JJ Abrams ‘Not Averse’ To More Time Travel or Cameos In Star Trek Sequel | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

JJ Abrams ‘Not Averse’ To More Time Travel or Cameos In Star Trek Sequel January 16, 2010

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

Another day and another comment from JJ Abrams on the 2012 Star Trek sequel he is producing (and possibly directing). This time Abrams is talking about time travel and possible cameos from past Star Trek actors. Find out what he had to say below.

 



These excerpts actually comes from an interview that was probably conducted a few months ago and published in Wizard Magazine #217 (unearthed by TrekWeb). But since the work on the sequel is still in its infancy, it is probably still just as valid.

Time Travel again?

It seems like time travel is mandatory for the most successful Trek films. But will you veer away from that in the sequel ?

JJ Abrams: We’re just now talking about what the story is going to be and there is some very cool ideas that are out there. My instinct would be not necessarily go back to any of the same well again unless it pertains to character. But if there was some brilliant piece that involved time travel of course I wouldn’t rule it out.

However, being as the story is being developed by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof, I think it is pretty unlikely they will propose another time travel story to Abrams. Lindelof has told me that after doing a whole season of time travel on Lost and doing it with the first Trek movie, he was ‘done’ with time travel. And my interview with the writers in the April Geek Magazine had this exchange:

Time travel has been a staple of Star Trek, including many favorite movies and episodes. Did you use time travel again because it had worked in the past?

Orci: Actually the opposite. We hesitated to use time travel, because it was so used. However, it was such an important reason to use it — to have both a prequel and a sequel — to maintain canon, yet free us up. Despite its overuse, we thought ‘let’s use it one more time before we put it away, and then not use it again.’ It was also the only way to justify the level of involvement that we felt for Nimoy to be a genuinely active participant in the movie. And that was worth it and specific enough that it didn’t feel like a gimmick. So we allowed ourselves to use it to jump off.

Plus in his May Fan Q&A here at TrekMovie, Orci noted pointed out that they have stricter rules on time travel, and it is no longer a simple matter, saying:

Orci: In our Universe, as long as I am here, you can’t just slingshot around the sun


Nero and Spock needed a giant black hole- In the Abrams-verse, time travel is no longer so easy

More Cameos?

Wizard: Would you consider any more cameos from any of the other Star Trek actors from any of the other series ?

JJ Abrams: You know, I’m open to anything. But I am not going into it thinking, "Oh, okay, how do I figure out a way to create more cameo options?"

Wizard: But you are not averse to it.

JJ Abrams: No, I’m not averse to it, but the great news is that the cast of the new Star Trek has this massive burden of having to try to live up to the incredible job that the original actors did, and I think they were so good that they did it. And while the first movie would have been nearly impossible to do without Leonard Nimoy – we would have had to change the story completely – I feel like while being open to it and, like you said, not averse, I am also thrilled that we are now in a place where we don’t necessarily need to shoehorn cameos in just to appease original fans. The great thing about Nimoy, beyond his just being who he is, is that the role was not a cameo, it was a critically important character in the movie. Trying to find cameos was never an interesting thing for us. Trying to tell a decent story was the thing that we were working hard to do.

If there is a guest spot in the new movie, the one most seem to talk about is William Shatner. The actor has made it clear (as recently as last week) that he is interested, and Abrams himself has said it was his hardest decision to not have Shatner in the first film. All that being said, it is probably still a longshot. They don’t ‘need’ to do it for the fans this time, and it is unlikely for them to develop a story that needs a past Trek guest spot. Plus, without using time travel, your options get more limited. But, you never know.


Leonard Nimoy was a key to bridge the past with the new "Star Trek", but do they need to do it again?…probably not

You can read the full interview in Wizard #127.

Comments

1. StevenPDX - January 17, 2010

I fully agree with JJ and Robert’s approach: keep the focus on telling a great story, which is what made the first movie so successful.

2. StevenPDX - January 17, 2010

My apologoies–“Roberto”

3. boborci - January 17, 2010

call me bob

4. Anthony Pascale - January 17, 2010

Hi Bob…you are up late

Anything to add to the above analysis?

5. Aussie Adam - January 17, 2010

I’ve often thought that hidden cameos would be cool, i.e. cameos from familar trek or other faces disguised as alien characters to the point that they are unrecogniseable but not so much that “fans” know that they’re there. What do you think Bob?

6. Aussie Adam - January 17, 2010

# not so much so that “fans” don’t know that they are there.

7. Paul B. - January 17, 2010

I wish there was a legitimate way I could pitch a story to you guys, Mr. Orci. No real expectation of having a chance in hell of selling it to you, but all the same. (And I mean a serious pitch, not fanboy wish fulfillment.)

That’s why you’ll have to launch a new Trek show someday–to open it up to more minds and more stories. (Not that yours are tapped out, by any means! At least, I hope not!)

Congratulations for your recent successes, and good luck with many more!

8. Buzz Cagney - January 17, 2010

I can live with time travel- but really don’t want any old face’s popping up. Let the new kid’s fly without that ‘safety net’. They don’t need one.

9. DJT - January 17, 2010

Bob! :)

Can’t wait for next movie.

10. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

3. boborci – January 17, 2010
call me bob

You are the actual Bob Orci?

11. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

I have a non-fanboy story that will make Avatar look like the wizard of Oz. Will post it later.

12. U.S.S. Manila NCC-99232 - January 17, 2010

Star Trek will suck again if they use time travel over and over again.

13. U.S.S. Manila NCC-99232 - January 17, 2010

Still, no offense about that.

14. Yeti - January 17, 2010

I can’t see any problem with using familiar cast members but perhaps using William Shatner and creating what would almost certainly be a time travel piece would just repeat a formulae that the film has already used. Using a situation or villian already seen in the original series however would be a good way to go perhaps? I for one have seen the new film over and over and I’d just like to say to the writers that they made me feel like a kid going to see Star Wars for the first time and that goes for a lot of my Non Trek friends also. In this new universe perhaps the mystery and spectacle of science fiction and Trek would be a nice idea! VGER on RedBull perhaps but essentialy , the story of seeking out the unknown!! Well done team for not being afraid to break the constraints of the established universe, and giving us above all a great Classic movie!!

15. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

Bob,

even though the window of opportunity to use Shatner is closing fast, I really don’t think you need him in the next movie. The new cast is more than capable of carrying the torch forward. Nobody wants to see an old evil Kirk from the Mirror Universe, or an older version of Pine played by Shatner (gross). Shatner would probably demand a substantial role and paycheque, neither being required for box office popularity. The Shat started to parody his own image many years ago, thereby relinquishing any believabilty in wearing a Starfleet uniform. His involvement in the next film would “pull us” out of any realistic tone you are trying to set. Just because you have an opportunity to do something doesn’t mean you should. Shatner sold out years ago….no need for you to do the same.

Let it, and him, go!

16. Jeffrey S. Nelson - January 17, 2010

Bob… Shatner’s not getting any younger. Please don’t overlook the opportunity to use him once again. He looks far younger than his years, but could lose some poundage for sure. But once once he’s gone, he’s gone.
J.J. … I’d love to see some Trek guest stars from years gone by. Morgan Woodward as Captain Tracy, for one! It’s just too bad Robert Lansing has passed on and can’t return as Gary Seven. But, what about Gary Lockwood as Gary Mitchell? Or Sally Kellerman as Dr. Elizabeth Dehner??

17. Will_H - January 17, 2010

I’m kinda bummed that JJ decided to throw out the standing time travel rules from previous Star Trek. Still its good to see him keeping an open mind for the next…as long as that open mind doesnt include putting Khan in there.

18. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - January 17, 2010

Tell a good story and the next movie will be just as good as the first, if not better. No need for shatner. If you put some Nimoy in for the second movie showing him on the new Vulcan colony that would be awsome….

19. NCC-1976 - January 17, 2010

I actually think it would be cool to have Khan in the sequel, but set it up in such a way that he is introduced inside of another story/crisis that Kirk and company are dealing with, and have the situation result in Kirk and Khan having to team up in an unlikely and uneasy alliance to resolve the crisis.

20. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

Having Khan in the story could work very well. IMO the sequel should focus on the visual aspect in the way Avatar has. Not to say the visuals of Star Trek were not good, they were VERY good. But Avatar has raised the bar big time. It shows that story is secondary to what the viewer sees. Keep in mind Im not saying the story doesnt matter, but as far as Sci-Fi goes in motion pictures, FX goes a long way. They dont have to come up with a story as indepth as 2001 to make this a succesful movie. Just add on to what they did in the first.

21. Alf, in pog form - January 17, 2010

William Shatner selling pies on a vid-screen in the background would be a good cameo…

22. Eric Saussine - January 17, 2010

That’s funny all this talk about Khan and cameos. I’m not conservative in all Trek matters. I’ll be very happy if the team gives me something new, fresh and unexpected.

and 20.

If Bob and his friends come up a story as indepth as 2001 with the energy that filled the previous movie, I’d be very happy too!

23. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

22, if they put out a product that has the visuals = to Avatar, and also a story on par with 2001, they will be putting out a Sci-Fi Masterpiece by any standard lol

24. Yeti - January 17, 2010

Eric!

Energetic 2001, now that I gotta see!
But I do agree with you, a race against time against the unknown…

CLASSIC!…….

25. MDSHiPMN - January 17, 2010

21, lol.

But seriously.

I don’t see how or why to put Shat in the movie. I like the new cast and it’s all about them.

There are other ways to show resect for TOS and I suspect the production team will keep the suprises coming.

26. David B - January 17, 2010

Try to get William Shatner in if possible as others have stated he won’t live forever.

Also get Scott Bakula to reprise his role as Admiral Archer AND GET HIS DOG BACK!

27. fansince66 - January 17, 2010

OK
Everybody line up in rows.
I’m standing in the row that says NO to time travel; NO to cameos;YES to “just-tell-a-good-story”.
And you’re right #20. AVATAR has caused all “A-grade” sci-fi movies to kick their FX up to the next level. A 3-D and IMAXed STAR TREK would be awesome.

And pleeease JJ,O&K, DO NOT bring back the holodeck! Make starships HAVE TO GO planet-side for shore-leave,R&R,resupply,etc…
It got irritating (IMO) how much TNG & Voyager used the holodeck. It was like “why even go to outer space?!? Just build a Cinemax holodeck on Earth & never come out.”

28. Yeti - January 17, 2010

Can we get rid of Scotty’s little sidekick too please? Just a wee too much of the Lucas curse for me! “Meesa givings all meesa can Captain! ”
NO NO NO!

I think Pegg can carry enough of the humour without the space clam!

29. Lando - January 17, 2010

“Orci: In our Universe, as long as I am here, you can’t just slingshot around the sun”

The next guy will be like “In our universe, as long as I am here, they won’t be able to beam or fly faster than light.”

30. elodie - January 17, 2010

Shatner : NO! His overdemanding stuff about being in the sequel is just heavy. It was yet the case for ST11 and he hasn’t even watched it!

Scott Bakula : YES! (I’ve just seen the episode “Twilight”, and that’s just WOAH!) Because Scott wants too being in the movie, he wants more Archer and to my point of view, Archer deserves to be more developped than Kirk Prime. We even haven’t heard his speech for the future Federation in the “finale”! Almost everyone talks about Shatner wanting to be in ST12, but no one talks about Scott Bakula (except Trekmovie!!!!) Scott Bakula for ST12!!!!!!! I want Archer and Porthos back!

Leonard Nimoy : YES! One of the reasons I loved ST11. Among a lot of bad stuff.

31. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

New sci fi ideas would be awesome, exploring realms (micro/macro worlds), existence, ancient aliens, phenomenons, afterlife/souls, space mysteries, planetary collisions, alignments, new technologies/relics, explanations to extinctions of dinosaurs, new alien race/planet, moral dilemmas (greed/exploitation, good of the many greater than good of the one), End of time/expansion/collapse of the universe. Friend/Foe becoming enemy, ie Khan deep multi dimensional villian that is smarter than our heroes and yet is flawed/tragic story (exploration vs expansion/conquer)

That’s my wish list.

