor have I.”

McCoy: “Damn Pansies.” (leaves the Bridge)

130. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

AJ, I know you…………..how many drinks tonight?

131. AJ - October 10, 2009

Not enough, Harry! Just a few glasses of wine.

I was up quite late last night, so I’m trying to tire myself out . It was either write lots of serious industry stuff on my blog or blow off some steam here. Guess which one won?

132. dmduncan - October 10, 2009

Manny Coto couldn’t fix Enterprise because the premise was irreparably flawed, and that’s something he inherited.

You don’t let a canonically less technologically advanced time period with characters who have less gravitas than The Magnificent Seven try to out-TOS TOS. Enterprise SHOULD have been something in between what we saw and Defying Gravity. It should not have been another imitation of TOS, which is what it was from its inception, and you can’t change something like that without completely overhauling the show.

I think the TOS premise has been done to death, and best at first in the 60’s, and if there’s more material to mine for a TV show in Star Trek it should go in a different direction unless you are going to reboot TOS on TV, which I would definitely tune in for, particularly if the sets were technologically updated but substantially faithful to Matt Jefferies’ designs. And there’s no need to do a TV version of what we see in the movies. It would be totally cool to go retro and literally revisit the TOS universe as it looked in the 60’s at the same time we have the new Star Trek movies in the theaters. Not one or the other: Both.

One of the cool things about the alternate universe premise is that it provides a logic for having several different looking Star Treks all occurring at the same time, so the two mediums, Star Trek in the movies and on TV do not necessarily have to mesh, follow the other, or look the same.

And that’s what’s going to happen anyway every time there’s a reboot. So what does it matter if the same characters are rebooted in two mediums at the same time or different times? How many times has Superman been rebooted without regard for the other rebootings? That’s the model I would follow—not the straightjacket of canon, which the premise of alternate realities makes irrelevant anyway. Just chalk em all up to other universes if that’s what you need to do to get some sleep.

I know that’s a radical idea and some will say it will just confuse the slack jawed public, but I have faith that if it’s a good product, they’ll tune in and they won’t drool themselves into dehydration trying to get unstumped by the differences between movie Trek and TV Trek. Smallville and Superman Returns sure didn’t seem to have any trouble coexisting at the time.

133. Harry Ballz - October 10, 2009

I only wondered since you started writing out scenes like you were posting to Chat. Glad our side won!

134. AJ - October 11, 2009



Sometimes the other threads need to stop taking themselves too seriously as well.

Besides, I was taking YOUR King Kong idea forward. Hopefully Bob and Alex will see it here (fingers crossed).

135. boborci - October 11, 2009

112. dmduncan – October 10, 2009
“110: “Nonsense. These guys are just basically well-meaning, harmless corporate hacks, punching out product.”

(Sarcasm alert) Yeah, they didn’t have any personal investment in Star Trek at all. Bob comes in here to answer questions and listen because he’s a masochist and likes to flog himself with hyperbolic nonsense like the above.

You know us so well! May I have another slap please?!

136. Harry Ballz - October 11, 2009

Bob, an Animal House fan, eh?

“Thank you, sir, may I have another?!”

137. AJ - October 11, 2009

See, Harry?

I’m sure, for a brief second, your Trek/King Kong idea was considered, and most likely, discarded.

138. Harry Ballz - October 11, 2009

Most likely?

Ooooh, hope springs eternal!

139. Harry Ballz - October 11, 2009

When people argue about alternate realities, I laugh.

If we can enjoy Star Wars, a space romp that takes place “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away”, then isn’t this simply a variation on the same theme?

Stop worrying, sit back, pass the popcorn and enjoy yourself!

140. CmdrR - October 11, 2009

Bob —
Just give us something fun to think about between the ‘splosions and we’ll be happy. Whether the sequel is Khan, Kor, or Kong, we just want a movie we still care about the 653465346345636543rd time we watch it.

141. dmduncan - October 11, 2009

@139: Some fans require some sort of way to make everything mesh. I don’t. But some do.

Canon is like one of those stunt obstacles on Wipeout. Try a bold NEW idea that even slightly violates an idea used 40 years earlier and you get a giant boxing glove to the groin that knocks you off a platform into a pool of filthy water.

