Kurtzman and Orci Talk About ‘Digging Deeper’ In Star Trek Sequel October 21, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman, Star Trek (2009 film), Star Trek sequel (2012) , trackback
We already reported that at the 2009 Screenwriters Expo last weekend, Star Trek scribes Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman announced that they are now shooting to finish their sequel script in eight months (instead of two) and the film is now likely slated for 2012. In a new interview from the event, the pair go into more details about what that extra time gives them, as well as talking about more aspects of Star Trek and more.
Orci and Kurtzman taking time with Star Trek sequel
Excerpts from IGN interview, Here are the relevant Star Trek parts of the extensive interview with the writing team:
IGN: You mentioned that you ended up with more time to write it then you first expected. Has that allowed you to take a step back and not have to rush anything?
Orci: Yeah. We want it to come like the first one, which came organically.
Kurtzman: Because we weren’t rushed.
Orci: We weren’t rushed, so I think the time we got to spend on it is reflected in the work. We feel the pressure a little bit coming on, but we’re easing into it slowly.
IGN: Kirk and Spock have always been the stars of the series. Is it a difficult to make sure all those characters get their time to shine?
Kurtzman: For sure. In a sequel, you have even more of that burden, because the first movie is about introducing characters, but the second movie is about digging deeper into them. So you’ve got to make sure your story is giving everyone a moment… More than a moment. An arc.
Orci: We’ve always thought of the bridge crew as a family, so it’s not just, "What are we gonna find for them?" It’s part of the DNA of doing Star Trek right, I think – to make sure all the characters represent a significant part of the family.
IGN: How did you decide to make Spock and Uhura a couple?
Kurtzman: It actually came from the original series…
Orci: There was a little flirtation in the original series. But we thought that since we were doing a harmony on some of the things that were happening before, well, what happened in the original series? The first interracial kiss was with Kirk. So we thought what can we do that’s different, but that still pays homage to that? Spock!
Go to IGN to read the full interview, discussing Fringe, Transformers Xena and more from Bob and Alex.
Bob and Alex digging deeper into the crew and their character arcs
Loading ...
Comments»
As much as I hate to admit it, having extra time to do the movie will be a nice bonus. I’d rather they take their time.
2012 will be here before we know it, though.
And how did they decide to destroy Vulcan? I don’t remember that from the original series.
Not Star Trek anyway.
Three years is SUCH a long wait. If the quality is there I suppose it will be worth it. But heck, TOS wrote and delivered half a movie every week when you think about it. Some of Trek’s best hours came from that.
I’m just sad that, at this rate, every time we see these actors again, they will have aged 3 years a pop! Not exactly making “optimum use” of this relaunched franchise’s most valuable commodity, now is it?
Remember the Jack Black rumors? Everyone immediately pointed at Harry Mudd. What about Cyrano Jones? Trelaine, or Koloth even? I’m not saying that as what I want to see, I don’t even know if I like the idea of Black being in it… But the variety of odd, humorous characters isn’t limited to ol’ Harcourt Fenton.
Harry,
one of the reasons they went with a young crew is so they actors wont age themselves out of the roles too quickly, but perhaps the next film will actually be set a few years into the Enterprise’s mission. This would have a number of advantages:
1. Kirk would be past the ‘is he or isnt he ready’ phase
2. Pine would more look the part of a ‘captain’
3. the time gap would allow them a ‘canon’ reason to make changes to the ship or even the crew.
At least it wont be another 7 years a wait.
It’s not 7 years, but it is a while… I’m for more ENT until then, whether miniseries or straight to DVD. I wonder if the cast would come back.
of course it’s pooh to have to wait. But you know, it will all be okey. Look all the stuff that’s coming out. New special features for all the movies, new versions of the original series etc. I think there will be enough. Besides, all the new fans have to catch up a bit and watch, what is it now….. 28 + seasons of star trek (oops, I didn’t include the animated series) so, they will be busy for a while.
7
Anthony, thank you for taking the time to personally respond to my post. Much appreciated!
“Orci: Yeah. We want it to come like the first one, which came organically.”
“Kurtzman: Because we weren’t rushed.”
Is that why Transformers 2 wasn’t quite so… organic?
12
Now we wont get any jive talking racist red shirts!!
Point #1: I kinda like that they are spacing out trek a little bit. Remember in the Rick Berman “debriefing” of star trek he noted oversaturation of the franchise. These movies being so far apart is an attempt to let out the tires while not leaving us completely hanging. I’ve really found solace in watching the fan films. New Voyages should tickle any TOSers fancy.
Point #2 And while we are fantasizing about the new movie I still get Goose Bumps thinking about Javier Bardem as Khan.
Point#3 12.. I’m sure Transformers 2 was more influenced by Michael Bay and making a Bazillion dollars. I’m sure Bob and Alex were offered such a ridiculous sum they couldn’t turn down producing something in 2 months or however long they were locked in a hotel room.
Point #4 I’ve never really looked at the TOS crew as being Kirk/Spock. I’ve always seen it as Kirk/Spock/McCoy. Getting Kirk and Spock together in the newest movie was only logical but I felt like the key component of McCoy was downplayed a little. I hope they get to the heart of the blessed Trinity of trek.
Point#5 Thank God this website is working for me again, I feel like I needed to vent trekness, thus the length of this post.
Live Long and Prosper
#2 – “And how did they decide to destroy Vulcan? I don’t remember that from the original series.”
Yeah, by paying attention to the film and everything else around it on this site you’d know it’s an alternate timeline/universe.
#3 – “Not Star Trek anyway.”
It’s Star Trek anyway.
Next?
As long as Star Trek 2 doesnt turn out like Transformers 2… I’ll be fine.
I took my friend to watch Transformers 2 with me and at the end of it I apologized for making her watch that train wreck they called a movie.
@7. Anthony Pascale
I couldn’t agree more. Look what 3 years did for The Empire Strikes Back.
Three years won’t be too bad. It’s a wait, yes, but by the time the sequel is released, the wait will have been worthwhile. It does take time to come up with a sequel that will make fans ask for more; we wouldn’t want a Transformers-ish sequel. During that span of three years the cast will grow deeper into their roles, more uncharted territory will be explored, and special effects will have innovations. The concept of using an alternate reality to reboot the series was a major risk, however it paid off. Rebooting venerable a series as Star Trek puts much pressure on the production’s shoulders, and we all want films that are worth watching, which is what the crew is trying to give us. For now, all we have to do is wait.
“Orci: Yeah. We want it to come like the first one, which came organically.”
Organically? Organically? Come on…
That entire movie was a set-up for opening up the new Trek Movie universe for sequels. The 5 minute conversation went something like this…..
“We know where we want to end up so lets begin there and work backward. But we don’t want to stray too far from Classic Trek so lets just pull the key plot point from Wrath of Khan and use them all over again…”
The whole movie was about as organic as a Twinkie.
In other words, “we haven’t thought of a good story yet”.
#2 Enough already.
#15 Nice!
huh, much as I totally enjoyed Trek ‘09 I have to agree with others that the story was easily its weakest point. What carried the show was the pacing, look and pure bravado of the piece.
I’m glad the writers have been given longer to get something going- I hope they use the time well. ;)
- The first interracial kiss was with Kirk. So we thought what can we do that’s different, but that still pays homage to that? Spock! -
I don’t get the logic of their reasoning, let alone the emotional base – but who am I anyway…
People complaining: Try writing it yourself.
I can see jack black as jones.
The writing staff of TOS was some 15 to 20 people that went on to make a living at it. And they was many angles of life to glean ideas from. Then a 3 year gap between SW4 & 5, but that was written from Lucus’s 9 story outline plot. And the story line was in a Galaxy far…far away and no one knew really any thing about it. But for Star Trek it is in places far to close to our hearts that we have built love for in the last 43 or so years.
The next movie script has to be a key that opens the old Star Trek lock, but it can not be one that looks like old keys to the Star Trek Universe lock. To do this you have to be one hell of a locksmith (or Smiths) to build a key that does not make a key that does not get any destroying scratches.
And there will be scratches of the new key, just like the last 11th key was scratched my the Engine room flaws. But those flaws are only noticed by fans that can see the changes.
And the more you take from old keys that open the lock, the more people are going to say been there/done that already. And like TOS Kirk/Spock/McCoy was a three sided key. As you learned with double Kirks in the 4 broadcast show, Spock is a visible part of Kirks logic and order, and McCoy is Kirks ill-logical and emotional human personality side.
Now with Uhurah & Spock becoming part of the key, the key may work but it may be part of the key that is made of lead not steal, thus the triangular key could become soft and break. And if the lead part of the key gets mushy it is going to be hard to find some Viagra to cure the softness of the lead.
And the first six movies did not need structure to be built to show the binding strengths between the personallatys (thats what TOS did) but newbies wherein the old uniforms these building understrength’s will need to be built all over again. If Kirk/Spock/McCoy are going to become that shining beacon on the hill the bonding process is needed to be seen again. Star Trek had 3 years in the airwaves, and the writers will kind of have 3 years of private dreams of ideas. But if all comes together correctly will these three years produce a perfect child only time will tell. The building blocks used to make the out come will reveal to us either a #1 on it’s forehead or 666.
And you almost have to be the devil or work for him to want 666 to appear.
No more Spock/Uhura: that’s completely heavy!
More Mc Coy/Spock! I’ve haven’t seen Mc Coy a lot in ST11.
And Admiral Archer for cameo.
for those who haven’t read the novel -SPOILERS-:
a well known beagle appears aboard the Enterprise.
I really enjoy Alan J. Foster novel, more complete than the movie. After, I’m gonna buy Countdown.
#25) toddk, paraphrase, bitchers write it yourself, you have to realize many of these people have a more rubbery mind than a Super Ball. And you expect beautiful stories from brains that bounce all unplanned directions.
That’s like playing Russian Roulette with an Ozzie.
But then again the script could be what a FanFilm team is looking for.
#24 not complaining- but I do feel its an undeniable truth that the story was not its strongest point. That being said the writers had a tough task on their hands, I agree, to introduce the characters and place them in a story that was meaningful. I think they had a good solid stab at it- in places it was really moving- George Kirk being the really successful element.
And for sure, I couldn’t have done better. But that doesn’t stop me from having a view on it. I don’t know how to build a car but I know which sort I prefer to drive.
#19: “The whole movie was about as organic as a Twinkie.”
[nods] I do wonder, though, if it’ll have anything resembling a Twinkie’s shelf-life :)
I enjoyed the film (as an action-comedy space fantasy legally branded “Star Trek*”) but yeah … you could practically hear a susurration of gentle pencil-clicks as the film soldiered on, the collective noise of product-goal checklists being rapidly ticked to completion.
The end product was funny, action-packed and pleasing in its way, but the end product was, exclusively, a product.
—–
* No relation.
im not impressed
Im not going to bow down before these two.
Im not going to be happy with what im hearing just because they said….
what they say other then ‘I’m Sorry” dosent matter.
what matters is the canon (on screen). they need to be able to write a good story WITHIN that. And Star Trek wasnt it.
#29: “George Kirk being the really successful element.”
Oh, agreed. In some ways I almost wish the introduction _hadn’t_ been so emotionally successful; it raised my modest expectations for the film in a way that the rest of the movie didn’t even seem to acknowledge, let alone attempt to live up to. It’s like the first few minutes were from an entirely different film (the kind of film I could have fallen deeply in love with).
Hopefully the movie will be in the cinemas early in 2012. I don’t want in the summer, where so much other good movies are shown. I think with less competition, it will get more viewers. So I prefer a january, february, or march opening.
30
you preach to the quire and i hear you.
a movie i enjoyed more then Star Trek….
Zombieland
District 9
im thinking G.I Joe (still thinking)
as much as a i think Inglourious Basterds needed more. i think it might have been better then Star Trek.
@ 24, Just give me that chance… (Loved the flick, am a writer, have alot of my own Trek ideas, seeking book or tv series type of thing…) (Yes, seriously.)
Please.. get rid of those two and get someone aboard who really knows how to write character pieces.
No offense, but Orci and Kurtzman should stick with their usual target audience (Transformers, Cloverfield) and admit that they are incapable of writing a decent Sci-Fi drama a la Star Trek.
# 32
My thoughts exactly!
After George Kirk’s death, the movie went down (for me). Okay, the kid-stuff was nice too, but everything after the bar-fight was terrible.
Please stop abusing words like “DNA” and “organic” to this extent….
Spending more time on the writing.
What a novel approach for film-making today.
I wonder if it will catch on.
(No, I don’t. I’m certain that it won’t.)
Bring on the flashing lights, transparent plot-devices and cliches!!
William Shatner set to be beamed up in next Star Trek movie
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/2986590/William-Shatner-set-to-be-beamed-up
Any thoughts?
@40… Don’t forget the lens flares!
#36. Speak for your self. I thought they did a great job on the Movie. I would not be nearly as happy if someone other then Orci and kurtzman were doing this movie. I know Trek is in good hands and I want them to take what ever time they need to give us the best story.
I would love to see a main mission story. 3 years is what it is. Maybe after three years, Scotty will have streamlines the massive nacelles. As for grabbing a story directly from the series… please don’t! If you want to borrow a character, go for it, but make this new for us. And PLEASE include the brain food.
I like to think of the stars as Kirk Spock and McCoy not just Kirk and Spock.
On a side note The Melbourne Herald Sun todays reported that Abrams was having dinner with Shatner to discuss having him in the next Star Trek movie.
Iowagirl, in one of the first episodes of TOS they show Spock strumming his Vulcan instrument, and Uhura is really into it. It is subtle, sure. But looking at it in a new light, it does come across as affection towards Spock, in my humble opinion.
41 –
Shatner as:
A horta.
Evil Kirk from the Priceline Universe.
Rand after a terrible transporter accident.
or…
The Guardian of Fudge Cookies.
Deeper? As in pile higher and deeper?
The story for ST’09 was done in 2007. So, three years is coming up right about now, and this only exposes the Klingon Emperor Has No Clothes.
With talented craftspeople such as Manny Coto, the Stevenses, Ron D Moore, Ira Steven Behr, etc. out there who *know* Trek, I’d really wish that they had a shot at this universe. I think they’d already have the sequel(s) fleshed out quite well.
As to the Spock/Uhura romance…. geez, doesn’t anybody ever read TOS ‘about’ books? Have we all forgotten that the original “Plato’s Stepchildren” script had Spock kissing Uhura?? Have we forgotten Shatner made them change it so *he* got that kiss??? Where’s research gone?
In any case, it seems that in the original timeline, the Spock/Uhura closeness grew more to a brother/sister type relationship. Yet, here in the altered timeline, that kiss due to Amanda’s death… does make sense. But let’s credit Meyer Dolinsky for the original idea of Spock kissing Uhura and finding it the logical thing to do.
During the TOS years, all women had a thing for Spock, didn’t they? … moreso than Kirk, I think. Spock was the tall, dark, mysterious type who appealed to lots of women… It doesn’t surprise me at all that Uhura had a thing for Spock.
I don’t recall TOS having a writing staff the way TNG (and post-TNG series) did.
I wouldn’t count the Shatner eggs before they’re hatched. We have no idea what JJ and Shatner are talking about. We shouldn’t presume that Shatner will be in the next film, or — if he is — that he would play Kirk…? Again, I think Shatner is good for Star Trek, and he definitely knows how to play the PR game. I’m all for seeing him in uniform again, but I’m not holding my breath.
If the next film has something to do with the Nexus, I suppose there is a possible way for Kirk Prime to re-emerge. But then you’ve got Spock Prime and Kirk Prime both living in an alternate timeline, which seems to be pushing things a bit, IMO. But I am confident that Orci and Kurtzman are already considering all of this.
I would like to see McCoy (Urban) given a greater role in the new film, taking us back to the triumvirate relationship of K/S/M.
Wow! The nay sayers weigh in, already. I have been a Star Trek fan since I was about 10 years old. That’s 33 years! When I was that young we would play “Cops and Robbers” and “Star Trek”. I always wanted to be Spock. He was so smart and I loved that he could incapacitate people without really fighting too hard. The latest Star Trek movie was the best to date, from my perspective. Sure “The Wrath of Kahn” is up there, too. Anyway, I ramble. For me, canon is not that important. That doesn’t mean that I am not a “true fan”. I am. I love Star Trek and I think that it is in good hands with this group. And , oh yeah, the latest Star Trek movie got my wife hooked real good. Now, it won’t be so hard to convince her to go see it with me in the future.
“Digging Deeper”?
Gentlemen, you have a lot of digging to do.
OK to Orci or Kurtzman (if they read this, and building on Anthony’s #7 comment): If they adjust the crew; heres an idea: bring Gaila back and have her be transferred to be the Security chief (and also institute a new red shirting policy where the Security Chief is the ONLY security person who CANNOT be killed)…or, to mix things up a little they can get Chekov transferred to become the new Security Chief and get Gaila to become the new Navigator…or they can reintroduce Ilia, and early…we have no idea how long Deltans live and how old or young Ilia actually was intended to be in the 1979 film…
Also, since Majel’s passing, they need to find a new voice for the ship’s computer…maybe Nichelle Nichols? :) or someone from another Trek, like Marina Sirtis or Nana Visitor? Or Jolene Blalock…Jolene would make in-canon sense, as they could say they altered the ship’s computer voice to use T’Pol’s vocal template…as she would still be alive in 2258-2262 (assuming she wasnt on Vulcan when Nero blew it up!!)
Maybe they could bring in a young Saavik too… which would make a VERY interesting romantic triangle with Spock and Uhura…does Spock stay with Uhura or get with Saavik to help repopulate the Vulcan race? Also with Amanda dead…will the Kirk/Spock friendship be redefined so Kirk and Spock will be stepbrothers? Meaning will Sarek marry Kirk’s mother?
Dear Prophets… the untied up story threads post Trek XI seem like One Tree Hill…which brings up someone to play Carol Marcus: Sophia Bush from One Tree Hill…her or Danneel Harris, also from same show…
And as much as pople wouldnt like this…realistically if a new Trek series were born and the current Supreme Court couldnt do the new show, logically to appeal to a larger fan base, the people behind One Tree Hill would probably be who are chosen to do the new show…before they ditched Smallville to focus on One Tree Hill, the people behind both shows did do a good job with the early seasons of Smallville and the style they brought to said show would be the best chance to bring a new Trek series as close to TOS style as is possible in the early 21st Century…even if it is with a different crew on a different ship…
On that topic: my choice for a new Trek series: Captain Robau, George Kirk and the crew of the Kelvin, pre-Nero incident, with the series finale of said show directly leading into the beginning of the ‘09 film…
@ #19. MaoMan – “The whole movie was about as organic as a Twinkie”
Fantastic! You gave me a great morning laugh.
And in the immortal words of Tallahassee- “You may not be aware of this, but Twinkies DO have an expiration date”.