32. Captain Kathryn - January 17, 2010

#28 YETI- I agree. That little guy really gave me the creeps. They need to dislodge him. Yech!

33. Anthony Thompson - January 17, 2010

It seems to me that the writer was pushing those ideas (personal agenda) and that JJ was responding politely. My prediction: no time travel and no cameos. And, I HOPE, no Khan!

34. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#33

Would be funny to see them do time travel with cameos and Khan eh? lol

35. Captain Kathryn - January 17, 2010

I don’t that Porthos is the orignial beagel dog who was ‘lost in space’ that Scotty was not able to bring back. Beings their lifespan is only about 15 years and considering Captain Archer is now Admiral Archer, not sure what the star date difference is, but I am certain that this is a different dog. Still it would be nice, now that Scotty has invented transporting at warp speedthat it is the universe that is moving, to get him back!

36. Chris Fawkes - January 17, 2010

I don’t want Shatner in the next cinema movie but i would love to see a yearly telemovie set in TNG era with changes that have taken place due to the altered timeline.

In that timeline it could be assumed that Kirk is still alive and is once more called upon to team up with Picard to save the universe.

With a decent story that would not only be a huge ratings winner it would also provide many fans with the sense of fulfillment that they have craved since the senseless death of Kirk in Generations.

37. Captain Kathryn - January 17, 2010

Being that the other Star Trek show (Enterprise, Generation, Voyager) all were able to explore unique adventures without a lot of repeat characters, it would be fun for JJ to find a new adventure for these young explorers!

38. Buzz Cagney - January 17, 2010

#30 You don’t want Shatner but do want Bakula? It is indeed a strange old world that we live in.
Bakula would not add one extra person- apart from you- to the box office. And no, I don’t want Bill either.

39. Captain Kathryn - January 17, 2010

YEs, I think bringing back Admiral Archer would be such a plus. At first it was hard to really get into his character, but over the years he developed in such an impending force of a true character for the star trek series. HE matured and demanded the respect that was due him. Put him in the next movie and plese bring the dog back!

40. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

Lets ignore Enterprise and all the other shows and pretend they never happened and only reference TOS and TNG please.

41. Anthony Lewis - January 17, 2010

@29 — I think Bob has said that because as a theory for time travel, it’s pretty baseless and out dated. In the 60’s and through the 80’s maybe that was still a topic of discussion but i don’t think it is any longer.

I highly doubt they anyone will ever removed matter energy transpot or warp speed as both are not only seen plausible theories in science but also things that may be possible in the distant future. If memory serves the ship doesn’t really fly faster than light, the engines warp space around the ship (essentially moving space around the ship and not moving the ship through space).

42. Captain Kathryn - January 17, 2010

Actually Enterprise really grew on me. I did not like Xindi thing with the giant Insectoids. They really gave me the creeps. But the episodes that were interwoven with the Suliban, and yes, Time Travel also, and with Shren. I also really thought the last show dealing with Gen. holodeck , and how Archer helped with the Federation of Planets form, was really well written. But as an original Trekkie, it was hard for me to really get into these other shows. But the more you watch, the more you begin to understand the characters & realize that not everything revolves around Kirk and Spock. Things change, even in space. The thing I liked about Voyger, is that it was during the same time as Generations’ Enterprise was exploring the Alpha quadrant, which brings up that point, in the episode where they are sending a signal to the Delta quadrant.

43. Anthony Lewis - January 17, 2010

@40 They probably will. ENT is the only remaining bit of history left intact in the new universe as those events took place before the Narada caused a split creating the before mentioned new universe.

44. ety3 - January 17, 2010

Please, no time travel and no crossovers.

I’m sure that’s the direction they’re going (standing on their own feet) so I’m not terribly worried.

45. Craig Keith - January 17, 2010

40# Id rather not forgrt ds9 or voyager on even enterpise cus they are canon , and events nin that universe led to romulas sun blowing thus nero going back in time and kicking the shit into the kelvin

i would love to see adrmal archer , he had soo much more to give , and had soo much less screen time then shatner , who if he was in the movie it would be a cameo , and if it was any more , he would end up taking half the movies budget.

and the tourch has been passed …. pine is now kirk … leave it at that

46. Craiger - January 17, 2010

Could they somehow use time travel bringing Kirk into the new Universe without effecting Kirk saving Veriden III? Maybe save him right before he dies and revive him in the new Universe? This way you could use that scene in Generations with Picard and Kirk after Kirk falls down that cliff.

47. AJ - January 17, 2010

I think, as JJ is cornered and asked “Trek” questions endlessly, he’s not going to rule anything out, especially at this early stage. If the story’s worth telling as a “Trek” story, tell it.

As Harry mentioned up top, however, the new crew is now proven, and the elder statesmen are no longer necessary beyond an ‘aww shucks!’ cameo.

Bring in Gary Lockwood as a Starfleet Admiral or Robert Picardo as a doctor for a laugh, but leave the Bridge and the main story alone for new ideas.

48. Dr. Image - January 17, 2010

BobO,
If you’re going to use Shat, DO IT SOON.
You’re running out of time…. (the sad truth.)
One more thing-
Keep Keenser!!!!!!

49. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

Well , enough is enough with time travel.

Bob and Alex have pressed the reset button ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reset_button_technique ) in trek once and for the last time already. Theirs no more time traveling… trust me. They need to develop the characters instead !

50. crazydaystrom - January 17, 2010

I love Shatner but I don’t want to see him in the next film. Too much time and story would have to be devoted to him and that would lessen the opportunies for the news cast AND would be a bump in the road along the path through the new timeline/universe.

Also, as much as I loved ST’09, I’d like the next film to be different. Please, no time travel, no villain seeking revenge and no original TOS actor cameos. Go boldly. If Keenser going to be there, make him a bit bada$$, not just ugly/cutesy. Give us awe, wonder and exploration. And a better engineering section.

51. crazydaystrom - January 17, 2010

…the new cast….
…If Keenser’s…
Should’ve proof read that post. Sorry.