@135: ; )

142. AJ - October 11, 2009


I don’t disrespect the canonista faction. When the show/film comes on, your mind sets itself in that universe.

if you’ve been tracking that universe for 40 years, you can feel the pain when Data says we can raise speed to warp 9.8, but at ‘extreme risk.’ You know warp 10 is non-achievable, but that Kirk’s Enterprise went to Warp 13 in “By Any Other Name” and you blew your cerebral cortex in a puff of acrid smoke.

Or you didn’t.

143. S. John Ross - October 11, 2009

#135: “You know us so well! May I have another slap please?!”

If you insist, we could have a thread discussing The Clonus Horror :)

144. S. John Ross - October 11, 2009

#142: “Or you didn’t.”

I didn’t. Canon’s this thing other people care about, and that’s cool.

I still hold out hopes for a time when canon is treated like history and Star Trek on-screen adventures are treated like dramatizations _of_ history. I think that’d feel a lot more whole (as opposed to the current scheme, where canon is treated as Fact and on-screen adventures are treated as an actual look at fact happening, as if we’re some hand-rubbing villain watching the heroes through our smoking blood-pool mirror).

On the other hand … [rubs hands experimentally, cackles]

145. Anthony Pascale - October 11, 2009

how many times do i have to warn people about getting personal and flaming. You can find ways to debate without name calling

like you S. John Ross

146. Anthony Pascale - October 11, 2009

And Lando, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Paramount would never have made another TNG movie, even if Bryan Singer wanted to make one, which he didn’t, he had his own reboot in mind.

147. S. John Ross - October 11, 2009

#145: I’ve neither “flamed” nor name-called that I’m aware of, at least not in recent memory??? [confused expression]

(Unless you’ve taken the “corporate hacks” comment for name-calling; as I clarified in a later post, it was meant as a characterization of the work, not meant to disparage the two men involved … I thought that counted as both explanation and apology, but I could be more explicit with both if it would help).

148. AJ - October 11, 2009

Anthony and Lando:

I wouldn’t write a TNG film out of the cards in 10 years or so. Much depends on how the series is treated during the current TOS revival and any TV series that come out of it.

TNG was revolutionary and popular, and kids who grew up watching it are now intelligent adults with kids (including the estimable writers of Trek09), and it should get its shot at a reinvention.

The same calls of ‘heresy’ will surely come up as they dare to replace Patrick Stewart and Picard’s team with newer actors, and how to re-make the 24th century world in the 21st century when the 23rd century has already been re-jigged in the 21st as more advanced than the 24th looked in the 20th, etc.

Perhaps we’ll all go ‘schwing’ with references to DS9 as well.

The key right now is once again in the hands of our friends the writers who have full plates, and JJ Abrams, who is juggling as many projects as the President, to get the second film up. TNG’s reboot needs TOS to succeed.

149. Porthos X - October 11, 2009

I think the film should be a pre-existing friendly species facing a religious zealot taking control of the government and threatening the galaxy…kinda like an Ahmadinejad-like figure amidst pre-Occupation Bajorans

150. Porthos X - October 11, 2009

one thing though: they need a new editor… there were multiple obvious errors in the film…ones which made the film look like a high school editing project in some areas…namely Robau’s missing delta shield, the Kelvin turbolift going in the wrong direction, the Enterprise being upside down near the Narada at Vulcan in one shot…Nero’s mauled ear being on the wrong side at one point as he yells SPOOOCCCKKKK!!!… call Nemesis bad but at least all the shots were edited like a legitimate film instead of a farce like The Naked Gun series! LOL

151. S. John Ross - October 11, 2009

#150: “…namely Robau’s missing delta shield, the Kelvin turbolift going …”

Maybe errors, maybe not? On the rare occasion I notice stuff like that, I tend to assume the filmmakers did it on purpose as a kind of easter-egg or nose-tweak) :)

But I’m a romantic.

152. Harry Ballz - October 11, 2009

Yeah, I get a little misty-eyed myself every time I see a mauled ear on the wrong side!

153. boborci - October 11, 2009

143. S. John Ross – October 11, 2009

Never saw it.

154. S. John Ross - October 12, 2009

153. boborci – October 11, 2009

Fair enough ;)

155. AJ - October 12, 2009


Porthos X:

The E being upside-down was done intentionally. There was a discussion here months ago that conventional ideas about ‘which way is up in space?’ would be challenged by the film’s portrayal of ships moving through space.

As for the editing, I think a fine job was done. Keeping a frenetic pace and rich story going for two hours isn’t easy.