Good writing takes time. We must learn to be patient, Grasshoppers.
As for the Uhura-Spock thing: I was intrigued by it, and accepted it, but I *still* think the original series indicated more of a Thang between Uhura and Kirk. Just look at the way she smacks around Marlena in “Mirror, Mirror,” and you’ll see what I mean. . . or the way she googly-eyes Kirk in that very same episode. . . or the way the spectral Kirk appears to Uhura, and the way Uhura grieves, in “The Tholian Web”. . . and so on.
Or am I the only one who thinks so?
I still say have Spock end his relationship to Ohura in order to take a Vulcan mate to repopulate his species(the only logical thing to do), then have Zoe go after Capt Kirk as revenge(the very thing all women do, if a guy scorns a women, she makes it with his best friend as revenge). Pine wouldn’t mind a day of filming a love scene with Zoe.
It is going to be a long wait between movies called Star Trek and featuring the full crew of the starship Enterprise. But isn’t there any way for Paramount to dig deeper into the franchise and put more Star Trek related movies into their schedule? (They don’t all have to be $150mm epics either. Nothing wrong with a smaller production that is more personal and intimate to round out the slate.)
For example, did Pike ever visit Talos IV in this new timeline? Couldn’t we see that in a movie? Why couldn’t we see a movie about the USS Kelvin before the attack by Nero? Could we see a movie about Spock Prime helping to restart the Vulcan culture on a new world? These could be executed with new creative teams under the guidance of the Supreme Court as creative consultants/executive producers.
(And please…no direct to DVDs. In my experience, those seem to be cheap, exploitive knock-offs or where tired frachises go to finally die.)
Couldn’t we get a Star Trek related every year with a “traditional” movie with the full Enterprise crew rotated in every 3 years? There’s certainly a rich tapestry of material to work with.
As for guest appearecnes this would be my ranking:
01. John de Lancie as “Q Prime” (he knows all and exists in all quantum realities)
02. Leonard Nimoy as “Spock Prime”
03. Patrick Stewart as “Jean-Luc Picard Prime” (Stewart is a great actor and I always liked Picard)
04. Jolene Blalock as “T’Pol” (she would be Prime anyway)
05. Kara Zediker as “T’Pau” (same again and I loved here)
06. Jeffrey Combs as an Alien (he was awesome as “Weyoun” and “Shran” and he would be also great in another alien make up)
07. Alice Krige as “The Borg Queen”
08. Marc Alaimo as a Cardassian (he is a great actor and the best to play these guys till today)
09. J.G. Hertzler as a Klingon (one of my favorite Klingon actors)
10. Avery Brooks as “Benjamin Sisko Prime” (considering he is in a timeless state by the Prophets)
Still say the apparent delay in Trek sequel production is not a good sign for the franchise. We went from public assertions that Trek is now an “integral” part of Paramount’s strategy to pushing back the sequel until 2012. Those are mutually contradictory objectives.
Dunno what’s up, but three years is too long.
to #19 and 30: i love how you guys were OBVIOUSLY a part of the creative team on board with this film, I mean since you seem to think that you know the film didnt come together organically. Jeez…as a small time filmmaker, I personally think some of you guys complain about things that were done in a smart way for the sake of making a good movie. Some of you bring up District 9 when talking about good movies compared to Trek. D9 WAS good but totally different than Trek. The first movie had to be done a certain way and until you’ve made a successful blockbuster yourself, whats the point of acting like you can do better yourself? Some ppl dont understand how hard it can be to make a movie, let alone a highly successful one that pleases people on both sides of the aisle. It wasnt perfect but for all the hard work that every person put in on the film they deserve a little more respect…or maybe you wanted Paramount to crank out another Nemesis quality film based on the Romulan War that wouldve gotten swept under the rug after a couple eeks in the theater?
34
Unbelieveable. All I can say. You liked some of the worst movies of the year more than Star Trek? You just must really hate Star Trek, which begs the question why you are here.
Zombieland was painful to watch. GI Joe was almost as rediculous as Transformers 2. Just mindless action. No story. Horrible acting. No character development to speak of.
Just put 2 hours of explosions and robots fighting on the screen and teenagers will line up by the millions to pay for it.
Star Trek was light years better than any of those films. Yes the story may be the weakest part, but thats like saying the steering wheel of a Ferrari is the least favorite part of the car.
The cinemotagraphy was fantastic. The sound amazing. The score great. The acting superb. The action was heart stopping good.
Great movie. It deserves all the awards and nominations it is getting and will get.
#23-Iowagirl—
Who are you? You’re my wife!
Never forget how important you are to me….
I agree with #60, and three years is not a long time to make a movie considering JJ Abrams has other projects and commitments.
@ 60. Jay “Yes the story may be the weakest part, but thats like saying the steering wheel of a Ferrari is the least favorite part of the car.”
With all due respect, and honestly, I’m really not trying to be a jerk or a troll, I just don’t know where to go with that. I’ll just leave it at saying that the story is more like the freakin’ ENGINE.
And in that respect, ST09 kinda had a 4 banger from an ‘82 Corolla.
If the story is set somewhere in the Five-Year-Mission, it will be fun to speculate, or hear, about the time that’s passed since the events of Trek09.
Just how many ‘parallel’ missions will they have had to their counterparts in the “prime” universe? How many new notches in Kirk’s crotch? Has McCoy finally joined the Holy Trinity?
I can’t wait for the boys to write us a new one. This time with fewer butterflies in their stomachs, and the origin story done, I am sure ST2012 will be great.
so if they had all the time in the world to make the STXI, they actually thought it was a good idea to have the kid scenes (i thought that did nothing for the film and was kind of spoofy) Not to mention no epic battle scene just that wreckage scene. that was dissapointing.
also to mention the star trek theme ride aka water tanks, also boiler rooms & 20th century factory rooms did nothing for the film either
As a hard core trek fan this isnt my favourite film.. hope they learnt there lessons (i did go see it twice though..)
#7
I would love to see the points of your third example become a reality.
#11
You and I are both suck-ups.
66:
That’s only when we let Harry out.
Roberto,
John Cooley here. Before the film opened we traded comments a few times. Thanks for that by the way, I enjoyed those messages.
First, I’ve not had an opportunity to thank you and your writing partners for what you did with the new film.
You were right when you said that I’d love it, and I did.
Each of our beloved characters was given more than just their moment and we left feeling that “STAR TREK: THE NEW UNIVERSE” was in good hands. Thanks again!
With that said, I’ve do have one request for the next film…
…please make the Enterprise a full character.
Gene Roddenberry and Bob Justman intentionally made the audience feel that The Enterprise was just as important a character as Kirk, Spock and McCoy. We felt that through Kirk’s love for her, Scotty’s care, and Spock’s respect. When we saw the ship on screen there was an emotional connection there and that was an important part of the Original Series. Show us something of Kirk’s love for her bordering on obsession (without going “overboard”). Remember that when the Enterprise was destroyed in STAR TREK III, the audience felt a real loss, as powerful as the death of Spock one film earlier. The reason was that the audience was invested in the character of the Enterprise over the course of 18 years (at that point).
Issues with the new design aside, we could use more than a passing glance of the ship. Now, I’m not suggesting that we have a seven minute flyby, but give the audience a good long look at her. You know nearly everybody I’ve talked to loved the shot of her rising from Titan. That’s because that’s the closest we got to a beauty pass of the ship.
Anyway…thanks again for everything you’ve done to make the new universe something we can love.
John
#52
Please keep Jolene Blalock as far away from any Star Trek productions as possible. Thank you.
#58
So this is like when they delayed it from December to May, and it turned out just awful, right? Good grief.
@52 – Yeek. No, Sarek will not marry Winona Kirk. Not in any universe. Period. Spock and Kirk may be “brothers in arms,” but they won’t mess up the Star Trek universe that badly.
Now, my take on the Jack Black as Harry Mudd/Trelane/Koloth thread: Let’s not worry too much about this until we see how Seth Rogen turns out as The Green Hornet. Might make more sense to put Black in the Koloth costume at that point. But if Rogen bombs, don’t look for Black to be approached at all.
And frankly, it’s time we left the old universe behind and started thinking of new adventures. Don’t rehash the old stuff. Besides, nobody could do Harcourt Fenton Mudd like Roger C. Carmel. Anything else would be parody at worst, imitation at best. And Black doesn’t have the scenery-chewing chops that Carmel did.
And @65 – Agreed, hope they rebuild Engineering into more of a 23rd-century-type of location. But as far as not having an epic battle scene, what about the Enterprise emerging from warp in time to destroy Nero’s missiles that were aimed at the jellyfish? Pretty darn epic, if you ask me.
68-They couldn’t get the ‘organic’ characters right (they had to use an alternate timeline/universe version of the characters), so I have little hope they do anything worthwhile with the character of the Enterprise.
And if they attempt it, if Transformers I and II are any indication, we will get the Enterprise leaking on a dog (or a bad ST equivalent) and/or offensive racial stereotypes, or maybe even worse.
71. cd
” if Transformers I and II are any indication, we will get the Enterprise leaking on a dog (or a bad ST equivalent)”
God I hope not…
Tom Hardy (Shinzon) is now being considered by George Miller as the lead in Mad Max 4 according to AICN (opposite Charlize Theron). I was actually looking forward to this one…
Now back to your regular program….
It’s just been confirmed! Shatner has signed to be in ST12! Unfortunately he will be buried heavily in Klingon makeup and a roman helmet. paramount is busy at work designing a special industrial corset to hold his considerable girth in, so as not to distract from the costume look. Bill is filming his part now quietly so it’s in the can, in case of his death, due to his advanced age.
I think they are trying to put a good spin on the fact that the project is being pushed back another year. More time doesn’t always equal a better product. There are many hungry and talented writers who could write a good movie script quickly. Although the Transformers 2 movie made a ton of money, I haven’t heard any good reviews about the writing. But they did hit a home run with the first Star Trek movie. Anyway, I predict there will be more delays and it will be pushed back to Christmas 2012 or Summer 2013 for marketing reasons, or other currently unforeseen delays. In the meantime someone should get a new and good Star Trek t.v. series up and running.
#2 (who is also #3) – you’re an idiot. This is a completely different timeline and anyone who remotely payed attention to the movie would know that. And obviously a LOT of people payed attention. I saw it five times in theaters and it got better every time!
#15 & #24 – kudos to you two. you actually seem to have some sense!
2. cd – October 21, 2009
And how did they decide to destroy Vulcan? I don’t remember that from the original series.
———–
If it was ok with Nimoy, you shouldn’t have a problem with it.
Hey, what a surprise!! They used the word “organic” again in an interview!
What IS it with these guys, and using the word “organic”? I don’t think that I’ve ever read a single interview where they haven’t used that word.
I really hope their imagination isn’t that limited when penning the sequel. I don’t know why it bugs me so much, but it does for some reason. It’s like when a 6 year old learns a new fancy word, and uses it it ALL the time to impress people. “Organic” this, “organic” that. Drives me crazy.
Okay, I’m done venting now :) LOL
68. John Cooley
Noted.
Some of the very best movies have been written in a rush of inspiration. But that’s usually when you have one person’s vision driving it, not a team effort. But then again, look how long Lucas took to get the last three Star Wars prequels written – puke!
I think the smartest thing that Orci did was to destroy Vulcan. When I first head about it I didn’t like the idea, but after watching the movie and that final scene with Spock Prime and young Spock, I see where they were going. They made the Vulcans much more interesting than ever before. It reminded me of Superman a little.
Now, what I didn’t like was they way it was destroyed since it violated all kinds of laws of physics…but that’s a compaint for another time.
78 – Organic means Natural, with a flow to it, rather than rigidly calculated.
68. John Cooley for Roberto Orci – October 22, 2009
“we could use more than a passing glance of the ship. Now, I’m not suggesting that we have a seven minute flyby, but give the audience a good long look at her.”
_______________________________________________________________
John, I agree 100%. In fact, I suggested something similar to Mr. Orci a few days ago (don’t know if he read it, but he posted a couple comments in the thread). I suggested some interior shots of the ship that were always essential to the relationships..
I’d like to see a meeting in the Briefing Room, where everyone is around the Briefing Room table. Maybe a good “Kirk speech” to rally the troops.
Maybe Kirk in his corders, with a good “Kirk, Spock, McCoy” philosophical debate.
Kirk, Spock and McCoy in Sick Bay.
A slightly more recognizable Engineering…
Those things all stand out in my mind (from TOS and the movies) as being the best parts about the Enterprise and the crew. Familiar places, regular “hangouts” on the ship where things and ideas played out. Like you, I don’t mind the cosmetic changes that they went with. It was all good. But, they could have toned it down just a tad (to make it feel more like “home”). The pipes in Engineering.. they were good. Nice idea. But, they were overwhelming, visually. You didn’t know WHERE you were in Engineering. Couldn’t make heads or tails of it, therefore, “Engineering” wasn’t a fun, familiar place I’d like to “visit” my old friend Scotty. Week to week, you liked tuning in to Star Trek on TV, visiting all the characters. Engineering didn’t do that for me here. I’d like to see some “familiar” control panels and stations mixed in there with the pipes. Doesn’t have to look like the old show, but it should look like a familiar place each time you see it. The pipes themselves don’t mean anything to me.
76, 77-I am well aware it is an alternate timeline/universe. I was just wondering what TOS inspiration, if any, there was for it, like the mentioned Spock-Uhura romance. From my perspective, the destruction of Vulcan appears to have been inspired more by Star Wars than Star Trek. If you like the movie, fine. If Nimoy likes the movie, fine. I just would have rather had a movie that was a little less of a Star Wars mashup. I may (or not) be in the minority on that, but I am certainly not alone.
84. cd – October 22, 2009
The inspiration came from two sources
1) History: the destruction of Vulcan clearly echoes the holocaust and the trauma of September 11th.
2.) No going back: we wanted to make it perfectly clear that this was not the same time line, and that we were not going to timidly tiptoe around the subject.
68, 79 – I second that about the Enterprise being a character.
One thing they did in Star Trek: TMP was that before Spock was on board, the Enterprise was having troubles, imbalanced Warp Engines, faulty Transporters etc.
Then Spock came on board and helped Scotty get things up and running, and the Enterprise was complete again.
Aside from the Titan shot, there was also the shot of Kirk looking up at her being built, and realizing that this should be his future.
One idea might be to take that nugget and have Kirk express a love of the Enterprise and his Command.
It would also be great to get Scotty almost in tears because of the pounding taken by his “Poor Bairns”.
Perhaps having a moment when they think the Enterprise is lost, and have our crew react with grief and shock for a moment.
Oh, and Kirk and McCoy philosophizing in his corders over Saurian brandy. THAT would be cool. Remember, some of the best doctor moments are when they perform bartender duties.
78-If they keep using the word organic, they may get a carbon tax imposed on them.
>;>}
82. OneBuckFilms – October 22, 2009
78 – Organic means Natural, with a flow to it, rather than rigidly calculated.
_______________________________________________________________
Yeah, I know what it means :) Sometimes, I just like to change it up, that’s all. I’ll just say “natural”
I still believe that Javier Bardem is wrong for the part of Kahn. Leave him for the third film. Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman should take a page out of Christopher Nolan’s book of writing and focus on why we should care about these characters. As a few of you have mentioned, this is an alternate universe, so there are some character traits that are surprisingly different from their TV show counterparts.
Cheers.
Kahn? Maybe Antonio Banderas
Or, Gerard Butler (if he can do an accent)
All this discussion is why Star Trek should be a TV SERIES
When you get a bum episode on TV you go: “oh, well they will do better next week”
When you get a great episode you say: “I can’t wait for next week!”
When you get a bum movie: “WTF? I could have pulled a better movie out of my @%%”
When you get a great movie: (like we got this may) “2012? Come on get it in theatres before then!”
Bring Trek back to TV!
Oh, and we should have Spock playing his Vulcan harp! But, a futuristic one this time.. like.. Vulcan “Harp Hero” video game. He could jam in his corders in front of the TV :)
I do like the idea of the Enterprise being treated as a character. After all, it is a ’she’, and this new Star Trek universe has very little of that.
#77
Personally, I hated the idea. But I doubt anyone cares.
I will chime in with my wish that the Enterprise be treated more like a character in the next movie. I would agree with just about everything that G said in post #83. And what OneBuck said in post #86.
That stuff was so clear in TOS that it was part of what fueled my obsession with scienc fiction spacecraft.
Here, toss this “e” up into post #96 for me. I seem to have forgotten it.
@92: “This! Is! CETI! ALPHA! FIVE!!!!!”
@47: You forgot the most obvious role:
Shatner as Starfleet Judge Advocate General Denny Crane. The 14th.
And of course that means bringing in James Spader as his hetero-life-mate Alan Shore’s great x 10 grandson. :)
I wonder if Kurtzman and Orci ever get the urge during these interviews to just say “we’re working on it! Now bugger off!”
I know I’d have run out of polite ways to answer the same questions about ten interviews ago.
#61
Oh Gary, how could I possibly forget that…
Thanks so much for your wonderful words – I needed that….
98. CarlG – October 22, 2009
@92: “This! Is! CETI! ALPHA! FIVE!!!!!”
___________________________________________________
Gerard Butler, in 300.. Wow, eerie, isn’t it!? I didn’t even realize that when I suggested him.
Spooky! LOL
85-I get the analogy. I thought it was unnecessary, but I get the reasoning. You wanted to drastically alter the course of events, to make it unique, I understand that. But, the characters were changed until they are very different, in some ways, opposite, to the originals, and the circumstances were changed (destroying Vulcan), to a point that, other than the ships, the uniforms, and the cliches, it hardly seems like Star Trek, to me at least.
But it was a fine summer action adventure movie.
Re: #12.
Compost is organic, too. I finally watched Transformers 2 the other night. What a pile.
Mr. Orci, if you’re still reading this thread and rolling your eyes, in addition to the character of the big E which I totally agree with, I’d also like to see more of the Kirk-Spock-McCoy relationship played up more than just Kirk-Spock.. I feel confident that you will all do another great job, just sorry we have to wait three years.
Oh, and could someone please release some decent models of the new Enterprise while we wait for the next movie?! C’mon! I’m still trying to warm up to it and let’s face it. Dudes need some visual aids.
Oh, and don’t forget the USS Kelvin too!
102. Kirk’s Girdle – October 22, 2009
Re: #12.
Compost is organic, too. I finally watched Transformers 2 the other night. What a pile.
____________________________________________________________
Yeah, I actually fell asleep, if you can believe that.. in the theater.
And, why didn’t Bumble Bee talk (again)? I didn’t get the point to that. It had no point, served no purpose (unless it was meant to be an “R2-D2-ish” character) But, it served no purpose to me.
77
We’re not joking. this is serious.