52. P Technobabble - January 17, 2010

One of the most difficult things, I imagine, must be talking about making a Star Trek movie without actually saying anything about it. It’s obvious that JJ, and Bob, and the rest of the Supreme Court, enjoy talking about Star Trek, but they certainly don’t want to tell us what they are actually working on. That would be like someone telling you you are getting a surprise birthday party, these are the gifts you’ll be getting, and so on. How much fun would that be??

And when they are pressed for answers, they are deliberately vague… they have to be! I’m with all Trekkies, anxiously looking for news on the new film, while at the same time I don’t want to know what the plot is going to be, who the villian is going to be, or if Shatner is definitely in the film, etc. That would take all the fun out of it!

What is fun is the speculation of what could happen (although I would never presume to toss out plot ideas — I think Bob & Alex, Damon and JJ are quite capable of coming up with their own), and what the possible ramifications are of being in a new universe. The possibilities are endless, so we’ve all got plenty to discuss until 2012!

I think as long as William Shatner is capable, Trek-fans would like to see something done to take away that awful death scene we were forced to sit through in GEN. If Capt. Kirk had died in a truly heroic way — a larger than life sort of death that really summed up the kind of legendary character he was — perhaps we would not feel such a need to see him again. But for him to have died from falling off a rock was simply an insult to all the fans who loved Capt. Kirk. It was NOT the kind of death we would imagine for Kirk. It was not any better a death than the original scene of Kirk being shot in the back. No, Capt. James T. Kirk would have gone out in a blaze of glory, because that’s the kind of character he was. If there is a way to bring Shatner into the next film, I’m all for it — although I do not feel that he MUST be in the film. It is completely understandable why Leonard Nimoy was in Trek09, and his presence was completely necessary to the story. Unless Shatner’s presence is completely necessary to the story, there is no reason for him to be in the film. This seems pretty logical, hmm?

53. What is it with you? - January 17, 2010

Bob,

It stands to reason that Kirk and Spock still have some growing to do in their relationship. The scene you originally wrote for Shatner was/is prefect. As much as I loved the new movie, it is less for having this scene omitted (tell JJ. and others I told you so!).

If there is a way you could work that scene in…perhaps this time as a means to convince the new Kirk that he needs Spock… please consider it.

That scene was the greatest piece of star trek writing since TWOK – it’s a shame we didn’t see it realized on film.

54. Craig Keith - January 17, 2010

52# i complety agree with you on that , his death was nothing short of an disgrace to his character.

in my own opinion ( and im sure iv ehard this in an audio commentery before) theres only one way capt kirk should have went out ….. and that is in the bridge on his ship … saving his crew

55. Yeti - January 17, 2010

Hey maybe a film about Keenser then?

Could be a TV movie like the Star Wars Christmas special. We meet Mama Keenser and kiddy Keenser’s. The Enterprise has dropped him home to celebrate a Keenser family BDAY!
Scotty gets marooned with him accidently and they end up in a kiddy friendly plot to do with not being taking for granted just because you’re small.
They finish up with a planet Keenser BDAY song to the tune of the original series.
Think it would float?

56. Victor Hugo - January 17, 2010

Star Trek should me more like “COSMOS” and “DISCOVERY PLANET” and “ALIEN PLANET” than 1960´s television nostalgia.

Enough self referencing nostalgia already, they burned out all the 70´s and 80´s franchises with these greedy artificial remakes.

Let´s explore alien planets, let´s do Christopher Columbus in space.
I wanna see astronaut suits. H.R.GIGER like planets and detailed ships.

Take some inspiration in the FINAL FANTASY game series, they´re the ones really showing “strange new worlds” in the past decades.

57. Ralph F - January 17, 2010

“in my own opinion ( and im sure iv ehard this in an audio commentery before) theres only one way capt kirk should have went out ….. and that is in the bridge on his ship … saving his crew”

The Kirk novel in the CRUCIBLE series wraps up Kirk’s life nicely; give the book (and the whole series) a whirl. Love what David George did with McCoy’s story and the whole alternate universe/Edith Keeler angle.

58. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#49

I agree, they sort of boxed themselves into a corner in regards to telling any more time travel stories. Their version of time travel is no more than alternate realities/universes that exist and no event or history is ever changed, just observed. So there is never a need to correct anything or fix anything, ie. Prime spock not attempting to “fix” the timeline and just go with what happened/observed.

If there was a whale probe now or borg cube coming to earth, Kirk/Picard would simply say who cares, there are other realities where this never happened, let’s just go there, why bother fixing anything if there are other realities out there that exist that don’t need heroism.

59. Ben - January 17, 2010

boborci….

A non-movie related question for ya… I know you’re a busy guy with a ton of projects on your table right now, but in your free time, any chances you’ll be playing Star Trek Online?

60. jonboc - January 17, 2010

56, I have to disagree. The new movie was all about 60’s TV nostalgia, and it perfomed well beyond expectations. More please.

61. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

Looking forward to the 2nd masterpiece bob. Listening to the End Credits now.

62. Julie - January 17, 2010

In talking with a bunch of hard core, older fans who saw the movie multiple times I discovered that most saw the movie over and over primarily because of the presence of Nimoy. One said it gave them a “warm, fuzzy feeling.” Several mentioned that they would like to see Nimoy and Shatner in the next movie.

But most of the teenagers I talked to said that they only saw the movie once and just considered it to be an sci-fi/action movie, not because it was Star Trek. In fact, many said they avoided it at first because it was Star Trek.

63. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 4 (Anthony)

Looks like Bob doesn’t answer to Anthony or anyone !

So strange question.. who is Bob taking orders from ?

JACOB.

64. HelloGirls - January 17, 2010

When I left the theater after Generations, I remember distinctly feeling let down by Kirk’s death. But over time it grew on me. In a sense, it reminded me of the death of George S. Patton. Patton, during life was, like Kirk, larger than life. But Patton didn’t die in battle leading troops in one final campaign; he died paralyzed after a car accident. Death is the great equalizer. Kirk was, as far as we know, the Federation’s greatest “hero.” It is somehow appropriate that a senseless death would rob the Federation (and us) of that hero.