156. Marko - October 12, 2009

Here’s what I think a film should be based on: the Federation Prime Directive for non-interference. It must be there for a good reason, which was never examined in filmed Trek (perhaps it was in a book). In TOS, Kirk violated the Directive routinely, usually to positive effect. But suppose New Kirk and Co ran into a situation that cried out for interference, but every attempt at interference simply made things worse, reaffirming the Prime Directive as the right solution. Plenty of opportunity for character-based interaction between Kirk, Spock and McCoy, as well as being thought-provoking, and something that involves a central principle of Trek. I have no idea what the situation should be; I’m not a screenwriter!

Please, if not the next film, then the one after that!

“Enterprise” should have done a storyline like this as part of the Federation’s origins, to dramatize whatever catastrophic screw-up resulted in the Prime Directive in the first place.

157. dmduncan - October 12, 2009

I’m all for a massive Klingon invasion movie that Kirk figures out an amazing way to repel, testing young Kirk’s fitness for command, and silencing all his doubters—a way which which averts an all out war between the Federation and the Klingon Empire.

It would be cool to see the crew split over confidence in his ability, with Uhura, McCoy, and Scotty doubting him, and Sulu, Chekov, and Spock believing in him, a split which is resolved by the end of the film.

Afterwards, McCoy and Scotty both apologize and pledge they’ll never doubt him again. In the turbolift, Uhura does the same. When he thanks “Uhura” she corrects him: “Nyota. My first name is Nyota.”

He smiles and nods. She smiles back, her gaze lingering a half second too long before she whirls off.

158. dmduncan - October 12, 2009

It goes without saying that any portrayal of the Klingons should not be a reprisal of the simplistic one dimensional villains. There would have to be sympathetic characters. Turn someone like Steve Buscemi into a funny and very non warrior-like English speaking Klingon who hates the Empire and agrees to help Kirk if he can get asylum in the Federation. Have Kirk discover a half naked beautiful Klingon sex slave in a Klingon officer’s quarters when they run in there to escape a chase (imagine someone like Dichen Lachman in the role) with NICE teeth—maybe a bit vampirically sharp, but nice—who also wants out. She doesn’t speak English, so the Buscemi-Klingon has to translate.

159. Daoud - October 14, 2009

Bob, I think you and Alex are doing a great job of sandbagging us.

I tend to think you’ve already got the script all plotted out, and you’re enjoying all the diversionaries. :)

All I hope to have answered… is why the hell was the fleet being gathered at the Laurentian System before Nero’s appearance at Vulcan….

Is that system near the Klingon-Federation “borderland”?

And since Pike (a majorly important Captain, erm, I’d say almost a “Fleet” Captain) wasn’t already at the Laurentian System in charge of it… there must be another Fleet Captain already there….

Fleet Captain Garth is really a great answer to that. And there’s no reason (following on your use of the Laurentian Abyss from HFRO) you couldn’t model the yet-to-go-insane Garth upon Marko Ramius.

And perhaps Axanar is nearby… and a young Kang, Koloth and Kor.

Oh, it would have been glorious…. and interesting to have Kirk’s Enterprise turn up at the Axanar “Peace Mission”, etc.

160. Craig - October 15, 2009

I wish these hacks would just leave it alone, Bring it back to the prime universe is what I say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

161. joseph - January 13, 2010

let the klingons evolve again, give them horns and reptilian dna, make them a cuckoo race whose home is a world stolen from its indigenous peoples, hide them (a la the deleted scenes from the first movie) at first so as to deliver some sort of disgust or shock when we eventually see them, cast morgan freeman against type as a psychotic alien who gets klingon red-eye when mad and who lightly sautés women and children of the human red-shirt persuasion as his favourite starter before entering into battle, washed down with a magnum of mugatu blood… this is an alternative timeline where shatner never died or might die tomorrow, we don’t need ‘old’ villains, the crew wouldn’t even necessarily meet them anyway. ho-hum. and please re-introduce yeoman rand, at least as some kind of bargaining chip for the villain, before letting her die horribly, thereby giving kirk a reason to kick galactic ass. just don’t make sulu gay.

162. Jamey Kless - April 21, 2011

Woah! I’m really loving the template/theme of this site. It’s simple, yet effective. A lot of times it’s hard to get that “perfect balance” between usability and appearance. I must say you’ve done a great job with this. In addition, the blog loads super quick for me on Safari. Excellent Blog!

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