85
Your so called clarity was not expressed so in the movie.
with all do respestct screw Nimoy.
i dont know what you told him or how you treied to sell it.
but who wrote that charactor? Leonord is a great man. He is great at Spock. but I think a lot of people cant see past their love for Nimoy in the ears and see that it wasnt Spock.
You want to talk universe theory and these people have the same souls. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD MAN. Even MIRROR Spock knew kirk and co had to return to their universe and he had to have his captain back.
#68
I thought the enterprise scenes was done fine. With the young rebel Kirk glancing up on the half finished ship, with the early sun rising.
Kirk looking out the shuttlecraft and being wow’d while being under the effects of a vacine, with the music background of enterprising young men pumping up as the shot reveals the enterprise and a nice pass of the ship.
The titan scene, the mid warp beaming scene, I think the writers did the enterprise justice, as you said we don’t need a 7min pass of the beauty. I don’t know what else you wanted.
The only thing I didn’t like in the movie was the whole Nero going after Earth thing. I guess, I’ve seen too many movies where Earth is being threatened, V’ger/Whale Probe/Borg/Nemesis and now ST09.
It would have been much more thrilling to have the Vulcan scene imploding as near the climax of the film, where the opponent delivers you a near KO but you get up and punch his lights out. The other sports analogy would be a game 7 playoff game and the opponent just made it 2-1 with a few seconds left to go and you only have that one shot to tie it or win it. The earth scene imo was predictable and not the brightest point of the film.
It would also been great dramatic irony if the audience saw the 7 star fleet ships/armada get pwned by the Narada, that would have been a special effects orgy that would have rivaled empire strikes back, after the dramatic sequence of that 1min battle, flash to Kirk waking up and him warning Pike and crew. Great chance here also to showcase some great close up shots of facial expressions/torpedos as they hit the ships.
Don’t get me wrong I still loved the film, just nitpicking at what I didn’t like.
@ 101. cd – October 22, 2009 “But, the characters were changed until they are very different, in some ways, opposite, to the originals, and the circumstances were changed (destroying Vulcan), to a point that, other than the ships, the uniforms, and the cliches, it hardly seems like Star Trek, to me at least. But it was a fine summer action adventure movie.”
That was my take on it exactly. Sure, it was a fine”summer smash ‘em up” but it just failed to connect with me on some level, especially as a Star Trek story. And that was despite what I thought was an absolutely stellar (pun intended) cast.
OTOH – I don’t think that comments like #106. from Enc contribute to the discussion at all. Mr. Orci has always been very gracious and generous with his time here on the site. I may have differences of opinion with him on the some of the choices that he and Mr. Kurtzman made in their script but I have no doubt that he does have a huge affection for Trek and genuinely reaches out to the fan base to give them a better idea of how their team approaches the franchise.
rant over.
end of line.
Yeah, fantastic movie, Bob O. But, Star Trek is STILL our “child”, even after that first kick-ass movie you did :) And, our child starts 2nd Grade next year. We want our children to go to the best schools, that’s all :) We want nothing but the best for our kids. So, you’re still gonna hear from us LOL Yeah, just consider this like.. Parent/Teacher conferences.
#106
I don’t know what’s more insulting your inability to move past the past or your disrespect for one of star treks iconic actors.
I think we understand you did not like some aspects of the film, get it out and move on.
#106
Yeah, don’t ever disrespect “The Nimoy” like that. Blasphemy.
A fair number of the comedic bits in the movie worked really well, for me—especially some of the subtler ones, like Kirk’s off-camera response to Scotty asking if he and Spock Prime are “from the future?”
The biggest disappointment, for me, was the Bones character. The way that Karl Urban played him just didn’t work. It didn’t fit and seemed forced. I hope something changes about that, or it might become extremely irritating in subsequent films.
107 – About the ships being destroyed sequence:
I think seeing the ships destroyed in the attack, or the attack taking place, would have ruined the shock of seeing the ship wreckage ass the Enterprise came out of warp.
The way the film played, it meant that we were reacting viscerally with the crew on the Bridge.
Also, seeing the attack would have taken time away unnecessarily from the rest of the story.
#113
Good point, I was simply taking another angle on it. Having the audience see the destruction and know what is coming towards the crew of the enterprise, hence the play on dramatic irony.
112. Cygnus-X1 – October 22, 2009
“The biggest disappointment, for me, was the Bones character. The way that Karl Urban played him just didn’t work. It didn’t fit and seemed forced. I hope something changes about that, or it might become extremely irritating in subsequent films.”
____________________________________________________________
Respectfully, I only half agree with you there. I thought Urban was right-on. I think the only problem was, his “McCoy” was mostly one-liner responses to others, which made it too “comedic” or forced, perhaps. I think that he would simply be better served in serious dialogue, when McCoy debates with Kirk and Spock on serious issues.
I think Urban did good “McCoy”, I think he just needs some dramatic and more thoughtful scenes maybe.
ill agree to 115
for me i didnt like bones, scott or pavel
those charactors were close. but i didint like the delivery and to that extent the script they were given. It sound like the actors were forcing their lines.
#115
Yes, I love it when McCoy lectures Spock about morality/humanity and how Spock would respond back in a logical emotionless computer, their debates and dialogues was always the best.
Bones: Insult Insult, emotion, emotion, morality, ethics, humanity.
Spock: 0,1,0,1,0, you are too passionate and emotional.
Trek must be a weekly series. 2 or 3 years is just silly. I need my weekly fix of sifi adventure and I’d rather it be Trek!
117. somethoughts – October 22, 2009
#115
Yes, I love it when McCoy lectures Spock about morality/humanity and how Spock would respond back in a logical emotionless computer, their debates and dialogues was always the best.
_______________________________________________________________
Agreed. McCoy may have come across as hating Spock sometimes, but in fact, he loved Spock (as seen in ST III: TSFS). McCoy would always poke and push and challenge him to show some emotion, because it just bugged the hell out of him that he didn’t show it. McCoy couldn’t relate to that, and wanted Spock to reciprocate the fond feelings they all had for him.
My theory, anyway.
Javier Bardem as Khan rumor:
Isn’t casting a Hispanic actor to play an Asian character a little, ahem, 1960s?
117
01101100 01101111 01101100
81. VZX, I totally agree. The Vulcans were beginning to be relied upon, more than any race should have been, to solve all the Federation’s problems. And the resulting chaos creates even more potential conflict/drama for Spock (man without a species, actually, and now without a home world). Even the idea, proposed earlier, that he would be forced to chose between Uhura, and a Vulcan mate, could be met with contention by his world’s survivors. Recall, he is not a “full-blood”. And his “vulgar” (for a Vulcan, anyway) refusal of entry, to the Vulcan Science Academy would not go unremembered, by at least some (I’m sure the news made the Vulcan equivalent of all the scandal sheets, “Ambassador’s son, does not do as expected.” Shocking!).
And, what of those few surviving Vulcans? I know of some real estate in my neighborhood, with a perfect climate, where they would be completely accepted, near Roswell, New Mexico. ;-)
The Vulcans should all relocate to Florida.
+1 on the beagle, also. That’s genius. Porthos could just materialize and then be running around the ship for the rest of the movie, providing a nice ENT homage while adding some fun moments.
Do these guys have any idea for a an original story or are they going to be lazy and rehash Khan?
Given Hollywood mentality these days I fear the latter and if that is the case then I am not goingto be happy.
#121
I think you just time traveled with Bender.
sorry but I am still not a fan of these ‘writers’
119 – Great anaysis.
I think the Movie shows this:
Kirk: Who was that Green Blooded Bastard?
McCoy: I don’t know. But I like him !!
BobOrci- If you do another freefall sequence please do give the characters helmets/eye protection:) They would have been falling at terminal velocity face first and take it from someone with experience under the canopy that with all that debris in the air they would have been badly hurt/killed and they certainly wouldnt have been able to communicate clearly. That was one of those plot points that just said screw reality and appeared to be very poorly researched and took me out of the movie. Hell, Im surprised Kirk and Sulu didnt get blown off the platform just from the high altitude winds. The fact that they were so high up on that platform without breathing apparatus (the air of Vulcan is very thin remember…and thats at ground level let alone as high up as they were). That whole sequence seemed poorly researched and lacked credibility. It was action for the sake of forcing the story ahead regardless of credibility. Attention to detail.
This movie didnt suffer from the big things but rather the little things. I agree that the opening of the movie with George Kirk was a hard act to follow. That was good, tight emotional story telling.
Vulcan-As much as I hated to see Vulcan go boom it does set up for some interesting story telling but please avoid the Nemesis concept of taking the same character (Picard/Shinzon) and putting them in different circumstances to show how DIFFERENT they can end up. It would be more satisfying to see Spock remain Spock at his core but through a different journey.
Maybe T’Pring survived. Maybe now Spock has to make a decision to procreate for the good of his race and so he decides to honor his bethrothal…the Narada incident shouldnt have affected that too much. Duty to his emerging Human nature and his love for Uhura or his duty as a Vulcan. THAT may give a further purpose to the Spock/Uhura story.
Kirk does NOT need an ongoing love interest as was figured out by the original TOS folks (bye bye Yeoman Rand)…he needs escapades. Thats who he is and now that hes Captain he should NOT be diddlin female crewmember of the week.
Even in todays Chain of Command that is unacceptable but what MAY be interesting is to bring back an ex (like the Orion girl) and put her on the ship as a foil. Shes still in love with him but now hes a Captain and not an equal.
Give Karl Uran more to do! He was brilliant!
More cooperation and communication with the Art Department…no more of this retroactively changing scales of ships because the innards dont match the exterior. Bigger isnt always better and that brewery was a nightmare decision with few apologists.
Change the pallet and lighting on that bridge! No military Tactical Operations center could function in that bright white enviroment with those godawful bright lights shing in their eyes. Not credible or realistic at all. I cant imagine acting in that environment let alone trying to run a ship like that. WAY to distracting, The original artwork for teh bridge with the more subdued lighting was far more believeable and as a viewer I found the bridge as FILMED to be a headache to look at.
NO MORE GODDAMN LENS FLARES everywhere. Does JJ realize that this has become a joke??? Its freaking obnoxious as hell and shaking a camera and adding lens flares is a ‘trick’ and an overused one at that. A good story doesnt need all of that.
Pay homage to the mythos but do not pander to the fans. Delta Vega? Really? Lets face it that was a fail and it was NOT ‘organic’. Organic doesnt pander and Delta Vega did not ‘fit’ there…that was pandering. ‘Organic’ would have been calling it something else not forcing a name on it that didnt fit the location so the fans could go ‘nudge nudge wink wink’. That planet didnt NEED to be Delta Vega to work so it WAS pandering and it WASNT organic.
This was an enjoyable film but a rollercoaster doesnt require thought to be enjoyable. Transofrmers 2 showed (unfortunately) that todays general audience doesnt require much to make a film successful. The financial success of Trek 09 has allowed for a second attempt and HOPEFULLY the misteps and pitfalls of the first outing will be taken in to account on the second one. With 3 years to work on it there is no excuse for anything sort of brilliant.
BTW…if you do go back to the Klingons do NOT use those godawful designs edited from the first movie. The makeup looked brilliant but those leather trenchcoats and sam brown belts…well, that was just incredibly off the rack at Wilsons Suede and Leather lame.
When it comes to changing things let me just just say,”Just because we CAN do a thing doesnt mean that we should…”
127. OneBuckFilms – October 22, 2009
119 – Great anaysis.
I think the Movie shows this:
Kirk: Who was that Green Blooded Bastard?
McCoy: I don’t know. But I like him !!
____________________________________________________________
You’re right! LOL
Yeah, I’ve just always felt that McCoy was always thinking to himself, “I KNOW Spock cares about me and admires me as much as I admire him, but that’s not good enough. I want him to SAY it!” The others accepted Spock for being this way, but McCoy took it personal.
A long length of time between movies doesn’t always guarantee a quality result. Just look at Lucas and The Phantom Menace! However, on the flip side there’s Cameron and the lengthy amount of time between the first two Terminator movies. But then again these guys ain’t Cameron.
So, who knows? We’ll just have to hope for the best.
106. Enc: Exactly!!! #@&%
It was a fun summer movie. I just don’t consider it Star Trek, per se. I think of it as Other Trek.
The Star Trek I like still has the planet Vulcan and only one Spock.
I’m hoping the sequel will be a little more successful in giving me that familiar Star Trek feeling that was sort of lacking (again, for me) in this last movie.
69. sean once said “So this is like when they delayed it from December to May, and it turned out just awful, right? Good grief.”
Given the unofficial Texas premier and the fact that there were no known changes since then, I’d say the extension was even shorter than that and no where near close to extending things another year. And the only way it can be discerned if that small interval was put to good use is if there exists a December cut that Paramount releases and with which comparisons can be made. Till then, this film’s delayed release is a dunsel as a “use of extended time to improve quality” metric.
124
I dont know who these guys are and dont liek em. we know that much.
i know how much a trek fan i am. but i dont know how much a fan of trek they are. remember what this movie was made for. a trek fan could mean anything. from casual viewer to die hard nitpicker.
and we are on the outside looking in and for us its can be easy to to be judgemental. like em or not. but for these writers. they say they are fans and right now THEY are the ones on the inside. and now they are the enemy. TPTB the ones who have to hear it. form the rest of us.
i just hope we dont get more popcorn. i vote for no trek modern retelling. they shouldnt let trek fall victim to the moods of the industry.
#134 … . “i vote for no trek modern retelling.”
Well what do you vote for, then?
Dear Kurtzman and Orci,
Yes, there was a little flirtation in the original series, but it was one way. Uhura only flirted with Spock because she was lonely. Flirting is not always because a woman has the hots for a man, but can be a sign of friendship. If you really watched the original series, you would see that Uhura has a little girl way about her, that because she is a daughter/sister figure of the enterprise crew. You talk about the crew as a family, but you have a father-figure of the enterprise like Spock messing around with a daughter/sister figure of the enterprise like Uhura.
There was way more hints pointing to a coupling of Uhura/Sulu on the original series, then Uhura/Spock. Kirk and Spock on the original series/movies were always a solo act (no real loves in their lives, just work). Kirk and Spock are the parents of the enterprise, the enterprise is their baby and it’s crew are it’s children.
from Darrksan
Most of the criticisms of Trek09 range from “interesting point” to “not worth the time it took to read it.” I think some fans are just deluded, swept up into something as if they were really a part of it. We are on the outside looking in, and that is how it is supposed to be. We are not the creators, or makers of this product. Sure, we can say whatever we want — good or bad, this idea or that idea — but in the end, the product is not in our hands. If we don’t like what we see, we have the freedom to move on. It would seem a ridiculous waste of energy to continually groan about a product we have no real control over, hmm? Unless, of course, you have nothing better to do…
2012 is kind of pushing it, don’t you think? I mean, I want to see the next Trek film *before* the world ends.
@ 137.
Or just bored at work… ;-)
134:
“they shouldn’t let trek fall victim to the moods of the industry.”
Trek is pure iconic Hollywood pop. It always has been. Every Trek product ever shown on a screen was produced to attract as many viewers as possible. Same with the books, calendars, Burger King toys, etc.
And the “mood of the industry” is based on following the cash, and the consumers who provide it,
135
it was in re to khan
dont retell old trek ep/movie/story
137
theyre on the inside its hard for them to see it from a more indipendant view. theyre new to star trek.
Criticisms are a way a person can grow.
We (as people) more likely do not like hearing criticisms because it hit on the ego. Kurtzman and Orci as writers need the criticisms. If you want to put your ideas out for people to see like writers do, you will have criticisms.
Kurtzman, Orci or JJ are not the creators or the makers of Star Trek, nor are the fans. The different between Kurtzman, Orci or JJ and the fans is that the fans have a deep love for Star Trek.
121 – C9 AH 90 C9 B6 D1 F3 9H
11001001 10101100 10100001 11110101
I speak Binary and Hex well ;-)
4C 49 56 45 20 4C 4F 4E 47 20 41 4E 44 20 50 52 4F 53 50 45 52
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.
I am so glad to hear the writers speak in terms of arc, for each main character. Never forget that Sulu is the star of his own personal adventure. Each main character should have his or her own problem to solve, or knowledge to contribute to the new story. Please, boborci, Uhura’s problem should not be her love life!
And yes, I was always a Spock girl. Still am. Sigh…
133: “this film’s delayed release is a dunsel as a “use of extended time to improve quality” metric.”
In this thread that applies to the writing process, the process of actually coming up with the ideas to shoot. A story gets going when you have a great idea not when you sit down at a keyboard and announce to the universe that you will now produce greatness. My best ideas do not come when I’m sitting ready at a keyboard, they usually come when I’m driving and all I have is a broken pencil and a dirty napkin or a crumbled up receipt to write on.
Regarding Spock-Uhura, yes Uhura flirted with Spock in Charlie X. It was one way. In The Enemy Within she tries to do the same thing. He’s not interested. In fact, moments after telling her Vulcan has no moon, totally missing the point of her flirt, Spock bitches her out for giving him hell over not asking more questions when the transporter reported a fatality and it might have been Kirk.
But Uhura did willingly confess to Kirk how secure he made her feel while he was holding her in Plato’s Stepchildren, and that part was not coerced.
I do agree that it is kind of tricky to establish the bridge crew as a family and yet have Uhura as a romantic interest for one of them. It would be more interesting to me to have an X Files sort of tension between Uhura and Kirk. Something that’s there, and that they are aware of, but which could jeopardize the relationship if its acted upon.
And I sure felt the Enterprise was a character in this film. But you don’t compare 2 hours 6 minutes to 79 hours of TOS. If you want to compare this film to the first 2 Star Trek pilots, The Cage and Where No Man Has Gone Before, I think you’ll find the Enterprise in this film certainly playing a much more spectacular role.
i44
i agree with the 1960’s comment. and i cant right now come up with any other latinos for the role so banderas sounds like a good enough choice. but as much as it might be pc it just dosent look right to put an indian there. it would just come off as another change by TPTB.
besides i dont want them to do it in the first place. Id prefer new stories.
#145: “Please, boborci, Uhura’s problem should not be her love life!”
Amen. Nor should it be some bit of fluffy communications-technology technobabble, which would be my second worry :)
138. Captain Dunsel: “2012 is kind of pushing it, don’t you think? I mean, I want to see the next Trek film *before* the world ends.”
Summer 2012 ’should’ still work… a ‘last hurrah’… (or final insult).
148.
And, I never understood why Uhura was the only one who knew that 47 Klingon ships were destroyed. She knew, and Pike didn’t. She was in the Academy. A cadet. Didn’t she report this to anyone???
I mean, if Uhura has an open relationship with anyone on the bridge, it sort of sets them apart from the others as a unit unto themselves, and that feels weird when I think about it, at least from the aspect of the bridge being a family.