65. Jim Cude - January 17, 2010

#11- Wizard of Oz is a classic movie so what is your point? That you can’t even get your metaphors right makes me think you can’t write a script either. :)

66. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 64

I’ve always felt that the death of Kirk added HUGE GRAVITY to the Trek Universe. In Star Trek… whenever someone died… they would somehow comeback to life ! It was pathetic !

Kirks death not only reminded us that when people die in the Trek universe…. they can die and stay dead , lol, but it also reminded me of a humans mortality and how not even the great Captain Kirk escaped death. We must all face it…… and our deaths might not make sense ….. they might be senseless deaths… but thats how it really is in reality. So the death of Kirk in Genreations was perfectly orchestrated by Ron Moore and Brannon Braga….. except the Nexus…. there was too much fantasy involved with the Nexus !

67. S. John Ross - January 17, 2010

#22: “I’ll be very happy if the team gives me something new, fresh and unexpected.”

Wouldn’t we all?

68. Eric Saussine - January 17, 2010

Well don’t you it would be swell if they had a “New, Fresh and Unexpected” banner on the wall of their offices just to keep that in mind?

69. Andy Patterson - January 17, 2010

Orci:” In our Universe, as long as I am here, you can’t just slingshot around the sun”

But everything else is okay.

70. Captain Hackett - January 17, 2010

They need to focus on something that is very original and neat in next movie.

71. Sarah - January 17, 2010

If the next film has Klingons in it, it’d be nice to see if they can somehow work in Worf’s ancestors.

72. Sarah - January 17, 2010

I know Leonard Nimoy’s Spock Prime may not be as vital to this film as the last one, but I still hope to see Nimoy in the next movie, if they can work him in. It was wonderful to see Nimoy in that role again. Quinto is a great Spock, but I think we veteran Trekkies might have an emotional (ironic, isn’t it?) attachment to Nimoy’s portrayal. He’s so good at it!

73. Boborci - January 17, 2010

Anthony p

no, as usual u git it covered!

74. PJays - January 17, 2010

To support Bob’s statement, “you can’t just slingshot around the sun”. At this point, they haven’t discovered it yet (in either universe) and unless they live the same events as their prime timeline counterparts, they may never discover it. I believe it was first discovered by the original Enterprise in “Tomorrow is Yesterday” (Feel free to correct me). It is all up to the writers at this point. Keep up the good work. I can’t wait for the sequel!

75. Boborci - January 17, 2010

5,Aussie Adam

Why not? If they’re wiling to sit for hours in makeup

76. William J. Bordeleau - January 17, 2010

To the Writers, and Producers of STAR TREK ’09:

Warm praise for your hard work, and dedication to the greatest sci-fi franchise on the planet. Your generous (yet cautious) treatment of STAR TREK in general has been very honorable. You’ve succeeded in breathing new strength into what many had believed was a show crippled with fatigue.
STAR TREK will live forever- but now you have the privelage on deciding HOW.
It is my opinion that the ‘origin arc’ should continue it’s focus on a character of GREAT importance.
The Enterprise
She was awesome to me as a child. I was consistantly amazed how she performed beyond her specifications. To me, she was- at times- the star of the show. She was blessed with the spirit of humanity- nearly sentiant on occasion.
The Enterprise’s powerful aura made the characters seem all that more interesting.
Who else, but the Federations elite, may serve aboard her?
It is clear to me that the main characters are joined to the enterprise through some “greater intervention”. This could not be more clear to me when Kirk found Spock prime in the cave (STAR TREK ’09).
It would be awesome to see how- or why the Enterprise is special.
You see, I love the old girl, and I’ve waited too long to be reaquainted with her.
Star Trek: Enterprise failed to rekindle this tradition.
Please, let the Enterprise get top billing. Her greatness alone can define what star Trek is all about.

Thank you for your consideration

because only humanities elite have the skills to serve aboard her.

77. Boborci - January 17, 2010

Hugh Hoyland

of course it’s me. Who would pretend?

78. Boborci - January 17, 2010

29. Lando

well, warp is going faster than light, but I dont think their will be any transwarp beaming in the next One.

79. That One Guy - January 17, 2010

Bob,
What’s the likelihood of us seeing more beauty shots of the Enterprise?

80. That One Guy - January 17, 2010

Better yet, when can we expect the first Teaser?

81. boborci - January 17, 2010

76. William J. Bordeleau – January 17, 2010

Noted!

82. boborci - January 17, 2010

59. Ben – January 17, 2010
boborci….

A non-movie related question for ya… I know you’re a busy guy with a ton of projects on your table right now, but in your free time, any chances you’ll be playing Star Trek Online?

——

Now that you mention it, I have time today! Will check it out… right…. NOW!

83. boborci - January 17, 2010

Wait, is it out yet?

84. Mr Tim - January 17, 2010

Definitely think that the new film should end with the discovery of the SS Botany Bay…

85. boborci - January 17, 2010

55. Yeti – January 17, 2010
Hey maybe a film about Keenser then?

Could be a TV movie like the Star Wars Christmas special. We meet Mama Keenser and kiddy Keenser’s. The Enterprise has dropped him home to celebrate a Keenser family BDAY!

—–

So good.

86. boborci - January 17, 2010

53. What is it with you? – January 17, 2010

Appreciate that. Tough decision we had.

87. doug_skywalker - January 17, 2010

as much as i like comics and pop culture, i stopped reading Wizard years ago due to weak articles and outdated info. that, and they changed the format, and i was paying more for less…

@78: Boborci – would you be interested in ever having a Q&A seesion ala Newsarama’s ’20 Questions with Dan Dido’? i’m sure i’m not the only one burning with questions to see answered, and this way you can control which ones you answer…or something…

88. Yeti - January 17, 2010

Bob

While you’re around, there’s a lot of speculation as to the next film obviously but keeping to the Prime world what has been you’re favourite Star Trek movie and do you find yourself drawn to certain aspects of your favourite elements?
Must be hard to suddenly get a “Would like to have” moment when writing and be subjective as a writer rather than what you as a fan would like to see.

89. boborci - January 17, 2010

7. doug_skywalker – January 17, 2010

That’s what this site is! I think I’ve answered 1000 questions here.