Oh, wait, she did tell someone. She told her room mate, the green girl (LOL)
# 85 BOBORCI
Great answer…that’s actually what I thought you were aiming for.
P.s. SHATNER AS KHAN!!
I can see it now…
KIRRRRRRRRRRRK!!!!! KIRRRRRRRRRRRK!!!!
Actually, I think the one person you could hook Uhura up with and keep it real would be McCoy. He’s not a bridge crew member and most of the time he’s off the bridge so there wouldn’t be the constantly working alongside your girlfriend weirdness. Spock and Uhura having a little spat while Klingons are trying to torpedo the ship.
Which would be funny, but…
These guys better be careful, if they take too long to write, then the expectations will be too high, and all the posts will be “what, I had to wait 3 years for the piece of cr@p. Kind of like I felt after sitting through Star Trek V.
Its nice to see them put alot of thought into this. Many of the prior Terk movies (besides haveing cheap budgets) seemed way to lightweight in their stories.
128. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat):
“… [No] plot points that just said screw reality and appeared to be very poorly researched and took me out of the movie.”
“More cooperation and communication with the Art Department…Not credible or realistic at all. …”
“NO MORE GODDAMN LENS FLARES …”
“Pay homage to the mythos but do not pander to the fans.”
“With 3 years to work on it there is no excuse for anything [short] of brilliant.”
FULL AGREEMENT.
In addition: No more pussy whipped Spock, PLEASE!!
153
on one hand it dose sound out of place for these studants to be doing the work. what kind of organization is this. the ENTIRE F#%!#& fleet was gone off to the convieniant sector. and the only persoel they had left was several thousand studants.
but there was also TWOK an dother referances that put studants on ships (but that was for a training cruise).
Uhura, let alone Spock, is way too professional to be getting involved, openly or otherwise, with a fellow bridge officer. RIDICULOUS!!!
Anyone know if the new cast will be at the Vegas con this year?
#157
Meh…then they have to deal with the destruction of the entire fleet.
And you complainers would be all over them for that.
P.s. Think Pearl Harbor whenever you want to complain about this again. Where was most of the US aircraft carriers when the Japanese arrived? On maneuvers. It has happened.
Seriously? Kahn? We’ve been there. Done That.
Let’s “Seek out new life, new civilizations and bold go where no one has gone before.”
That was what the show was about wasn’t it?
Besides “Star Trek” needed new blood. Let Orci and Kurtzman have there shot at it. It couldn’t be any worse than “Spock’s Brain”? Cause that’s sure a classic…
Jack Black would make a pretty good Harry Mudd!! =D
But what about the Shat as Cyrano Jones, dealer of Spican flame gems, Antarean glow water and tribbles, channeling some of his Priceline shtick!!!
77. Boborci once said “If it was ok with Nimoy, you shouldn’t have a problem with it.”
This is an important reveal into the creative process and I commend you for sharing it. I want to encourage you to feel free to do so and express my gratitude that you have done so. Thank you.
However, I feel compelled to point out that your statement gives the appearance (odd, given your profession and yet, perhaps not so odd given you regard yourself as a fan) of falling for a common fallacy: confusing the person projecting life into the written word on screen with the actual creator or creators that molded those words into a cohesive structured form, i.e. the narrative of the screenplay.
While I am confident Mr. Nimoy has contributed many story points and ideas to Trek, I don’t believe has ever directly contributed to the writing of a Trek script?
Perhaps my concern will be easily dismissed by many, but I feel your statement is far weaker than it could be with the name of a Trek writer of known repute (especially with regards to the planet Vulcan) substituted for that of the accomplished actor/director.
I believe Nimoy, himself, would readily admit that when it came to Trek film screenwriting, he leaned heavily on Nicholas Meyer?
As much as I enjoyed TOS and the original film era with these characters, I admire the bold approach to the altered timeline. I think it’s great. I feel that it allows these characters to develop somewhat independently going forward.
The death of Amanda Grayson and the destruction of Vulcan make for a potentially very interesting turn for the character of Spock, and I am very much looking forward to it. We already saw Spock Prime’s struggles…Let Quinto’s Spock have his own.
As for the Spock-Uhura romance, I think it can only be carried so far before it runs out of juice, but the good thing is that the writers can move past it anytime they wish.
Sometimes I have to laugh at some of the stubborn aversions to anything different. Why should these characters be rehashed exactly the way in which they were before? I’ve already seen TOS and the original films. As much as I enjoy reviewing them, I am much more interested in seeing how these characters develop in this altered environment.
There was very little I didn’t like about the approach taken in ST09. My only gripe with the story was that Kirk’s rapid ascension to permanent command of the Enterprise felt a bit unnecessary and forced, since much of the story took place in 2258. But even that didn’t prevent me from enjoying a wonderfully gratifying film.
What I want to see in the sequel is more Dr. McCoy—-and not just to deliver sarcastic complaints. I want to see him act as the conscience of the “Big Three”. I have no problem with Uhura supplanting Scotty as the “next most important character”—-but I don’t think she should overshadow “Bones” in anything but movie poster space.
I’m glad they are taking their time. Just tell me a good story featuring my favorite characters.
142 Darrksan
I agree, criticism (of the constructive kind) can sometimes be useful and appropriate and can make a person grow in some way. However, I do not see an awful lot of constructive criticism, I see a lot of condescending, adolescent snottiness, being passed off as criticism. Some people think they, alone, know everything about Star Trek, they know how it’s supposed to be, what it’s supposed to look like, and how it’s supposed to be made into a film. I am not worried about Orci, Kurtzman or Abrams having their ego bruised, particularly by some of the critics in this forum, but they shouldn’t have to listen to some of the verbal abuse that gets tossed at them… that is simply a matter of human decency. Can we say Star Trek had nothing to do with human decency?
And I disagree strongly that the fans loved Star Trek any more than Orci and Kurtzman, both of whom have expressed their love and affection for Star Trek on numerous occasions. And Abrams said he was always a casual fan but came to love Trek even more. Imagine the energy these guys must be feeling this time around? I think it is unfair (and rather arrogant) the way some people feel like they can say any mean-spirited thing they want — hiding behind “freedom of speech” rhetoric, and in the end they didn’t have much to say anyway. Intelligent discussion/debate is one thing. High school-style badgering is something else, which has nothing to do with intelligence.
163 – I think he meant that Nimoy was so in tune with Spock’s character, and he did not raise a red flag.
Nimoy has lived with Star Trek since the beginning, and refused Generations because he did not see spock’s role as being necessary for the story.
He also has a lot of long term insight into the characters and Star Trek in general, which means his judgement was important.
Leonard Nimoy has also directed a Star Trek movie, a pretty good one, which means he has at least some insight into what has been written.
This makes him a key source to flag when things are fundamentally wrong with the script and the implementation.
- The first interracial kiss was with Kirk. So we thought what can we do that’s different, but that still pays homage to that? Spock! -
And, according to some, was originally scripted to be Spock.
165 – Too true. :)
163
just speaking the language of the deal
#163—-”While I am confident Mr. Nimoy has contributed many story points and ideas to Trek, I don’t believe has ever directly contributed to the writing of a Trek script?”
And I don’t believe he did here either. However, Nimoy was instrumental in helping Dorothy Fontana to develop one of the most iconic characters in television history. Given that the writers were telling a story which featured that character as one of its two most important figures, it seems rather silly to question why they would feel good about having Nimoy’s approval on an area of the story which would have such a profound impact upon that character.
Bob never suggested that Nimoy came up with the idea (much less that he wrote it)….just that he approved of it. Say what you will, but aside from Dorothy Fontana herself, there is no greater authority around on Spock than Leonard Nimoy.
I wouldn’t be shy about boasting that either.
Before the Narada was destroyed, Nero DID manage to partially drill into San Francisco Bay. Perhaps, something was unleashed.. JJ’s monster from Cloverfield, buried in the Earth’s crust since the 21st Century, escaping through the fissure that was opened up by Nero, and wreaking havoc on Starfleet.. Alcatraz – Destoryed. All humpback whales – devoured (opening the “probe searching for whales” scenario for the next movie.
Ok.. maybe not.
166. OneBuckFilms: “…makes [Nimoy] a key source to flag when things are fundamentally wrong with the script and the implementation.”
I doubt that he was much of a script and/or technical consultant. If he was, I would hope that he would have caught WAY MORE of the things that “are fundamentally wrong with the script and the implementation.”
I kind of get the feeling that some of these posts are expressing fanboy wishlists that simply would not work in any real drama.
JJ Abrams was right when he said that Star Trek fans are a vocal and passionate group, and I proudly place myself as a member.
But often, we really don’t know what’s good for us.
In Gene Roddenberry’s own words, Star Trek is not Shakespear.
It was a TV show with great characters, occasionally great allegory, a massive dollop of camp, and a great sense of adventure.
The big mandate of this movie, often unspoken, but always implied and obvious, was to give us something different, shake things up, and go back to the basic premise in a new way.
Destroying Vulcan was, as far as I can tell, a way to say “there will be no reset, things will be different that before” both figurativel and literally.
Sometimes, change can be painful, even when it is for the greater good.
172 – Fundamentally wrong, or against preconceptions of the details?
172
maybey theyll launch Virgil to restat the planet
or release the Morlocks
or journey to the center of the earth……
Pussy whipped Spock is fundamentally wrong…
If they continue SpockUra, I better see me some angry, hot & steamy PON FARR, baby!!
173. OneBuckFilms: ” Destroying Vulcan was, as far as I can tell, a way to say “there will be no reset, things will be different that before” both figurativel and literally.”
Biggest mistake since killing Spock, IMHO
“Sometimes, change can be painful,…” INDEED
“…even when it is for the greater good.” YET TO BE DETERMINED
And, Pon Farr’s gonna be slim pickin’s for Spock, now that Vulcan is gone.
#3: “Not Star Trek anyway.”
Yes, it is – better than most Trek, actually.
Dennis, out of 179 posts you chose THAT ONE to respond to?? :>)
178 – I don’t believe it was, certainly not dramatically.
From my perspective on Vulcan, I point out the following Advantages/Disadvantages:
ADVANTAGES
- Provides a fundamental catalyst to test Spock on an emotional level.
- Provides an unfamiliar audience with a direct way to feel something for Spock.
- Underlines how dangerous Nero is, and graphically shows what he would do to Earth. In essense, raises the stakes in a cinematic way.
- Reminds and underscores the fact that this reality is in fact different, and nothing can be taken for granted, thus seasoned Trek fans genuinely do NOT know what eventually happens to the characters.
- Provides an emotional hook for more skeptical fans to draw them into the characters and situations in the movie.
- Opens up more complex medium-long term stories in future movies, and adds texture to our characters.
DISADVANTAGES
- Destroys and/or alters possible Vulcan-centric stories and events.
- Changes what seasoned Star Trek fans know about the Federation’s politics are (could actually be an advantage).
Can you please explain to me exactly WHY destroying Vulcan was a mistake? WHY is it a bad move dramatically? Missing Vulcan being there alone is not sufficient a reason.
181-LOL!
>;>}
182. OneBuckFilms:
“DISADVANTAGES – Destroys … possible Vulcan-centric stories and events.”
THIS IS MAJOR!!!
Why can’t you have Vulcan-centric stories? Just because there are less Vulcans now, and they colonized on another planet? Sounds to me you could have lots of Vulcan stories there.
I mean, how many times did we actually see the planet Vulcan in the original series? Once? And, a couple of times (briefly) in the movies?
You don’t need the planet Vulcan to tell Vulcan stories. You just need Vulcans.
184 – Stories, basically, can be transplanted to the new Vulcan colony.
I think it was DELIBERATELY major. As in that was the point.
So tell me again, aside from missing Vulcan, what, from a fundamental, DRAMATIC perspective, makes it an actual mistake.
It eliminates or changes certain stories that have been told already. Big deal. You DO want NEW stories, right?
185 – Actually, I was thinking of stories centered around specific locations on Vulcan. In a way, you made my point.
180-”Not Star Trek anyway” was meant as a continuation of #2, to say that the idea of the destruction of Vulcan appeared to be not an idea from Star Trek but from Star Wars.
I did not intially mean it as you appear to have taken it.
But, upon reflection, if I had to choose four words to describe how I feel, “Not Star Trek anyway” may not be too far off the mark.
>;>}
Why can’t we have Star Trek without Spock? or Vulcan? or Vulcans?
because that’s NOT Star Trek!!!
187. OneBuckFilms – October 22, 2009
185 – Actually, I was thinking of stories centered around specific locations on Vulcan. In a way, you made my point.
————————————————————————————————-
What locations on Vulcan? Wallyworld?
star trek is more then the sum of its parts.
but in order to make star trek you still need those parts.
you still need Vulcan
#176
Pussy whipped spock was funny, I loved that scene showing Uhura demanding to be placed on the USS Enterprise or no more booty.
Whatever they do, I just want to say HOLY #$%! did you see that? I’m going 20 more times.
#191
Nothing is stopping the Vulcans from rebuilding a Vulcan II and rebuilding with 10K horny Vulcans ready to rebuild…PON FAR PARTY!!!
#85. Boborci – October 22, 2009
The inspiration came from two sources
1) History: the destruction of Vulcan clearly echoes the holocaust and the trauma of September 11th.
2.) No going back: we wanted to make it perfectly clear that this was not the same time line, and that we were not going to timidly tiptoe around the subject.
Of course, I can only speak for myself, but in my case the annihilation of Vulkan did register much more strongly as a narrational tool marking difference between the Prime and the New Star Trek Universe than as a metaphorical representation of the nearly complete physical and cultural destruction of a people.
Therefore, for me, this act and its moral and psychological implications felt more like a structural plot element and less like a central theme of the film.
THANK YOU TAKE YOUR TIME GUYS DO IT RIGHT NO KAHN LET THEM DO THERE OWN THING SINCE ITS A DIFFERENT TIME LINE I CAN WAIT MAKE STAR TREK LIVE LONG AND PROSPER BUT ONE SUGGESTION MAKE DO A SLIGHT REFIT ON THE ENTERPRISE MAKE THE ENGINES SLEEKER BUT DONT DO TOO MUCH
191 – Actually, you only needed Vulcan for a few stories out of hundreds.
What you need for Star Trek is a degree of optimism, the Federation, a Starship or Station under Starfleet control, good stories with the occasional morality play, and a sense of adventure.
Vulcan being gone changes none of those things.
190 – Shi’Khar, the Forge, Mount Seleyah, others not established or mentioned in the past :)
WallyWorld isn’t on Vulcan, and substitution Vulcan for a new Vulcan Colony would work for stories that are not explicitly tied to a place.
Amok Time, though tied to a place, could be embellished to deal with a new location, and it would be an interesting twist to couple such events with the fact that Vulcan isn’t there.
How do Vulcans cope with a primal drive to a non-existent place, for instance? What happened to T’Pring? Did she survive? Does Spock still get the biological urge if she didn’t escape?
Unanswered questions that could be potentially dealt with.
188. cd: “But, upon reflection, if I had to choose four words to describe how I feel, “Not Star Trek anyway” may not be too far off the mark.”
I told those who sought my review (knowing I’m a TOS fan), that it’s a good movie, a very entertaining movie, a feel-good joy ride…
BUT
“Not (a) real Star Trek” movie
…not even a real SciFi movie IMHO.
197 – Lets see:
It has Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Scotty, Chekov, Sulu, McCoy, The Enterprise, The Federation, Romulans, Klingons, Orions, Kobayashi Maru, Starfleet, Christopher Pike, Adventure, Drama, Time Travel Trouble and Starfleet Command in San Francisco, and yet it is not Star Trek?
It WAS STAR TREK !!!!
What makes it NOT Star Trek? Specifically, what additional elements would have actually made this a Star Trek movie? SPECIFICALLY?
If the destruction of Vulcan is inspired by the Holocaust and 9/11, the next movie has to show the war. Klingons and Romulans vs the Federation like the Axis powers vs the Allieds in WWII. And a pregnant Carol Marcus is killed in a sneak attack led by Kor. Kirk leads a vengeful strike against the Klingons above a seeming primitive planet with a pacifist population called Organia…
So I’m going on a Star Trek book reading binge (non fiction (another result of this movie)), and I’m on Herb Solow’s and Bob Justman’s book Inside Star Trek, and there’s a press kit thing from NBC in it that describes each of the characters and actors that play them, with action shots for each. Does anyone remember Andrea Dromm, the cute blonde actress that played Kirk’s Yeoman from Where No Man Has Gone before?
Here’s the blurb about her character:
“Yeoman Smith, who has drawn the important assignment of secretary to the Captain on her first mission in deep space is easily the most popular member of Kirk’s staff. A capable secretary and EFFICIENT DISPENSER OF INSTANT COFFEE (emphasis mine), she also provides a welcome change of scenery for eyes that have spent long hours scanning the vast reaches of space.”
Okay, so Bob, what we need is a cute new Yeoman who man’s the coffee station on the bridge (her only job) and who, at the most inappropriate, most dramatic moment of the film, punctuates the silence by asking if anyone would like a hot cup of instant.
199 – Actually, there are some good questions to be asked on that front:
- What reaction, if any, would the Romulans have to the destruction of Vulcan and the Narada?
- Would there be any Vulcans who shun their heritage to seek to derail peace talks?
- Would Spock try to more closely embrace his Vulcan Logic, and shun his relationship with Uhura?
- If there are peace talks with the Romulans, how would the Klingon Empire react?
There are a lot of story ideas.
200 – I certainly remember Yeoman Janice Rand. She could still make an appearance, as well as Christine Chapel, in the next movie. Kirk complaining about his diet to McCoy would be fun ;-)
194. Hermioni: re #85. Boborci:
…for me, [the annihilation of Vulcan] and its moral and psychological implications felt more like a [tool marking difference between the Prime and the New Star Trek Universe] and less like a central theme of the film.”
“No going back” OBVIOUSLY
“the destruction of Vulcan clearly echoes the holocaust and the trauma of September 11th”
I have to agree that I did not get this at all, either. I was HOPING for something like that… not clear to me at all.
If anything, I saw the Bush Doctrine: callous overwhelming preemptive strike.
200-
I believe they built that into the new design on the iBridge…those standup consoles behind Kirk’s chair are actually for the Yeoman/Starbucks barrista now assigned to all Federation ships.
The Enteprise is sent on a secret mission deep inside Klingon territory to get more information on their new technology/cloaking.
Inspired by that TOS epsiode where Kirk is captured by the Romulans on orders to steal the Cloaking device.
Kirk is captured and tortured and Spock has to go with orders as Kirk was operating outside of Star Fleet, going back to MI: If you are caught or killed during your mission, etc etc. Star Fleet will disavow all knowledge…sorta like MI in space. Spock disobeys Star Fleets orders/giving up on Kirk and organizes a rescue mission, jeopardizing relations with the Klingons/personal career. Spock is successful but causes a rift within the United Federation of Planets and war with the Klingons ensues.
Kirk meets Chang who is not a General at this time and he still has his eye. Kirk and Spock steal the cloaking technology, install it into the Enterprise with Scotty’s skills. The Klingons are somehow holding George Kirk as prisoner and Spocks Mom. Dr. McCoy confirms they are not clones *medical technobabble* Kirk learns that the Klingons have been overthrown by a genetically enhanced superhuman calling himself Khan and wishes to have dinner with Kirk. There was a story told by Mudd that the Klingons picked up a ancient Earth type vessel called the USS Botany Bay and the Warbird was taken over and Khan had moved himself into a very high ranking position within the Klingon empire to help them conquer the Milky Way and rid all quadrants of it’s enemies.
Kirk accepts Khans challenge to a game of space poker/chess where the stakes will be to be conquered or to surrender.
Kirk beats Khan in the epic space battle with his risky moves and hacking skills. Khan surrenders only to be killed by the Klingons and a battle ensures, the Enterprise limps home to intergalatic war against the Klingons.
Pike dies to save Kirk/Enterprise
Scotty’s alien buddy dies
Red Shirt is phasered into thin air
Kirk meets Carol Marcus played by Gwen Paltrow who is working on a design to help rebuild Vulcan with Elder Spocks help.
Insert TOS/TNG cameo
Insert Kick ass Klingon ships redesigned like the new enterprise
Insert Kick ass Klingon score courtesy of Michael G.
Insert 200mill budget
Insert 3 Academy Awards
Insert Enterprise Refit at the end of the movie setting up for a full final arc in part 3 star trek 2015 dealing with mirror universe concept/Picard/Data and the Borg.
198. OneBuckFilms: “What makes it NOT Star Trek? Specifically, what additional elements would have actually made this a [real] Star Trek movie? SPECIFICALLY?”
What makes it NOT REAL Star Trek:
Basically, REAL Star Trek does not insult our intelligence. A LOT more thought needs to go into the design, we need to believe that this world is real and functional
The cinematography needs to be realistic, not flashy, gimmicky.
The established characters should not behave blatantly contrary to their nature.
The overall style needs to be more serious, less of the ”kid movie” style.
It’s always a good thing to time for ironing out a story and make it work/ The question is, what story will that be. If i was talking to Orci and Kurtzman, I would advise them to embrace the vision Roddenberry had for Trek, which is an age-old concept in sci-fi: Tackle an issue affecting today’s world and put it in a different context that the genre affords them.
At the same time, they must remember the character’s they re-conceived in the last film. I have to believe that, from a character standpoint, the next movie has to be about Kirk’s trial by fire because he take’s The Chair 5-6 years earlier than he did in the Prime Universe and how that affects him and the crew around him. In essence, they all have to be shown on the brink because of the consequences of the previous film.
146. dmduncan
An interesting post, but if you read the sentence I wrote prior to that you quoted, you would have realized that I was typing about the December 2008 delayed release being used as a “good use of time” metric. If there were, indeed, any changes in the small interval of time to 2009’s sneak release, it would have most likely been limited to editing scenes and punching up the fx and nothing to do with script changes with the possible exception of looping.
Again, until such time as a December cut surfaces there is no use to claiming that that little time interval serves as some metric to indicate how much better (or worse for that matter) the 2012 release will be in writing or otherwise.
As for your interesting personal observations on writing and time, I think I was one of the first to observe in these very forums that Orci’s slate was starting to fill with LICENSE TO STEAL and other commitments that would likely diminish his contribution to this sequel’s writing in his original calendar date for its completion. I even speculated that it would interesting to see if he’d make it to the final draft if Paramount stuck to that original release window. So I think I have a good grasp of the need for time in the process.
205 – Lets address these:
Basically, REAL Star Trek does not insult our intelligence. A LOT more thought needs to go into the design, we need to believe that this world is real and functional.
> My intelligence was not insulted. The technology on the Bridge was more in line with actual technology, with what looked like a usable UI for the Bridge, and an Engineering section where technicians can access the components directly. The number of shuttles made more sense considering potential evacuation or personnel transfer logistics are accounted for. The design made just as much sense as TOS, and certainly contained more detail. This argument is false.
The cinematography needs to be realistic, not flashy, gimmicky.
> Cinematography has changed in countless ways, even in Trek. TOS had lighting designed simply so that they didn’t have to use different colors or graphics when they reused the same set, and to showcase with “Look !!! Color TV !!!”, the very personification of gimmicky and flashy. This argument is false.
The established characters should not behave blatantly contrary to their nature.
> I found the characters were very true to their natures. However, without specific examples, I cannot address them. Insufficient information to make an argument either way by your definintion.
> The overall style needs to be more serious, less of the ”kid movie” style.
Like The Trouble With Tribbles, I Mudd and Spock’s Brain? I found that it was something that one could watch without boring half the audience, and having a plot that was actually understandable without the writers playing the Adjective-Adjective-Noun game to create fictitious terms to solve a problem. This was not a Kids film, but it was one Kids could watch. It was not dumbed down but faster paced and a little streamlined. This argument, even if valid, does not exclude this from being real Star Trek.
#194: “Therefore, for me, this act and its moral and psychological implications felt more like a structural plot element and less like a central theme of the film.”
I agree with this. I’m fine, really, for destroying Vulcan or anything else they feel the need to blow up for the sake of the story (since, clearly, they feel the needs of many ’splosions going ’splodey and all boom and stuff), but it felt more like “for the sake of staking out a new direction for the franchise and providing Plot Impetus A at Juncture C to provide rationale for Slot-In Emotional Beat D at Point G,” which is a different kettle of whatever we’re keeping in kettles nowadays.
I like artifice as much as the next geek, but the bones showed through (not to be confused, alas, with the Bones).
Watched Space Seed and TWOK in HD back to back last night.
Though I don’t want Khan in the next film, when they do do it, I am whether they should play the story of Space Seed differently with Juaquim playing more of a role and have Khan the known but not the worst villain. In this instance I can agree with casting a muscle-bound Aamir Khan since his screen time can be limited and Bardem can play Juaquim. If you look at Space Seed it was the inability to the supermen to bow to each other that drove their downfall on earth and even Khan was proud of the “There Can Be Only One” mentality. The depiction of Juaquim in TWOK as dutious and subservient was poor– frankly other than the occassional cleavage, Khan’s crew in that film had no redeeming value as actors.
If you catch the Botany Bay crew after they have taken over a planet as they originally planned you can create an interesting question about interference in a society. There is the question about whether you should remove Khan and a question of the other evils. Can be interesting if maybe too topical…
However, I’d like to see less of revisiting the past and more of science…
208. OneBuckFilms: “My intelligence was not insulted.”
DUDE! Come on! Talk about apologist… I’ll try to just give the most obvious examples:
iBridge: fail
Engineering (brewery) epic fail
bridge lighting / lens flares: epic fail
handicam: fail
Pussy whipped Spock: epic fail
Star Wars style space battle “ballet”: pompous gratuitous derivative fail
Scotty stuck in the (conveniently clear) huge water pipes in “engineering”: stupidly implausible pandering to “the kids”.
…these are but a few…
#198: “It has Kirk, Spock, Uhura, Scotty, Chekov, Sulu, McCoy, The Enterprise, The Federation, Romulans, Klingons, Orions, Kobayashi Maru, Starfleet, Christopher Pike [...]”
Legally speaking, you are 100% correct. Legally speaking, what makes Star Trek “Star Trek” is a collection of recognizable elements, trademarks, relevant trade-dress, and certain copyrighted elements as well (like the Alexander Courage music).
That’s why I, for one, always take care to acknowledge, respectfully, that this film was 100% the legal bearer of the “Star Trek” trademark.
And if that’ what defines Star Trek for you (plus elements like adventure and drama, which you feel the film included), then it was, in every way that is meaningful for you, Star Trek.
For your next assignment, recognize that one of the things that makes Star Trek special is that it means a lot of things to a lot of people, and for some people it’s more personal than corporate.
It’s not unlike Italian food. For some, a can of Chef-Boy-Ar-Dee qualifies. I mean, by golly, the label even uses the color scheme taken right from the Italian flag. What more do people want? Bloody purists wanting to naysay this fine Italian grub! Hmph. Haters.
Honestly, aside from Scotty, I don’t care if I ever see Sulu, Chekov or Uhura, and I certainly don’t think the story should be sacrificed in order to find something significant for those characters to do.
KSM were the thrust of the story. Scotty a close second because he represented the other main character, the Enterprise.
The other three are filler and could be any number of other Starfleet radio operators, ship drivers and map readers.
It’s nice to see them if they have something to do, but they aren’t required (as Chekov’s first season absence and Sulu’s hiatus due to the shooting the Green Berets prove).
I get worried when writers start inventing extra plot lines to find something to do for those otherwise superfluous characters. That’s what killed TNG in my mind – too much trying to be an ensemble and not enough time driving plot through a small number of main characters.
212. S. John Ross: re: “a can of Chef-Boy-Ar-Dee”: Nice analogy! =)
…but now hungry for spaghetti and meatballs… Mmmmmm…..
210: “Though I don’t want Khan in the next film, when they do do it, I am whether they should play the story of Space Seed differently with Juaquim playing more of a role and have Khan the known but not the worst villain. In this instance I can agree with casting a muscle-bound Aamir Khan since his screen time can be limited and Bardem can play Juaquim.”
Aah! You are at least partially on my side now, friend! Aamir Khan as Khan Noonien Singh!
And as Khan Noonien Singh might say: “Excellent. Excellent.” ; )
Elsewhere: Somebody who’s making the accusation please tell me how ST.09 was an insult to the audience’s intelligence? I don’t get it. Back that up with a specific example, please.
The first time I saw it I didn’t understand what the heck was going on. I felt like a 5 year old lost in midtown Manhattan.
I love Bill as Captain Kirk. But I don’t want to see him in the next movie. Let them stand on their own now.
i wonder how long it will be before mr. nimoy writes a letter for this site about the lack of respect given to the new team by the fans because these posts are alot like the Trek Web posts that got him so upset. debate is good and healthy but i know we can all show more respect than this, even if you dont like Trek 09. Trek 5, 7,9 and 10 all sucked and it didnt kill series. And i’m sorry but jj and crew are treating trek much better than the last crew did. or as i said before, do u want another nemesis or another film that the studio doesnt have any faith in and decides to strip away trek’s budget AGAIN?
211 – Nothing you have said, no matter how emphatically you say it, proves this movie not to be Star Trek.
All it proves is that you don’t like these aspects of the movie.
iBridge – Different. I liked it actually.
Engineering (Brewery) – Problematic in many shots, but the concept worked.
Bridge Lighting / Lens Flares – The lighting was okay, though nothing spectacular. The End of Star Trek IV had a similar white Palette, as did Star Trek V. The lens flares were excessive, but for the most part worked.
Handicam – This is a stylistic choice I thought worked, and wasn’t used for every shot. Nothing actually wrong with it, but I guess you didn’t like it.
Pussy whipped spock – I say younger, less disciplined spock. See The Cage for details on the fact that he did smile rather freely. He’s half human, and has not yet mastered his logical resolve. Charlie X provided some interesting hints of what might have been in TOS. Surprising, but still works for me.
Star Wars style space battle *ballet* – Erm, Star Trek has generally had things move in a more stately pace, and aside from the three-dimentional aspect used, the ships didn’t actually move that differently that prior incarnations.
Scotty in clear tube – Okay, that was a little overboard, but it wasn’t all that bad.
The few you listed still do not disqualify the movie from being Star Trek.
They are just points that you did not like.
212 – What would you add/change to make it Star Trek?
191. Enc – October 22, 2009
Vulcan is not really dead as long as we remember it.
HEH! =D
215. dmduncan: “…please tell me how ST.09 was an insult to the audience’s intelligence? I don’t get it.”
Obviously, ST.09 did not insult the general audience’s intelligence.
I wrote: “REAL Star Trek does not insult our intelligence.”
“Back that up with a specific example, please.” See post #211.
what really upsets me is all you people complaining about star trek this and that and then bashing transformers 2 which they were both Great Movies in their own right! I guess I am just getting sick and tired of seeing all the negatives about two movies that I consider a Must see again! I believe the only reason why people have so much of a problem with Star Trek is because they have changed it up! I also believe that if Transformers wasn’t done by Micheal Bay then their wouldn’t of been one, so just deal with it! I hate people that think everything that is turned into a movie, has to go by the original story line! What fun would that be? you would already know whats going to happen, the expectation and intrigue would be lost and then what would be the point in seeing the movie.
220:
Oooh, Bob, you so bad!
219. OneBuckFilms: “What would you add/change to make it [real] Star Trek?” See post #205. Quick rehash:
A LOT more thought should to go into the design, we should believe that this world is real and functional.
The cinematography should to be more realistic.
The established characters should behave more consistent with their nature.
The overall style should be more serious, more mature.
If I had to boil it down: IT SHOULD BE MORE REAL.
I guess what insults my intelligence is that it’s not believable.
If not until 2012, why not the back-to-back option? Let Bob and his partner work on a 2-parter. That would offer broader possibilities for epic storytelling and would make sense practically also. Why not?
225. I am not Herbert – October 22, 2009
FUNCTIONAL LIKE THIS?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XNPD380IpBQ/SEChBCCGiII/AAAAAAAABB4/vJ9hL_W8hXo/s400/P38_14_captainschair-Court_Martial.jpg
7. AP
You mean the time gap would allow a canon reason for changing the engine room from a brewery into a credible location for warp drive propulsion! : D
@222: Okay non-Herb, so REAL Star Trek, as opposed to faux Star Trek does not insult people’s intelligence. And I’m supposed to look at post #211 for real life examples of what exactly? How ST.09 insulted REAL Trek fans intelligence?
The sight of Scotty humorously trapped in a water pipe was a joke. I don’t know how anyone takes that—and that’s about as close as you get to scoring a point—as insulting unless they didn’t get that it was a joke and were trying to take it seriously.
I don’t mind humor in Star Trek, even if it’s slapstick so long as it’s used sparingly.
If you want dry humorless Star Trek, you’ll always have Star Trek—The Motion Picture, which I think is a misnomer and false advertising on the “Motion” claim.
And although I can’t see Spock-Uhura evolving into marriage or a full blown affair, yes, I could accept what happened as a result of Spock’s vulnerability and the loss of both his planet and his mother. There was certainly nothing insulting about it. Surprising, but not insulting. The major point of this film is that we NOT see the fully evolved characters we met on TOS but that we see them before they have settled into who they were on the series. And they did a great job of crafting interesting younger versions of the older crew which I found believable.
The sets were beautiful. The TOS sets are still my favorites because I marvel at what a great job Jefferies did with no money, and coming up with such timeless designs, but THESE sets were beautiful too. And Engineering is an easy save for the sequel if they want to add a new set.
225.
The only character in the film that I didn’t accept was Scotty. I didn’t care for Simon Pegg’s performance nor the character as written (sorry, Bob). He didn’t “feel” like Scotty at all. Somewhat of a buffoon. Didn’t inspire confidence in his competence! Annoying. Loud.
227: LOL. Leave TOS alone!
227:
Oh, trying to push our buttons, eh, Bob?
227: LOL. It reads ALERT, ALERT, and JETTISON POD. What are the two CLEAR buttons for? One of them must be to ring up his Yeoman for instant coffee.
230. Anthony Thompson – October 22, 2009
Noted. No apologies necessary.
227. Boborci : “FUNCTIONAL LIKE THIS?”
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XNPD380IpBQ/SEChBCCGiII/AAAAAAAABB4/vJ9hL_W8hXo/s400/P38_14_captainschair-Court_Martial.jpg
YES! I have to admit that the TOS geek in me LOVES that sh*t!!!
Go ahead and advance the design, but YES, FUNCTIONAL like that!
Do you have a picture like that of the ST09 Captain’s chair? I don’t remember anything comparable…
Star Trek was an ambitious TV show for the sixties. It tried to show people things they’d never seen before on a cheap budget and tried to make it look real to the sensibilities of the time. But we’ve been exposed to a lot of stuff since then and our sensibilities have evolved. And I thought the ST.09 bridge reflected that evolution in both design and sensibilities. Nothing about it seemed fake.
229. dmduncan: ” I don’t mind humor in Star Trek, even if it’s slapstick so long as it’s used sparingly.”
I love some humor in my Trek too, but not when it comes at the expense of “suspension of disbelief”.
Scotty stuck in the (conveniently clear) huge water pipes in “engineering” is so stupidly implausible that it pulls you right out (of believing).
237. I am not Herbert – October 22, 2009
Scotty stuck in the (conveniently clear) huge water pipes in “engineering” is so stupidly implausible that it pulls you right out (of believing).
————
Transwarp beaming is dangerous. You could end up anywhere.
236. dmduncan: “…our sensibilities have evolved. And I thought the ST.09 bridge reflected that evolution in both design and sensibilities. Nothing about it seemed fake.”
…or contrived? Hmmm…
…not a glitteringly optimistic white plastic fantasy?
237: “Scotty stuck in the (conveniently clear) huge water pipes in “engineering” is so stupidly implausible that it pulls you right out (of believing).”
Unless they have a whale on board, those pipes were too big. Rick Sternback pointed that out in another thread. Of course “cetacian ops” on the TNG E was his idea too, so there could be a plausible reason for onboard cetacians; I believe Rick’s idea was that they assisted in navigation is some way, which is reminiscent of the Spacing Guild Navigators of the DUNE books.
But putting all that aside, just going into the theatre requires a willing suspension of disbelief, and apparently some of us go less willingly than others. I had no such problem as you did. I was amazed at what I saw. It was literally too much for me to absorb all at once.
TRANSWARP!!! BEAMING!!! <>
HEAD EXPLODES!!!
239: What is contrived about the bridge? Curves are hard to make. Everything on the TOS bridge is all flat and angles because that’s cheap and easy. It’s pure 1960’s Desilu tightwad production design. Don’t get me wrong: It worked great because Jefferies was talented, but the amount of work put into this new bridge is self evident and nothing to complain about. I could not STAND any of the previous movie bridge sets.
I’m glad they’re taking their time with the sequel to Star Trek even though 2012 does seem a long time away now, it means that they will have the opportunity to make the best movie they possibly can!
And at least we’ve got the DVD and Blu Ray release of Star Trek to look forward to, only six day away here in Australia!!
How long after the DVD release before somebody here posts a re-cut ST.09, including deleted scenes, to fanedit.org?
Dude! Speaking of: I just started watching TOS Remastered on disc!
TOS Remastered on disc is SO SWEET!!
…WAY better than broadcast version, EVERYTHING is better: picture, sound, editing… EXCELLENT! HIGHLY RECOMMEND!! =D
Actually I don’t think they host anymore to keep their asses safe, but that’s not stopping people from cutting their own illegal versions of stuff elsewhere anyway. Paramount really should release a special edition fan-cut version of the film—sort of like having the choice to watch TOS episodes with the original effects or remastered effects.