90. boborci - January 17, 2010

8. Yeti – January 17, 2010

I actually love the Trek234 trilogy. Almost everything you need to know about Trek is somehow represented, and certainly those 3 served as big inspirations (and case law) in our attempt.

But there is so much to love all over the trek spectrum, no?

91. Yeti - January 17, 2010

90.

Agreed, they feel like companions to the original series (2).
I’m a stickler for the original guys, bet you’re looking forward to writing some classic moments between Kirk. Spock and McCoy.

Now the characters are re-established there’s got to be bags of great comedy moments to delve into!!

92. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

Bob

you don’t have to tell us what JJ had as an opinion for feedback, but can you at least tell us if he was made aware of the fact that a number of us here weren’t happy with the exterior shots of the Enterprise in the movie. Somehow it never looked quite as real as it could have…..thanks!

93. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 76.

I agree !

@ Boborci

Bob, I would really love to see another tougher meaner starship , other then the Enterprise in the sequel ! Maybe it could be called the USS-EXCELSIOR ? lol…

94. boborci - January 17, 2010

92. Harry Ballz – January 17, 2010

I’m sure he checks on these threads to make sure I don’t say something too monumentally stupid.

95. Yeti - January 17, 2010

92.

Didn’t look quite as real as it could have?????!!!!

I wasn’t aware that people thought that?

i struggled with the design at first but the effects team were among the few who render their models full scale in the computer. That’s a LOT of processing power and I thought every bit of it was up there on the screen.

Everyone has an opinion of course it’s just that that one suprised me!

96. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

If JJ is reading this thread…. then please note: WE WANT YOU TO PLAY AN EXTRA !! Maybe JJ can be a starfleet captain ! I love it when directors have cameo roles in their own movies ! Alfred Hitchcock use to do that a lot !

97. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 92

I thought the Enterprise looks extremely realistic and awesome ! Actually most fans who did not enjoy the film… at least enjoyed the Visual Effects and style of the movie.

But i dare not speak for everyone !

98. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

94

Well, er, thanks, Bob….but I’m not sure how that answers my question.

No, really, I truly don’t get what you mean.

99. Christine - January 17, 2010

#94, Mr. Orci :: I don’t think that’s possible for you. Just saying. ;3

I think Scott Bakula would be an awesome cameo or part or something in the next ‘Trek movie. He really is a good actor, the directing on ENT was just sometimes not that fabulous. Of course, he’d probably not be the Jonathan Archer we all know… ‘Cause he’d probably be dead by the time of Kirk’s era, am I right? Or like… 140 years old. (Break out the aging makeup kit!)

100. boborci - January 17, 2010

98. Harry Ballz – January 17, 2010

I am sure JJ is aware of the wide spectrum of opinions, is my point.

101. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 99 (Christine)

I think it would be possible. We saw a really really old Doctor McCoy cameo in the TNG pilot episode “Encounter at Farpoint”. I think he was really old there ! So why not a Scott Bakula cameo ? I think it fits within Trek cannon and doesn’t seem too ”fanboy’ish”.

102. Christine - January 17, 2010

#101 :: OOHH, LOL, I was saying I don’t think it would be possible for Bob Orci to say something monumentally stupid here.

I’m all for a Bakula cameo. :D

103. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 102

lol !

Now the question is….. IS BOB ALL FOR A BAKULA CAMEO ?

104. That One Guy - January 17, 2010

Chrstine,
I’d love to see T’Pol again. Maybe her AND Archer? Porthos perhaps?

Bob,
Did you guys ever consider using physical models for the ships? Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely love the new E, but there’s just something more about a model.

105. Christine - January 17, 2010

#104 :: The only problem is that, unless T’Pol was in Starfleet at the time(or on a ship or something), she may have gone down with Vulcan. Which would be utterly, completely sad… But it would be WAY cool to see T’Pol and Archer in a scene together. Way.

106. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 104

I always loved the models, too bad they stop using them. I think its easier to use the CGI stuff. I’m in software engineering and were dealing with 3d animation and one of our profs told us that dealing with the large large models were always difficult and you never got to do complex action shots. But the CGI models are improving through time ! Some of the work I’m doing on CGI stuff at university is just incredible.

107. boborci - January 17, 2010

104. That One Guy – January 17, 2010

We did consider models for the ships.

108. Ceti Alpha 5 - January 17, 2010

If you’re gonna put Klingons in the sequel, you got to have Kor in it.
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Kor

If not, there’s always the Gorn. Just have an original Gorn character for Kirk to match wits(and fists) with.

Or maybe both.

Minus the god-like entities that magically solve their problems by the end of the episode, that got old real fast.

109. P Technobabble - January 17, 2010

I really must disagree with those who felt Kirk’s death in GEN was fine, or reasonable, or realistic, or whatever.
Star Trek is entirely a work of fiction, and (apart from some concepts and speculation) there is little about it that is not fiction. As an iconic fictional hero, there was no need for Kirk to die in such a mediocre way. Sure, it happens in real life, and I’ve known plenty of people who died without sacrificing their lives for anything, while the loss of their real-life existence far outweighed any kind of fiction.
But I am not convinced this has to be reflected in a work of fiction such as STar Trek, especially when the hero — Kirk — was always portrayed as being able to cheat his way out of death. The death of Kirk in GEN was entirely false to the mythology of Star Trek. Fan-critics of Trek09 complained about what they felt didn’t ring true to Star Trek mythology, but it was acceptable in GEN? I gotta take issue with that.
Certainly, I blame the production team of GEN, and I blame Mr. Shatner, who, historically, would never have gone with something he didn’t really believe in. It was, IMO, a major mistake for him to go along with Kirk’s death in that manner.
And, yes, we could say that it seemed like whenever someone died in Trek they would come back to life, but that is not entirely true. However, I have no real problem with the character of Kirk dying permanently (since, as a fictional character, he will live on forever), but rather that his death should have (in terms of storytelling and Trek mythology) stood for something. The writers put a bunch of time into creating alot of storyline mumbo-jumbo around the Nexus, but little time in formulating a fitting end to Capt. Kirk. Yes, this is just my opinion, but I’m sticking to it.

110. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

No more cameos please, I want lots of this new crew and whoever else you got in mind that is from TOS. Maybe Shatner as a old version of Pine, either through flash forward scene or aging illness scene.

You can also send Spock Prime home via the Guardian and discovers that Kirk is alive and many things have changed, Spock Prime was unable to return to his reality, instead he enters a future version of this new reality.

You can start the new movie with Leonard Nimoy playing 3dchess/poker with William Shatner and they talk about one of their earlier missions and tie that in with some crazy move William Shatner used to beat Nimoy in chess/poker.

111. Tom - January 17, 2010

Hey the scene for Shatner was not time travel

112. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

100

Bob, thanks so much for taking the time to clarify that!

It would have driven me batty!

113. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ boborci

Bob, can you officially say that NERO is dead at the end of Trek 09 ?

Because i’ve gotten into this debate with my fellow trek friends. I just don’t accept that Nero is dead at the end of Trek 09. Just as I don’t think Ra’s Al Ghul is dead at the end of Batman Begins.

Please help me on this one !!!!!!!!!!! lol

114. Silicon Avatar - January 17, 2010

Mr. Orci, great job on the new movie. I’ve been a Star Trek fan for over 16 years and I thought the new movie was absolutely terrific.

115. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#113

Listen to, “Nero Death Experience”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9sLJDt88ZY&feature=related

A ship going through a black hole is traumatic enough, now imagine a ship that is fired upon with all the weapons of the USS Enterprise with failing shields and a black hole vortex inside the ship. Then again this is sci fi, if Nero was a hit of a villain and the public wanted to see him again, he will be back. Right Bob?

116. That One Guy - January 17, 2010

113,
He’s dead, Jim. The Narada went ker-bloom/shluuuurp into the black hole as it was being fired on by the E. Had the ship even survived into another reality, chances are the sheer amount of hull breaches would’ve meant that he’s sufficiently dead.

117. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 115

Coman… a man who has technology like that….. who has the ability to destroy planets and create black holes…. most certainly has transporter technology and a small shuttle craft to get the hell out of there !

118. boborci - January 17, 2010

113. jas_montreal – January 17, 2010

I think it would be very difficult for Nero to survive falling into a black hole without the full protection of his ship. But since we can never observe the interior of a black hole, who know?

This answer doesn’t help, does it?

119. boborci - January 17, 2010

114. Silicon Avatar – January 17, 2010

Too kind.

120. boborci - January 17, 2010

115. somethoughts – January 17, 2010

Yup.

121. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#117

Fine, Nero pulled a borg sphere and transported himself onto the USS Enterprise and is hiding in the Beer Factor chilling and waiting for the right time to exact his revenge. Nero teams up with Khan and all hell breaks loose in the sequel. Nero studying Earths history is aware of the exact location of the Botany Bay and the famous missions of Jim Kirk including how Jim Kirk defeated Khan in the Wrath of Khan.

122. Mitch - January 17, 2010

On the Shatner issue–I think even the writers have to admit that it was handled poorly. To keep such avid fans hoping for so long and then not delivering was a terrible thing, even if the effect was unintentional. If Shatner is not going to be in the next movie, I’m asking in the interest of fairness and to NOT have it as a shadow over the next movie, to PLEASE, just announce it early, and be done with it.

I doubt too many people seriously believe that Abrams is really open to using Shatner in the movie next time. Been down that road.

But that said, I would LOVE it. Not some one scene cameo, but a real part. Not a starring part, but something on the level of Spock Prime last time. There is so much that can be done to bring in the Kirk Prime character, but ultimately, I am not getting any hopes up.

I file that under “too good to be true.”

I’m just asking that people not be teased with the possibility of a Shatner return, when it’s not really going to happen. We knew Nimoy was going to be in the movie well in advance last time, and that didn’t spoil the story. It would be nice for the same thing to happen if Shatner is in, or if not, to not be teased.

123. That One Guy - January 17, 2010

121,
Actually, I kinda like the Nero/Khan idea. Bring back Nero to bring back Khan, kill off Nero WITH Khan, and boom, we have an epic movie.

Now, just write a 2-hour long script based off of some-guy-on-a-website’s rantings.

124. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

I loved it also, I have the Best Buy collectors Blu Ray Enterprise model, got it the first day :) Can’t wait for part 2 and 3, this site along with the soundtrack/blu ray is helping the days go by.

125. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

I know how weird this may sound….

but i’ll never get enough closure with regards to NERO. I still think he’s out there, awaiting to get his revenge on Kirk.

FAN FICTION !

Yes , I’m going to write a fan fiction story, on how Nero escaped the black hole and tries to kill kirk !

126. toddk - January 17, 2010

Yes, bring harry mudd along for the ride, on the upcoming KHAN movie, Mudd will be the comic relief. and it will be harry who unwittingly gets KHAN stranded on ceti-alpha V.

127. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 126

Now thats just cruel :P

128. Tom - January 17, 2010

Hi Bob

I remember you said that some ideas that did not make it into first movie would be considered in the sequel. Would the Shatner scene be part of that? Any thoughts on this? What has JJ”s reaction been since the reception to your scene was overwhelmingly positive?

129. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

Gosh, if that Kirk scene was included in the end, that would have been the cherry on top. Perfect origins story, with the birth of Kirk, transformation from punk to captain and then to have Shatner as the Kirk close the movie with that scene. Standing ovation. It would have stole the thunder away from the new crew/Nimoy imo and I think that is why they decided as a team not to do it. Dammed if you do and Dammed if you don’t.

130. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 129.

Well they can always introduce that hologram message device in the sequel.

131. Jayb - January 17, 2010

Why not bring back Gary Seven and Roberta Lincoln? I think they’d make some fantastic characters to build a story around.

132. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#130

Yes, I think something has to happen to Pine for Quinto to view that pendant and do something that will jeopardize Spocks career, out of not logic but emotion/friendship.

133. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 131

I’m personally against introducing too many new characters in the new trek movie.