Because not using ANY footage with that buxom green babe is WRONG.
How is a trainee ship that just left earth the closest starship to regula 1 and the only one “in the quadrant?” How could the USS Reliant’s sensors fail to recognize that the ceti alpha system had the wrong number of planets? These technical “that would never happen!” scenerios have very little to do with whether or not a movie is any good.
227. Boborci – October 22, 2009
225. I am not Herbert – October 22, 2009
FUNCTIONAL LIKE THIS?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XNPD380IpBQ/SEChBCCGiII/AAAAAAAABB4/vJ9hL_W8hXo/s400/P38_14_captainschair-Court_Martial.jpg
Owned.
#248
I agree, JJ should just release the cut with everything intact. How hard is it to place x scene after or before y scene. Even if the special effects are not finished, I just want to watch the version without all the second thought cuts.
You know they can even fill us in more on the 3 years of Kirk being at the Academy.
I would love to see his first 2 attempts of the KM test, boborci and crew can do it right this time with all the suspense and climax for that scene.
Those 3 years would make great for either a flashback/novel.
“Vulcan is not really dead as long as we remember it.”
Ha!
Funny how the haters of this movie always seem to take up huge amounts of space writing their own fan fic script idea and pass it off like they’re Gods gift to Trek.
#220
Sorry Bob – not funny.
For my little birthday party this year, I went with three friends to see Star Trek, a day after its release. And, I gotta say, as none of them were Trek fans (at all), it was pretty nice to have them all enjoy the movie about as much as I did, which was a fair amount of enjoyment.
So, there’s your triumph of herd-mentality, commercialized, status-quo, profit-driven art-craft.
Though, I still say that Nero’s motive was oddly weak. There must’ve been some last-minute changes made on and about him, forced upon the film by its out-of-touch executive producers….because I KNOW that Bob Orci wouldn’t have made such an obvious oversight.
#166. OneBuckFilms once wrote “I think he meant that Nimoy was so in tune with Spock’s character, and he did not raise a red flag.”
I thought I was clear that I get that point of view but I think in the course of making Trek history Nimoy, the man, has also demonstrated an ability to get it very wrong about where it would be best for the Trek narrative to head. For example, we wouldn’t be here typing about this at all if TWOK stayed with his initial instincts that Trek would best be served if he and his character, Spock, were no longer a part of it.
Also, I’m not certain that knowing whether the destruction of Vulcan could ring true for the Spock characters equates to a complete understanding of the profound effect that the absence of said planet would have on the Trek narrative.
I think the death of the Planet Vulcan holds for Trek at least as much import as that of Spock himself. There’s a void created in either’s death that isn’t easily glossed over.
Back then, Nimoy was able to convince the producer/screenwriter Harve Bennet to work with him to give him a way out of that with which he had previously given his imprimatur.
Perhaps Vulcan needs a better agent as no obvious outs presented themselves in this year’s production? But Trek fans are always found of quoting “There are always, possibilites.”
I suppose with everyone (myself included) throwing TWOK around it would be rather tempting to encourage the writers to have Spock Prime give Carol Marcus the Genesis “equation” in order to create New Vulcan forthwith?
#219: “212 – What would you add/change to make it Star Trek?”
What would make it Star Trek for me may have nothing to do with what would make it Star Trek for another fan. For example, some of the points in post #225 resonate with me while others just make me shrug. As I said in #212, a lot of things to a lot of people.
To make it Star Trek for _me,_ even the shortlist of changes would be too much to list, but the first item on it would be a fundamental philosophical shift: to be Star Trek to me, a work must be a moral, humanistic work of space-adventure fiction with a bent toward attainable heroic optimism, emphasizing and celebrating the possibilities of humanity’s future in the face of challenges and threats solved by the wit, tenacity, resourcefulness and courage of the crew. That’d be job one, and it would erase something like 75% of the movie :(
Job two in one word: Trinity.
And so on.
To make it Star Trek for someone else? I guess I’d ask them. I don’t personally care about strict adherence to canon; I don’t much care what the Enterprise looks like (I’ve put up with ugly Enterprises before). I like Keenser. I’m okay with the Uhura thing. We all have our own deals with it, or not, as suits us.
#232: “Oh, trying to push our buttons, eh, Bob?”
That’s a skill I sincerely hope he develops in time for the next movie :)
# 85
“2.) No going back: we wanted to make it perfectly clear that this was not the same time line, and that we were not going to timidly tiptoe around the subject.”
IMO, an unnecessary decission. We already don’t know how the REAL Kirk and Spock met for the first time. There is a gap between 2255 and 2266 we don’t know anything about. Enough room for new designs, stories, characters etc.
259
A lot of things were unnecessary decissions IMO.
I’m glad Orci is reading the thread. I think it’s good not just for fans who get to talk about what they want, but for him, who can get an idea what he did write and wrong. Some writers are too arrogant to care what the fans think. They are not normally very good writers. Those arrogant writers tend to think they simply know better and usually do what THEY think is cool, rather than stay true to the franchise or characters. That happened a lot in the Berman era, and the franchise suffered.
So even though I may not like everything they did in this movie, a writer that can take the time to read up on the critiques is likely to put out a better story in the future.
I’ve said this many times–the movie was GOOD. But it was not GREAT.
I think in Hollywood today, most writers treat the audience as if they are stupid. What made the original series stand out is that it treated the audience as if it were smart. I think that’s something all good sci-fi writers do. That helped make TOS work. You also saw that on shows like Land of the Lost (which featured many TOS writers). That show had a nice continuity, and even as a 5 year old, I was able to follow it, and connect episodes.
So I would suggest that if you want to do a cool story involving multiple universes, go ahead. The audience will get it, and appreciate it.
Back to the Future II did a whole storyline based on altering timelines and changing history. It was complicated, and a hell of a lot of fun.
I like that you go back and rewatch TOS episodes. That seems like a no brainer requirement to write a Trek movie, but it didn’t happen in the Berman era, where they prided themselves on their ignorance.
When you rewatch the episodes for this movie, please pay careful attention to Scotty. I’m sorry, but you really wrote the character poorly in this movie, and he wasn’t really cast well either. No disrespect to Simon Pegg, but while Scotty does have some comic overtones, he is NOT purely comic relief. He’s no buffoon, and Scotty came off as a buffoon. Scotty takes his job extremely serious, and I think his love for the Enterprise needs to come out.
Both Scotty and Kirk have a strong love for the ship. Others have pointed out that the Enterprise should be a character that we care about. Unlike in TNG, where the attitude was, “well, there are a lot more letters,” on the original series, we need to feel the same pride that a crew would. The destruction of the Enterprise in ST3 was a BIG deal.
Scotty and Kirk are the two characters that are best to show this off. To Kirk, the Enterprise is his passion. Command is what he was born to do, and protecting that ship is his life. There is even a line in one of the episodes about how Kirk’s emotional love for his ship was able to get him to cure himself from that special love tear from that princess.
And the Enterprise is Scotty’s baby. He takes pride like a father. You can insult anything in the world to that man, but if you insult the Enterprise, look out.
And both Kirk and Scotty protect that ship with uncanny competence, be it a miracle in engineering, or in the command chair (and BOTH Kirk and Scotty are awesome in command).
You got Scotty wrong in this movie. He is so much more than comic relief. Ideally, I would love to see the role recast, but I doubt you’ll do that. So if you can’t do that, then at least write the character better. I know you can.
#227 “FUNCTIONAL LIKE THIS?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XNPD380IpBQ/SEChBCCGiII/AAAAAAAABB4/vJ9hL_W8hXo/s400/P38_14_captainschair-Court_Martial.jpg”
Clearly labeled. Batman (as portrayed by Adam West) would be truly proud.
And how awesome is it, that in the 23rd century, amazing technology, developed by the genius of Dr. Daystrom, allows for the entire funcionality of a button to be altered by the simple attachment of a self adhereing label! Such technology would no doubt be considered magic by you and I, but apparently it is common practice in the 23rd century. The science involved here is such, that we can’t even begin to dream about it! ( and yeah, the new movie stuff is cool too)
I’m glad they are taking the time to get it right instead of trying to rush something out sooner.
There was a lot of special stuff in Star Trek 2009. One small example out of many was Winona Ryder’s role as Amanda. After I saw the Star Trek, I heard her say in an interview that she had a very small role and I thought what is she talking about, she was a huge part of that film. Then I went to see it again and realized how short her actual screen time was.
Having a character make such a big impression and impact on the story in just two scenes is a sign of good writing and good acting. So I hope they take all the time they need to deliver a solid sequel. Was Star Trek V all that bad? Maybe not, but it was a let down in comparison to Star Trek IV and was probably rushed to camera too soon. I don’t want to see another Star Trek V (although, if it fits, a Shatner appearance would be fine!)
All I can say is that I took my Dad, who is in his mid-sixties and an original series fan only to the premiere at the Opera House, he walked out of the movie and said “that is Star Trek” he couldn’t see how a trek fan could see that film and not be happy. He was up till 3 in the morning talking to my mother about it, and then took her to see it again when it came out. I’ve seen it 8 times so far, and am looking forward to picking up the blu-ray next week and watching it for the 9th. In my opinion mission accomplished for Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman, keep up the good work guys, and the countdown now starts for 2012.
#85: Bob, thank you for your honesty. The destruction of Vulcan was the main reason I disliked the movie, but you clearly had strong reasons for it which I can understand.
Seriously, thanks Roberto for lurking and then often chiming in on this forum. I am not a TF fan, but know you appear from time to time over there also. Everyone appreciates it!!!
One thing that I appreciated about JJ’s film was that there was some thought between him and his cinematographer, as far as location photography. Some DPs seem to think that just throwing up a pair of HMIs will suffice, but using the real sun when possible (location photography for the fight on the drill’s surface as it was above Vulcan, for example) always looks better.
Cheers!
Ryan
#235—-”YES! I have to admit that the TOS geek in me LOVES that sh*t!!!”
And yet ST09 insulted your intelligence? People like you take Star Trek (and the ridiculous notion that it has to be realistic) far too seriously. It’s supposed to be entertaining!
Bob’s example from “Court-Martial” is one of the many instances in which what was being suggested in a Star Trek story was totally implausible and bordering on completely ridiculous, yet it was entertaining!
Sometimes, I think the more pretentious fans have selective memories…
This was more “like Star Trek” than anything produced by Paramount or CBS with that name on it in more than 30 years!
I too fall into the category of thinking the movie was good but not great. I know it’s not possible for Roberto and Alex to spill all the behind the scenes machinations from studio executives, but it’s gotta be tough to come out of story meetings, with mandates for “number of set pieces” and “consideration for the number of characters and how they relate to action figures.”
So, Roberto, can you talk about your and Alex’s process in story creation? Sometimes in considering your works, I imagine a big corkboard in your KO offices, with dozens of “cool set pieces” that are tacked into the cork, and shuffled around several times, and then the dialogue and exposition are worked around those set pieces. Can you elaborate on your process? Thanks…
265.
Oh God, now we’ve got another one. Could you please add your last name to future posts to avoid confusion?
268.
They elaborated their writing process in great detail in a recent interview which was posted here. It involved computers more than cork.
270
The cork question was not meant to be derogatory. They obviously use computers to write scripts for something like SNL, but if you know anything about the process on that show, you’ll see Lorne Michael’s office with a board with little index cards on it. Sometimes it is easier to see the big picture, and shuffle it around, when it is all staring you in the face…
I did read the interview, and I appreciate them being two old friends, sitting across from one another, bouncing dialogue back and forth, as if they were the characters, and then typing something into their Final Draft 8…
BobOrci.
Are you going to approach the characters any differently in the sequel now that you know the actors who play them?
I felt Chris Pine really showed his acting chops. He was both empathetic yet strong against Spock when Vulcan was destroyed. He could have been too strong and come off unlikeable or he could have been too empathetic and come off as a weakling. But he pulled it off well.
Also, Bruce Greenwood and Karl Urban stole every scene they were in. Greenwood’s Pike was a completely different take than Jeffrey Hunter’s and came off wonderfully as a Captain you look up to and respect. On the other hand, Karl Urban was so close to DeForest Kelley’s McCoy that I felt like he was an important anchor to the Star Trek that came before this. They both need more screen time in the sequel.
Boborci, thanks for reminding us of what Star Trek really is, rather than how it’s been percieved by some.
Guys, I can see why the movie did not meet what some wanted, it never would or could.
But the simple fact is that this is Star Trek seen through a different lens than Rick Berman.
Many of the things I liked and enjoyed in the movie, others didn’t. I know people who loved Enterprise, and I find it wanting in many ways.
But this movie is just as much part of Star Trek as The Corbomite Maneuver, Court Martial, Spock’s Brain, The Wrath Of Khan.
It’s merits and drawbacks, and how well it is percieved by any individual is not a qualification either way as to whether it is Star Trek.
Star Trek to me was always a fun time with a family of sorts, those characters I saw in the 60s, and the new versions of them are pretty close.
One can like or dislike the movie, but it IS STAR TREK. Fact. Truth.
To assert otherwise is to insult the intelligence of everyone by making Star Trek more than it actually is.
Just to clarify on what Star Trek means to me, one only has to look at the fact that my love of computers and programming started with Spock and the Library Computer in TOS.
Star Trek is greater than the sum of its parts because each of the episodes in TOS takes very different stories varying from silly (Spock’s Brain) to the beautifully gutwrenching (Ciy on the Edge) to the dramatic (Amok Time).
One film cannot distill everything that is Star Trek. This film distills the premise, and future films will deal with other aspects of what Star Trek has.
Stylistic changes in presentation does not change this.
24. More than happy to. Won’t take me eight months, either.
255. Iowagirl – October 23, 2009
#220
Sorry Bob – not funny.
I thought it was chuckle-icious.
268
Star trek was unlike any other experiance we’ve had in that we had no studio interference or mandates. The movie we wanted to make is the mnovie we made. As for the process, we do like the corkboards, but the approach is the reverse of what u described. We come up with the character story first, and then figure out the det pieces around the character stories last.
#267: “This was more “like Star Trek” than anything produced by Paramount or CBS with that name on it in more than 30 years!”
Well, THAT is true.
But damning it with faint praise is just mean. ;)
#273: “One can like or dislike the movie, but it IS STAR TREK. Fact. Truth.”
Legally speaking, this is 100% correct.
261. Mitch: “What made the original series stand out is that it treated the audience as if it were smart. I think that’s something all good sci-fi writers do. That helped make TOS work.”
FULL AGREEMENT
276:
It’s not like Bob Orci to have typos in his posts. Why, it must be Bizarro Bob!
Bizarro Bob!!?? Hmmmm, that has a nice ring to it! :>)
I’m on a plane sitting on runway using new balckberry
267. Closettrekker
#235—-”YES! I have to admit that the TOS geek in me LOVES that sh*t!!!”
“And yet ST09 insulted your intelligence?”
I don’t remember ANY input, manual or otherwise, on the iBridge besides the stupid throttle. Whereas the image provided by Bob shows the actual use of working, functional controls.
“People like you take Star Trek (and the ridiculous notion that it has to be realistic) far too seriously. It’s supposed to be entertaining!”
YES, realism and believability – TOTALLY RIDICULOUS… Let’s just sit back, turn off our brain, and be ENTERTAINED. D’uh!
“Bob’s example from “Court-Martial” is one of the many instances in which what was being suggested in a Star Trek story was totally implausible and bordering on completely ridiculous, yet it was entertaining!”
I can’t tell what the hell you are talking about here… ?
I resist the urge to tell you about “people like you”, “pretense”, and “selective memory”…
Hey Bob,
That one should be a twitter post ;-)
Have a good flight!
Bob’s blackberry woes are why we need voice command on those damn things. And if they can get it to answer back in the affirmative with a sultry “Yes, dear” so much the better!
(What episode was that where the computer had been reprogrammed on a planet of women?)
Hey Bob,
Was there a TOS technical consultant on the project, besides yourself and the “Supreme Court”?
Was it Nimoy?
Thanks!
#281 Wonder what they use for Blackberry in the 23rd century!? Can you imagine Kirk texting his latest conquest “don’t write, I’ll be out to space for the next five years” as he hops on the transporter platform?
;)
Safe travels.
281
“I’m on a plane sitting on runway using new balckberry”
Ah, well, that explains everything!
Gotta love those Blackberrys!
The biggest problem with the film is the flawed characterization and the flawed plot.
Why is Kirk becoming Captain at the end? Because he deserved it? No, it’s because he is Captain Kirk in the franchise, so he must be by the end of the movie, doesn’t matter if he cheated, doesn’t matter that he got from Cadet to Captain in only 3 days.
Why are Kirk and Spock becoming friends now? Is it because of a natural, reasonable development? No, it’s because some guy from the future told them they would be friends, so they simply have to be.
Why is Scotty aboard the Enterprise? Because of a guy from the future and a huge coincidence.
I don’t know about you guys, but I regard that as pretty ugly way of setting up a story.
If the next movie’s script is at the same level of garbage, hopefully you’ll realize it.
And that’s the result of two writers working on a script with no rush. I still can’t believe it.
Kirk saved the federation!
@282: 1960’s era buttons, switches, and gummy drop lights for a 23rd century starship seems realistic to you? Seriously?
So the static artwork above Spock and Uhura’s stations look like REAL and BELIEVABLE computer displays to you?
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Spock_at_science_station.jpg
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Nyota_Uhura,_2266.jpg
(Excuse me if this ends up being a double or triple post. First attempt vanished. Second too. May be too many links)
289: Kirk didn’t cheat. And there’s no indication he disliked Spock. Kirk thought Spock was the one who didn’t like HIM. Once Spock gets over the shock that this nobody outsmarted his test and learns to put his ego aside, it’s only logical that some friendship would develop. The animosity was all coming from Spock anyway. And Kirk’s manipulation of Spock’s emotions was not done maliciously but to get him out of the way so that he could stop Nero, who would have destroyed the Earth if the Enterprise had gone to the Laurentian system as per Spock’s command decision.
And before someone starts harrassing me about saying Kirk didn’t cheat, I’ll begin my defense.
The Kobyashi Maru was not a typical right/wrong answer test that Kirk could steal the answers to and falsely indicate he knew something which he did not really know.
And the “no win” scenario presumes on the programmer’s part certain definite situations that cannot be beat. But one man’s no win situation is another man’s challenge to excel.
By stacking the odds in such a way that it becomes actually impossible to win in ANY situation, then it isn’t a test of any individual’s ability but a mere rite of Starfleet passage. It’s like calling the exposure to tear gas during recruit training at Parris Island a “test.” If that’s a test, the only thing it’s testing is how much snot any given individual can involuntarily propel from his nostrils.
So calling the Kobyashi Maru a test is a very loose use of the word.
And Kirk had already taken the Kobyashi Maru TWO previous times and failed. So whatever reaction Starfleet looks for in its recruits during that “test” they got from Kirk two times previous, and as Bones said, nobody goes back for seconds, let alone thirds. Except Kirk.
So Spock admonishing him about the purpose of the test being to experience fear was a red herring. Kirk had already experienced whatever he was supposed to on two previous occasions. No, Spock was clearly upset that his perfect record of wins against cadets had been broken.
For Kirk, the no win scenario itself became the Kobyashi Maru test. The test for him wasn’t the events within the test, but the challenge the test itself presented to be beaten.
And presumably Starfleet would have precautions in place to prevent the test from being tinkered with which Kirk’s plan had to circumvent. So he literally outsmarted the system, and like a crazy fox found an opening to dart through no one could plug.
#282—” don’t remember ANY input, manual or otherwise, on the iBridge besides the stupid throttle. Whereas the image provided by Bob shows the actual use of working, functional controls.”
Just because we don’t get a real closeup of the consoles, aside from the aforementioned “throttle”, doesn’t mean they aren’t supposed to be there.
“I can’t tell what the hell you are talking about here… ?”
What I am talking about is the ridiculous notion that not only is there a recording device conveniently trained on the command chair buttons, but that one of them is actually labeled—”jettison pod”.
Functional? I suppose I could have a button with a label labeled “zap the badguys”, and it would be “functional” as well?
Realistic? Please. It’s a contrivance, one which we overlook quickly because it’s a fun story. It’s no less silly than Cogley’s “man vs. machine/human rights speech”. We don’t like it because it’s believable. We like it because it’s entertaining!
And the “pretense” to which I was referring lies in the notion that Star Trek was ever particularly thought-provoking or within some imaginary standards of intelligent story-telling—or worse, realism and believability. It is the overglorification of a very entertaining television show. Nothing more. Nothing less. I don’t require any more “thought” or any less “suspension of disbelief” to watch a given episode of TOS than I did to watch ST09. Seriously, where do you even derive those standards that ST09 supposedly fails to meet?
Star Trek is fun. ST09 is fun. I love the characters. I love the stories—even when they are somewhat ridiculous. I never required anything more from it. A few allegories (which are conveniently and inevitably spelled out for the audience in quite elementary fashion) never presented me with the illusion that its intelligence level was ever any more than it was, but still there are some fans who will hold ST09 up to some false standard, in many cases just to appear more “elite”. Otherwise, if you didn’t care for the movie, why would you still be here (months later) talking about it? Life goes on, and you should too.
291. boborci: “Kirk saved the federation!” …most of it, anyway…
RIP Vulcan =(
292. dmduncan: “1960’s era buttons, switches, and gummy drop lights for a 23rd century starship seems realistic to you? Seriously?”
For the 60s certainly, and even now it still holds up fine for me. I LOVE TOS!
SERIOUSLY.
One of the things I LOVE about Star Trek is: there is a lot of COOL STUFF in the future, and we get to see it! Star Trek probably more than any other Sci-Fi entity, not only shows us the cool stuff, but how it works, how it is operated (maybe even vicariously), and even how it is maintained, repaired, etc…
Having a bridge (or conn) without controls is like having a starship without an engine room…
“So the static artwork above Spock and Uhura’s stations look like REAL and BELIEVABLE computer displays to you?”
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Spock_at_science_station.jpg
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File:Nyota_Uhura,_2266.jpg
The displays on the TOS bridge are MORE BELIEVABLE to me than the displays on the ST09 bridge, especially those stupid giant HUD screens or whatever they’re supposed to be.
SERIOUSLY.
292: “The displays on the TOS bridge are MORE BELIEVABLE to me than the displays on the ST09 bridge, especially those stupid giant HUD screens or whatever they’re supposed to be.
SERIOUSLY.”
Dude, your marbles are scattered all over the floor. You have no credibility to look at pieces of ARTWORK on a low budget TOS bridge trying to pass as computer displays, and then complain about the BELIEVABILITY and REALISM of the ST.09 bridge which they obviously put a truckload of money into building. I don’t know if those bridge displays on ST.09 worked or the readouts were CGI (maybe Bob would share some words on that), but I DO know they were not cheesy stock pictures of stars and nebulae trying to seem like computer displays.
I love the TOS stuff to, but I’m not ignorant of the fact that a lot of that stuff looks as cheap as it does because poor Matt Jefferies had his budget slashed repeatedly, and if he hadn’t those “displays” almost certainly wouldn’t have been cheap stock celestial photos or artwork.
295. Closettrekker: “…And the “pretense” to which I was referring lies in the notion that Star Trek was ever particularly thought-provoking or within some imaginary standards of intelligent story-telling—or worse, realism and believability.” [SIGH] =(
“Seriously, where do you even derive those standards that ST09 supposedly fails to meet?” From all that has come before.
Which brings me to another thing which is missing (but has been recognized): a story with meaning.
I’ve discussed it here before, but i just want to add that:
Just as faith, without works, is hollow; so to is a story without meaning (a moral, if you will).
Kirk saved the Federation? Chekov came up with the plan. Spock destroyed the drill and the red matter. Kirk cheated in the Kobayashi Maru (and dmduncan, if you break into the teacher’s office and change the math test you have to write, so that there are only 1 + 1 = 2 calculations to do, then you are also cheating), he wasn’t even a commisioned officer, he wasn’t legally aboard the Enterprise, he was thrown out of the Enterprise (which was already totally ridiculous, just so he could meet Spock in the HUGEST coincidence ever – talk about lazy writing, seriously), and illegally boarded the ship, etc…
Let’s say WESLEY CRUSHER saved Earth that way, would he become Captain of the Enterprise? As a cadet at the Academy, on a visit on the Enterprise, with an unstoppable threat en route to Earth, Picard unavailable, Riker unable to fulfill his duty, so Wesley Crusher boards the enemy ship and destroys it. Would you seriously make that guy Captain? Totally ignoring the command structure and common sense? Just because he’s a one-time genius who had a lucky shot in saving the Federation? Would you do that with that character?
Really. Kirk in this movie only became Captain because he is Captain Kirk in the franchise. There is no rational or believable reason in the movie for it. Only a financial reason in the production.
Which is sad because you could have made it believable. By adding a “Three years later” before the ceremony, for example. By changing the circumstances (why couldn’t he be a Lieutenant already? Serving on the Farragut, when Vulcan gets attacked, and the Farragut gets destroyed, the crew saved in the last moment by the Enterprise, so he gets beamed aboard, is eager to help in attacking the drill, parachutes to the drill with Sulu and Olson, etc…). There was no reason to make it so contrived. Why did you do it that way? You can’t tell me you couldn’t think of anything else.
Exiling Kirk on the planet… come on. Spock Prime could have send an emergency signal, directed at James T. Kirk, with the promise of help. So the Enterprise, who just saved a Lieutenant Kirk, is going to investigate (Quinto-Spock figures it’s either a trap set by Nero, or real help, so it’s worth the risk). So Kirk meets Spock Prime on the planet. Agrees not to reveal his identity. Goes back to the ship, and so forth.
Seriously, I hope your next script is much better than the one you wrote for this movie.
Kirk, aboard the Farragut, seconds before being destroyed by the Narada… that could have been a great moment. He is seconds away of sharing the same unfortunate fate of his father. And then the Enterprise, commanded by Pike, rushes in to the rescue, beams the survivors aboard, and faces the Narada, which then suddenly ceases fire, because Nero recognizes it as the Enterprise.
When he sees Spock again aboard the Enterprise, and thinks of the fact that he was just about to die on the Farragut, he is reminded of the Kobayashi Maru cheat he pulled two years before, reminded of Spock’s words about the no-win-scenario and his father during the hearing. And finally realizes the truth behind them. And matures as a character (something he didn’t do in your script. When he is promoted to Captain, he is the same guy who tried to hit at Uhura in the bar, just in a uniform), and starts to respect Spock by himself (and not because Spock Prime suggested it would be good to do so).
@295. Closettrekker
I won’t presume to speak for anyone else who has criticized the film, but I’ve never held TOS up to a false standard of excellence. It was often times silly and self-contradictory. However, it still managed to capture my heart with it’s soul, which I felt this movie sorely lacked. And that was despite what I still feel was a wonderful cast and some pretty snazzy uniforms. The plotting and story felt sloppy and arbitrary to me and a lot of the changes that were made smacked of ‘change for the sake of change’. Many of the other changes that were made (example: Enterprise design and site of construction) flat out just rubbed me wrong. Those are, however, purely matters of personal taste and I’ve never said they weren’t.
As much as you seem to find offensive the fact that many of us aren’t completely enamored with the film I find it puzzling that absolutely everyone is apparently expected to sing it’s praises simply because it has ‘Star Trek’ in the title (well, okay, that IS the title – but I digress). It failed to connect with a lot of us and for a lot of completely individual reasons; we’d like to see better. We talk about that fact. It’s okay…
298. dmduncan: “You …complain about the BELIEVABILITY and REALISM of the ST.09 bridge which they obviously put a truckload of money into building.”
$ aside, it’s still not believable. It’s real FLASHY, lot of money went into light bulbs, I’m sure. But the consoles and displays look fake, FUNCTIONALLY; and we never get the feeling that anybody on the bridge is doing anything real at their stations, except for the stupid chrome throttle…
“…I DO know they were not cheesy stock pictures of stars and nebulae trying to seem like computer displays.”
Sure, they’re really nice flat panel displays; but what is displayed on them is obviously fake fluff. Oohh… nice and shiny! (but obviously fake, FUNCTIONALLY)
Perfect example of realism / believability on a 60s budget? 2001
300: “(and dmduncan, if you break into the teacher’s office and change the math test you have to write, so that there are only 1 + 1 = 2 calculations to do, then you are also cheating)”
The KM was NOT a right/wrong answer test of factual knowledge. You obviously ignored my real points to make spurious ones of your own. And what about the fact that Kirk took the “test” two previous times did you not get? Would anyone break into the teachers office to change the answers on a test that has no right/wrong answers? The KM is a test in name only.
“Kirk saved the Federation? Chekov came up with the plan. Spock destroyed the drill and the red matter.”
lol. And Kirk maneuvered himself into command so that he could chase down Nero and do something about it. If the ship had continued on to the Laurentian system with Spock in command, what would have happened to Earth? What plan would Chekov have come up with when there was no Earth to save? And which jellyfish would Spock have piloted in the Laurentian system if Kirk had not gotten Spock’s ass out of the center seat?
Nope. Earth’s and Nero’s fortune changed the moment Kirk took charge of the ship and ordered pursuit. Spock damned sure didn’t do that. The CAPTAIN takes responsibility for overall mission success, just as he takes responsibility for mission FAILURE, because HE is the one in charge saying go, no go.
“Let’s say WESLEY CRUSHER saved Earth that way, would he become Captain of the Enterprise?”
No, because we know who Wesley Crusher is and that would be a story only Wil Wheaton would write and as a comedy. You might as well have asked “What if Earl from ‘My Name is Earl’ boarded the Enterprise and saved the planet, would Starfleet make him Captain?”
Wesley Crusher wouldn’t be in that position because he’s not Kirk and doesn’t have his personality or strengths or inclinations, and if you wrote it that way it would be bogus. But it’s not a joke to see Kirk doing and saying those things. That’s who he is. And who Crusher is not. And Kirk was officially promoted on that basis.
But this can still be addressed in the next film for those unhappy few by showing Kirk’s command ability in question by senior officers who don’t think he deserved it, which Kirk refutes spectacularly by his actions in the sequel which proves he is no one trick pony.
“Seriously, I hope your next script is much better than the one you wrote for this movie.”
I don’t. Just as good will be great.
304: Sorry Herb, but I don’t find your complaints credible anymore. When you defend the dollar store stock celestial pics on the TOS bridge as realistic and believable, you destroy the believability of your complaints.
I want to talk to Bob Orci, and someone else replies. Why do you even bother?
“300: “(and dmduncan, if you break into the teacher’s office and change the math test you have to write, so that there are only 1 + 1 = 2 calculations to do, then you are also cheating)”
The KM was NOT a right/wrong answer test of factual knowledge. You obviously ignored my real points to make spurious ones of your own. And what about the fact that Kirk took the “test” two previous times did you not get? Would anyone break into the teachers office to change the answers on a test that has no right/wrong answers? The KM is a test in name only.”
That’s noted, but the rest of the post is not directed at you.
It’s obvious I don’t want to know what you think, I’d like to know what Mr. Orci and Mr. Kurtzman think.
@302: I have a completely OPPOSITE idea where Spock admits the logic of Kirk’s reasoning in circumventing the Kobyashi Maru as an example of the kinds of thinking a Starfleet Captain REALLY needs to confront and escape extraordinary situations—not the stoic sit-cross-legged-and-prepare-for-your-DOOM-in-a-situation-I-don’t-know-how-to-lead-us-out-of reasoning that Spock seemed to think all captains should know how to practice.
There’s no extra charge for what I think too.
306. dmduncan: “Sorry Herb, but I don’t find your complaints credible anymore. When you defend the dollar store stock celestial pics on the TOS bridge as realistic and believable, you destroy the believability of your complaints.”
I accept your apology. LL&P
My first post here:
I am also a bit surprised by the number of haters, and the trenchant, zealous sort of insistence on some unwritten standard that TOS never agreed to uphold anyway. There is a racist war between guys who are half-white and half-black, with there moral enemies who are half-black and half-white? Seriously? And they live in a Texas suburb complete with old telephone poles and auto-mobiles– but apparently have personal deflector shields and mental powers that only manifest when Kirk puts his foot down. Just wow. Is this the realism some folks miss so much? Seriously? Under that “Jettison Pod” button, you will see the currently unlabelled but fully functional “Destroy Alderaan” button, and “Order Coffee from my hot flight attend– I mean yeoman” button.
I LOVE TOS, I saw it as a kid, I re watch it frequently. I agree that the new movie was not *perfect* in every way, but it was the most credible piece of art to bear the name Star Trek in 30 years, in spirit and aesthetics. I concur that the Engineering section DID look a bit like a soda bottling plant, but…it isn’t a real big deal. Constant whinging about the nacelles and whatnot aside, this looked like Trek, felt like Trek, and even had a good Bones vs. Spock verbal fencing match.
Now to add my voice to the chorus Mr. Orci:
PLEASE…..PLEASE….let the next movie involve the Enterprise boldly going where no man has gone before. It is not a coat-guard cutter, and Star Trek is not “V”. Enough with the Earth-Destroying super ships already! ;-)
And FWIIW: Throw-back characters like Khan or Harry Mudd would be just fine in my book. A little comfort food for a trekkie’s soul…
276. boborci once blackblurried (sic), “Star trek was unlike any other experiance we’ve had in that we had no studio interference or mandates.”
Hmmm…what did Mr. Kurtzman mean when he was quoted by the NY TIMES’ Dave Itzkoff in the article, NEW TEAM RETROFITS THE OLD STARSHIP as follows,
nytimes.com/2009/04/26/movies/26itzk.html
”The studio wanted “a very specific kind of thinking,” Mr. Kurtzman said.
“You had to love genre at your core in every possible way,” he said. “And yet you had to separate it from what ‘Trek’ had been, to make it feel fresh.””?
Because the statement, “a very specific kind of thinking”, gives the appearance of being somewhat restrictive?
CD: “76, 77-I am well aware it is an alternate timeline/universe. I was just wondering what TOS inspiration, if any, there was for it, like the mentioned Spock-Uhura romance. From my perspective, the destruction of Vulcan appears to have been inspired more by Star Wars than Star Trek. If you like the movie, fine. If Nimoy likes the movie, fine. I just would have rather had a movie that was a little less of a Star Wars mashup. I may (or not) be in the minority on that, but I am certainly not alone.”
———————————————-
then i apologize for what i said in my first comment (#76). Just the way you worded it made you sound like an idiot. But to answer your question, I think the reason why the producers and writers decided to go that route is because it helped to put a twist in the story and it was so different from the original story. When I first saw it, I was stunned but it was necessary for the story and for Spock and Kirk to come closer together. And when you think about it, the same question can be asked as to why do they kill off Kirk’s father.
But in today’s world, we now look for a lot of action and especially to catch the younger crowd’s eyes, action like that destruction had to be used. So if it does pull a page from Star Wars’ book, so be it because its arguably the best sci-fi series ever conceived.
#312: “I am also a bit surprised by the number of haters …”
Me too, normally these threads have no haters at all (just reactionary fanboys pretending the “hater” boogeymen exist) but this thread actually has a surprising number: one (post #128 expresses hatred of one element of the film). Surprising because it’s an actual, positive integer.
Most of us liked the film and saw it multiple times; I know I did.
Roberto,
Hey man, thanks for reading my prevous post.
I have one more passing thought for you as you write our next adventure…please show us something new.
You know all of us are courious about what’s to come with the next film. Kahn, Harry Mudd, Kor, Trelane, Sargon or Mirror Quinto with a beard? But, I would urge you to stay away from simply recreating encounters and adventures the Enterprise had in the prime universe. If those events are referanced, let it be along the perifery, almost in the wings of the set (as it were). And show us something NEW. You and your production worked diligently to give us a new universe to play with. So do exactly that. Take a risk and take a “Landing Party” (please don’t call it an “away team”) to a planet the Enterprise has never been before in any universe.
I’ve waited my whole life to see Kirk, Spock, and McCoy beam down to a planet to survey it (as they did in The Original Series) and as the vewer, NOT KNOW what was coming next. I got a taste of that in your “pilot episode”, but now that everything is set up…blow us all away.
Thanks again,
John
#303—-”I won’t presume to speak for anyone else who has criticized the film, but I’ve never held TOS up to a false standard of excellence. It was often times silly and self-contradictory. However, it still managed to capture my heart with it’s soul…”
Agreed. I love it too. The 24th Century spinoffs——not so much.
“Many of the other changes that were made (example: Enterprise design and site of construction) flat out just rubbed me wrong. Those are, however, purely matters of personal taste and I’ve never said they weren’t.”
Although I personally have no issues with the asthetic changes to the set designs and actually appreciated the George Kirk/USS Kelvin tie-in with the Iowa shipyard, I wholeheartedly agree that acceptance or non-acceptance of those “changes” is purely a matter of personal taste for which there is no right or wrong position.
“The plotting and story felt sloppy and arbitrary to me …”
I didn’t find any of it to be “arbitrary” at all. On the contrary, I thought pretty much all of it served a purpose (at least from the writers’ point of view—I didn’t always agree with the value of a given purpose) in the story.
However, I did find one area of the story which I felt was somewhat “sloppy”, so we are not in total disagreement.
While Bob has made clear that, from his point of view, Kirk’s ascension to command of the Enterprise was completely “organic” and thoroughly justified by the way in which circumstances played out in the story—–I thought it was forced and premature.
Did Kirk’s actions prove his talent and leadership ability in a crisis situation? Yes. Did his actions warrant formal recognition? Yes.
But did his actions justify a promotion to Captain just out of the Academy? No…at least not in my opinion.
Now, with that said, I completely understand the desire on the part of the writers to end the film with Kirk in formal command of the Enterprise. But since the events depicted surrounding the defeat of Nero and the Narada took place in 2258, I felt that any question about the hasty promotion could have been avoided by simply advancing the story a few years in between Nero’s defeat and Kirk’s formal promotion scene, say—-2264 or so.
“As much as you seem to find offensive the fact that many of us aren’t completely enamored with the film I find it puzzling that absolutely everyone is apparently expected to sing it’s praises simply because it has ‘Star Trek’ in the title…”
I don’t find it offensive at all. I’m not that sensitive about a work of art in which I really have no stake or did not participate in. However, I do find it somewhat puzzling myself that someone like “I am not Herbert”, who doesn’t like the movie at all, would still choose to spend significant amounts of his/her time on this website trashing it…..critiquing certain aspects of it is something entirely different. By no means do I find ST09 to be perfect or above criticism, obviously, but I don’t find there to be any more contrivances or question marks in this story than there were in TWOK.
Being surprised that someone would still choose to spend his/her time in this manner more than 5.5 months after the film’s release is hardly the same thing as expecting everyone to sing its praises.
There are plenty of films I dislike as much as “I am not Herbert” dislikes this one. That is my right…and his/hers. The difference is that I am unwilling to spend any significant time or energy expressing that dislike on a daily basis on websites which are devoted to such films. It is that choice which I question—- certainly not that person’s own application of individual taste, and especially not his/her right to dissent.
I hope you can understand the difference.
Please ditch the Spock /Uhura romance….
It feels incredibly forced and out of place, particularly for Spock of any universe/timeline.
It was cute but really served no purpose other than “look at our sexy young actors!”. And the make-out session on the treansporter pad? Spock would NEVER, under any circumstances… especially after making such a big deal about showing no emotions to the crew over having lost his entire PLANET.
Let’s just say it fizzled out between films and concentrate on other things?
300. Did Kirk deserve to be given a ship at his age and experience level, even after saving the Federation? Kinda yes, kinda no. It DOES set up an interesting dynamic for the future: you know there are going to be people resentful of Kirk’s promotion, and I expect them to make his life as hard as possible. Hard is good…in drama, I mean.
318. Absolutely. Ditch Spock and Uhura–in the most painful, messy way possible (preferrably after some really HOT Vulcan sex).
Are you listening, boborci?
Once again for the record (and Closettrekker):
Please see my post #197 (can’t paste for some reason)
Please do not mistake my criticisms for hatred.
Please allow me to speak for myself (too easily misrepresented).
If one follows the site, then one would know that I have praised aspects of the film as well.
I am here because I LOVE Star Trek, and the healthy debate here; and I hope that my input might have a positive effect.
Please do not make this personal and attempt to characterize me.
I don’t want to hit anyone over the head with my point of view; but I will stand up for what I think is true. When asked to back up my POV, I will. When the debate is joined, I will not shrink.
“318. Absolutely. Ditch Spock and Uhura–in the most painful, messy way possible (preferrably after some really HOT Vulcan sex).”
I think that would appeal only to a group of female Trek fans who share Spock sexual fantasies. I don’t care that you have them, but I don’t want to see what’s in your head on the screen, thank you.
For me that’s a restroom break, and later, a bitchfest in here.
Did Bob land safely? Sure we would’ve heard about it if he didn’t (I HATE flying; don’t trust airplanes, and that’s as much Dr.McCoy as I have in me).
321. Why don’t you google “tongue in cheek”. You might learn something.
The “Girls Are Icky and Not Allowed Club” is meeting next door in the Stargate forum, fyi.
“321. Why don’t you google “tongue in cheek”. You might learn something.”
“The “Girls Are Icky and Not Allowed Club” is meeting next door in the Stargate forum, fyi.”
Vera, I took your advice and Googled “tongue in cheek.” I didn’t learn anything I didn’t already know, but I appreciate your concern for my education just the same.
And I assure you I love girls—so long as they are pretty, well shaped, suitably attired in red miniskirts, and know the importance of disrobing when I snap my fingers.
And FYI, what you suggested “tongue in cheek” has seriously been suggested here before, so the “tongue in cheek” claim becomes less obvious after exposure to the tongue out of cheek variety.
Okay, what I’m seeing is 3 options right now…
1. A Summer 2011 release date
2. A Winter/ Hoilday 2011 release date
3. A Summer 2012 release date
I really want to see the second Star Trek film out by the end of 2011, but if things go very slowly and get pushed into 2012 then that’s fine too. The extra time will give everyone more chances to make the film better and feel more right.
#27 “I really enjoy Alan J. Foster novel, more complete than the movie. After, I’m gonna buy Countdown”
Dunno, it seemed forced and sloppy to me. Not like ADF’s other works. I was a real fan of his TAS adaptations and was really looking forward to his work on this book, but it just didn’t measure up.
Oh no, I’m worried Bob ended up landing in an alternate universe! He’s had to assume the role of his look-alike double, the Minister for Film in the Estados Unidos de Norteamerica; a world where Mexico won the US-Mexican war when Canada intervened. Just another Fringe off to the left. :)
Now, seriously… if the deal with Ellison has happened, that does clear the deck for some more time alterations…. Those time stories handle all changes quite well, and open excuses to bring in Shatner. Wouldn’t Quinto’s Spock perhaps try to save his mother when they discover the Guardian this time around? And maybe Scotty is dealing drugs on the Enterprise. ;)
All told, hurry up with this sucker! We’re all getting old!
WHY DOESN’T PARAMOUNT HIRE NEW WRITERS FOR THE SEQUEL???? Oh yeah, b/c these two know how to come up with cheesy, over-the-top fluff masquerading as art.
#295: “And the “pretense” to which I was referring lies in the notion that Star Trek was ever particularly thought-provoking or within some imaginary standards of intelligent story-telling—or worse, realism and believability.”
Agreed. The standards which define Star Trek aren’t about any particular point, or any checklist which must be adhered to, and it _certainly_ isn’t about quality (TOS had some royal stinkers) or believability in any kind of dull or pedantic sense.
It’s just – for me anyway, since no one else’s Star Trek is for me to define – a simple philosophical bent, one which no TOS episode ever undermined, even if there were particular episodes which never explored it or expanded it. And that’s the important thing (the important thing which I think these filmmakers absolutely fail to understand) … that a given work doesn’t need to preach that philosophy or even to demonstrate it … it just needs not to undermine it. To not take a squat on it.
Star Trek is humanist, sympathetic, forward-looking and moral. Star Trek is funny, sexy, energetic and action-packed. It’s not rocket science to fit those basic things into a single film, but this film failed on about half of them, just as TNG tended to fail on the other half.
So far only Star Trek – the real Star Trek – had it all.
All it takes is skill. Hire some next time.
Why don’t they have a competition like American Idol where ANYONE can submit a script (after signing a release) to a committee from Paramount who would then screen them, finally picking the very best one?
The usual b.s. excuse is that all the studios say they can’t do that because of possible litigation down the road from someone who claims their idea was stolen from a script that was submitted. Total crap! That’s what the signed release is for, stupid!
Hollywood’s habit of “circling the wagons” and not allowing open competition to take place means audiences are subjected to rehash and recycled ideas over and over and over again!
What’s next? Oh, I know……Gilligan’s Island:The Motion Picture!
Disgusting!
#328—”WHY DOESN’T PARAMOUNT HIRE NEW WRITERS FOR THE SEQUEL????”
I can think of 258 million reasons.
#331
And yet TRANSFORMERS 2’s $402,111,870 would seem to weaken that argument for fans for it seem that as the B.O. goes up the storytelling quality goes down. Or are you making the argument that we can expect the next Trek movie’s story structure to following the “very specific kind of thinking” that went into XFORMERS 2?
#332 “And yet TRANSFORMERS 2’s $402,111,870 would seem to weaken that argument for fans for it seem that as the B.O. goes up the storytelling quality goes down.”
Transformers 2 has a miserable 19% at RottenTomatoes.com. Star Trek has a 95% critical score. The two properties are apples and oranges, and were obviously treated as such by the writers. And with Damon Lindelof taking a big role in the writing of the next Trek, plus JJ’s recent comment that the sequel has to be “more meaningful,” I have reason to belive the next story should be quite good.
@329: I just posted some of this on the JJ thread bt it applies to your comment as well, so here is part of the same comment in reply:
I was largely unhappy with the film after my first viewing. But upon following viewings it got better and better as I grew less emotional about my own unreasonable expectations.
I then experienced the same sort of discovery for the film that I experienced when I perchance happened to watch an episode of TOS in reruns and I thought wow, this is cool stuff.
And I also think far too many people had unreasonable expectations as I did. I think they expected this one film to accomplish more than anyone could have done. It’s main purpose was to show how the crew gets together while freeing their future from our own expectations so that in subsequent movie episodes the characters could go in new and unexpected directions while at the same time drawing from the TOS past we all know and love.
I don’t think Bob, Alex, and JJ meant for anyone to infer that every sequel would be exactly like the introductory episode. Because Roddenberry’s little morality play style doesn’t exactly mesh with the kind of story this film tried to tell, especially in a two hour movie, which was more like a document of the TOS crew’s assembly. If they had made a three hour movie then maybe that could have been woven in somewhere, but it was pretty damned loaded and moving at warp speed already, AND that’s with cutting out some scenes that I think probably would have served the movie better if they had left them in—such as the explanation of how Kirk beat the Kobyashi Maru, which simultaneously would have explained Kirk’s relationship with Gaila, and why she appeared so pissed in the background during his hearing.
So yes, I think it’s unfair to compare this story to the stories we got out of Star Trek with a crew that has already been firmly established and needed no introduction.
329: “All it takes is skill. Hire some next time.”
And this is unnecessary. You have a habit of slighting the writers on threads you KNOW Bob reads. Why do you do this? You’re not going to get him fired with your opinion, and insults do not generally contribute to a person’s confidence, so Bob will either ignore you, in which case your comment is pointlessly malicious, or he will write the next film drenched in Bourbon weeping that he doesn’t have your approval.
I don’t see the latter happening, buddy. So what’s the deal?
#332—”Or are you making the argument that we can expect the next Trek movie’s story structure to following the “very specific kind of thinking” that went into XFORMERS 2?”
Transformers 2 was a Michael Bay film.
Michael Bay is not directing or producing Star Trek: Something Something. He has absolutely nothing to do with it.
What Orci and Kurtzman were asked to do with that script (Transformers 2) is quite different from what they are being asked to do with Star Trek: Something Something…I’m not sure why or how that would be difficult to grasp.
Bob and Alex were asked to write a script for a “Michael Bay Movie”(and everything that implies)—-and they did so successfully. That has absolutely no bearing on what they do for Star Trek.
I am sure they were well compensated for that work. Good for them.
My point with “258 million reasons” should have been obvious….but since it wasn’t (apparently)….Why would Paramount (or Bad Robot for that matter) want to hire a new set of writers when the writers (who are also executive producers) they have in place have already proven that they can write a script for a very successful Star Trek feature in their first outing?
It isn’t broken….so why try to fix it?
#329—-”All it takes is skill. Hire some next time.”
I happen to think they already have.
Not only do I like what Bob and Alex did on Star Trek (2009), but my wife and I also regularly indulge in “Fringe” on a weekly basis. I certainly think they have some skill.
Although I would change one or two things about the story if I could, I think they did an excellent job. I don’t think they failed to deliver on anything they needed to. As with my other favorite Star Trek films—-TWOK, TMP, TVH (each of which was quite unique in comparison to the others), I will enjoy ST09 for many more repeat viewings (I’ve already seen it 4 times)…and I look forward to what Bob, Alex and Damon (whose work on “Lost” is great too) write for the sequel—-now that the principles have been properly introduced.
#336. Closettrekker once observed “It isn’t broken….so why try to fix it?”
The answer to that is obvious to anyone with a planet-wide perspective: because Paramount would like it to exploit the rest of the world market to the tune that XFORMERS 2 did.
Or to continue the Bond them for ST sequel titles:
NORTH AMERICA IS NOT ENOUGH
#338 … Pretty flimsy reasoning. I think the smashing success of ST 09 alone could lead to bigger box office next time, as long as the sequel isn’t a big step down from the current one. And I doubt it will be, for the reasons I gave in #333.
If Paramount wants Trek to do bigger box office overseas, they’re going to try new marketing methods, or bringing in established box office stars, not mess with Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof’s story.
#337: “I look forward to what Bob, Alex and Damon (whose work on “Lost” is great too) write for the sequel—-now that the principles have been properly introduced.”
The temptation to segue using that typo is so very strong. Must resist :)
But I look forward to it too. I think ST09 was a good action/space-opera explodey film and I’ve got no problem with plunking down a little green for more of the same … but until something alarming shows me otherwise, what I’m looking forward to is just that: more of the same.
And that’s fine. It’ll tide me over ’til the next creative team comes along (and then, odds are, I’ll feel the same way about whatever they do … unless it’s Brad Bird and Pixar) ;)
#339.
How is the studio telling them (Exactly as they did for this their first Trek movie according to Kurtzman.) that they want “a very specific kind of thinking” messing with their story any more than it did for their first Trek? Both pictures were written by the same team and Orci contends there was no interference in writing STAR TREK.
If the reasoning is weak then disprove it by example, name another picture that was better written than ST by this same team that also did better B.O.
#338—-”NORTH AMERICA IS NOT ENOUGH”
Actually, it’s English-speaking countries—-whether they lie on the North American continent or not. But whether you feel it’s “enough” or not, that’s really all there has been for the Star Trek film franchise since 1979 (with the exception of a usually strong showing in Germany).
But my friend Shatner Fan is correct. Doing something about the performance globally (beyond the likes of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc.) is going to be about the marketing department at Paramount. It has nothing to do with announcing a new writing team. That’s just silly.
#340—”The temptation to segue using that typo is so very strong. Must resist :)”
Lol. Yes, of course….That should read “principals”, not “principles”. Cute.
#341—”If the reasoning is weak then disprove it by example, name another picture that was better written than ST by this same team that also did better B.O.”
That makes no sense at all.
Your implication in post #338 was that hiring new writers might positively affect Star Trek’s box-office performance abroad. You’re asking SFP to ‘disprove by example’ something for which you’ve provided no evidence or basis yourself.
#342.,
There’s some confusion. I wasn’t suggesting a new writing team. I was suggesting that it wouldn’t be surprising for Paramount to ask them “Now let’s try the very specific kind of thinking that got us the world for XFORMERS 2 on ST:SS.”
According to a report I read from the era TMP’s non-domestic performance was Europe-wide and so good that it was the deciding factor to green-light TWOK. Apparently, it wasn’t until after that, that that capital was squandered to the isolated markets that you cite.
“Space battles, space battles, space battles, that’s all the studio ever wants is space battles. Space battles, that’s not what Star Trek is about.” – Gene Roddenberry
#343 … I understood what you were saying and I still disagree with your reasoning. You’re suggesting ST XII is going to be as substance free as Transformers 2 because of some mandate from Paramount to try and equal Transformers’ international box office (an attempt that would be futile). I think you’re way off base.
As I said in #333, Star Trek is NOT Transformers, nor will it ever be. Transformers is based on a toy line for kids. Paramount is not going to start making mandates to JJ & his team now that they’ve brought the recently moribund franchise Trek back to life. Damon Lindelof is a great writer. JJ Abrams is a smart man. He suggests the next Trek will be more meaningful, and I believe him.
#344.,
That is your prerogative.
The fact remains that the NYT reported that Mr. Kurtzman said that the studio required of them “a very specific kind of thinking” which Mr. Orci seems to contend in no way interfered with the script.
Now I can see how some, such as yourself, could see that as a mandate. I’m not so sure as the quoting of what the author says Kurtzman said seems very muddled as a piece of reporting. It does seem to me to be something that had to be somewhat restrictive but Mr. Orci has said there was no studio interference with the scriptwriting. An article on the ViewMaster project reported that K/O had a preexisting script that they felt that introducing a ViewMaster fit like a missing piece of a puzzle. I’m not sure how their creative process is working. It does appear as if requirements are being met but it doesn’t appear as if the creative team views those as “mandates”.
However, if I go with your mandate thinking, it does appear as though Kurtzman is implying that the alternate universe “thinking” was required by Paramount. This would not be surprising to me as I’ve said before that Paramount had to make this Trek quite differently than it had ever been done before, via a license, and it would make sense that they’d want to isolate their new Trek and its creations as much as possible from the intellectual property that CBS now ultimately controls as there was a tug of war going on between the two camps (Viacom versus CBS) in the parent company that holds both even before they were cleaved in two.
My wishes for the next film, all of which have been voiced here already:
1) More McCoy, but a more rounded McCoy. Urban nailed the funny/
grouchy side of the character; I’d dearly like to see Bones’ quieter,
serious side, as the Captain’s counselor/conscience, and the viewer’s
surrogate, explored again.
2) Rewrite Scotty! Scot was my least favorite thing in the whole film. Even
more than McCoy, this character suffered from being used -exclusively -
as comic relief. People seemed either to hate or love Peg, tho . . .
3) Less emphasis on space battles. More of the humanist/philosophical/
moral bent of TOS, and Star Trek in general. I am much intrigued by the
premise of Avatar. Remains to be seen if that film pulls off the serious
side of that premise, and does not deteriorate into pure spectacle. ST XI
threatened to deteriorate in that manner, but was sufficiently character-
driven that, thankfully, it didn’t, at least not entirely. I realize Star Trek isn’t Herbert/Le Guin/Card. Or Harlan Ellison. ; ) But it shouldn’t be Star
Wars, either.
4) Even though I liked the Spock/Uhura romance, I’d just as soon see it abandoned, preferably with some kind of conflict/fallout. Romances are
a dime a dozen. Trio buddiness was the essence of Star Trek.
My husband and I – just old enough to remember TOS in first run – saw ST XI three times. Being less enamored of pure action films than my
husband, I was less satisfied (see above) with it than he was, but I still
greatly enjoyed it. I was impressed with Urban, Pine, Quinto and
Soldana. My husband and I both suspect (heresy alert!) that we will
end up liking Pine as Kirk better than we did Shatner. Shatner brought a lot to the table as Kirk; still, even as a teenager, I never was a Jim Kirk
girl. Which brings me back to where I started: More McCoy. Please.
P.S.
I find referring to the new film as ST IX confusing. ST 09 is fine, but
ST IX was Insurrection. . . .