You can be guaranteed that they will introduce Nurse chappel into the uhura, kirk and spock love triangle. PLUS, a new villain ??!?! PLUS, harry mudd ??!?!?! Gary Mitchell ?

Now Gary Seven ?

BUT REMEMBER…. GARY SEVEN = TIME TRAVELER…..

Which is a big NO NO in the trek sequel. Plus, Bob has strict rules with regards to time traveling.

134. Jayb - January 17, 2010

#133 Well…in that case, nevermind then. :-)

135. jas_montreal - January 17, 2010

@ 134

Sorry if i sounded condescending to you, lol. It was never my intention !

136. Bucky - January 17, 2010

While I understand from a story-perspective that sling-shotting around the sun is too easy for time-travel, I’m just wondering from an in-universe setting why Spock wouldn’t do it. Did he just forget? (Let’s assume that Spock never tells anyone in the JJ-verse how to slingshot around the sun to go back in time, considering how messed up the timeline got). Also, I would assume that Spock can’t slingshot back to the moment the Narada arrives because he’d just have one ship and no red matter and no real way to stop them. So I can buy him not fixing it.

But, ah-hah, what about Gary Seven or Braxton and the Relativity or Daniels? Wouldn’t they just be like “Good gravy! What happened to the timeline?!” Maybe it’s too much of a mess to clean up, or they just filed away the JJ-verse as “Tangent Universe #456″ and left it on their merry way and continued to try to keep the Prime timeline from having too many holes in it.

137. Mel - January 17, 2010

I hope there won’t be any time travel or cameos in the sequel. I like William Shatner and other old Star Trek characters but I think the new crew should stand on their own now.

By the way I would love to see more of Keenser. He is funny and cute! But it would also be very interesting if he has a scene were he is not only funny and cute but also show some surprising skill. For example he could repair something or put something together which was put apart in a lot of small parts, VERY fast, much faster than a human could. Or he could perhaps fight quite good. Just because he is small, everyone is probably thinking that he is quite helpless physical. It would be cool if he is not and a big surprise! I don’t want to see him as a main character but it would be really nice if he has one or two good scenes!

138. Bucky - January 17, 2010

Also, not sure if this has anything to do with anything, but I think it’s kind of nifty that “Star Trek” got the WGA Award nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay for being based on Gene Roddenberry’s “Star Trek” when it’s not really based on specifically anything from anything in particular. Heck, if anything, I’d say the closest analogy for the flick to be “based on” something would be Yesterday’s Enterprise, and that was TNG.

139. JIM - January 17, 2010

Bob,

thank you for all the answers here! Good to have one of us in the supreme court of the franchise!

140. ryanhuyton - January 17, 2010

J.J Abrams, Bob and co. did a great job on this movie. But I have a few suggestions:

1. A new engineering. I’m concerned about the fact that Scotty is a drinker and he happens to work in a brewery.:-)

2. Don’t reveal what happened to Admiral Archer’s prized beagle. Some mysteries are better left unsolved. Make the dog the equivelent of the “Amelia Earhart” of interplanetary transporter disappearances. :-)

3. Khan ‘n Klingons. How can you go wrong? If not, how about some Gorn? Or Andorians? Or Tholians?

141. dalek - January 17, 2010

Definitely up for Shatner. The scene you wrote for him was fantastic.

Question about Trek 09… When Kirk steals the corvette and drives past the kid what does he shout?

Some people have said it’s “Hey Jonny!” But I thought it sounded like “Hey Georgie!” inferring it’s his brother George Samuel Kirk.

142. ryanhuyton - January 17, 2010

I have the feeling the next article will be:

“Breaking News: J.J Abrams stubs his toe; fans offer to kiss it better”.

Or:

“Breaking News: Bob Orci accidentally smashes a prized model of the original Enterprise; fans rally in support of Bob with donations of model kits and glue”.

Either way the number of posts will be ( you guessed it) 1701.

Seriously, this site is the best and Bob is a cool dude for hanging with us.

143. Tanner Waterbury - January 17, 2010

I have an idea, make a Doctor Who-Star Trek crossover movie! that would be FREAKING SWEET!!!

144. VOODOO - January 17, 2010

Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner in a Star Trek movie would always be a good thing… After seeing how much Mr. Nimoy brought to the last film how could anyone say that they don’t want him involved?

After all this is science fiction… There is always a way to get these characters/actors involved. The main reason they should be involved is because it would fun to see these icons on screen one more time as Kirk and Spock.

P.S. Kirk prime deserves a better ending.

145. boborci - January 17, 2010

136. Bucky – January 17, 2010

May I refer you to the fan Q&A linked above.

to quote myself!:

“…our story is not based on the linear timeline of Einstein’s General Theory of relativity upon which most movies about time travel are based (like say, BACK TO THE FUTURE, or TERMINATOR, both of which I LOVE). The idea of a fixable timeline has been a wonderful staple of sci-fi since the 50’s, but in reading about the most current thinking in theoretical physics regarding time travel (Quantum Mechanics), we learned about the speculative theories that suggest that if time travel is possible, then the act of time travel itself creates a new universe that exists in PARALLEL to the one left by the time traveler. This is the preferred theory these days because it resolves the GRANDFATHER PARADOX, which wonders how a time traveler who kills his own younger grandfather would logically then cease to exist, but then he’d never be around to time travel and kill his grandfather in the first place. Quantum Mechanically based theories resolve this paradox by arguing that the time
traveler, in killing his grandfather, would merely split a previously identical universe into a new one in which a man who is his grandfather in another universe is killed in the new one. The time traveler does not cease to exist, although he is no longer in his own original universe (where he is now missing)…”

146. boborci - January 17, 2010

140. ryanhuyton – January 17, 2010

“1. A new engineering. I’m concerned about the fact that Scotty is a drinker and he happens to work in a brewery.:-)”

HA! Well played, sir. You may have won this time, but we’ll be back!

147. colonyearth - January 17, 2010

Anthony! Sometimes I think you and Bob and the rest of the Supreme Court are in collusion. You post some “talk” and a new “tidbit” which really doesn’t say anything new (JJ said nothing new here than he’s said anywhere else) and Bob gets to read the responses in order to gauge reaction to ideas. It’s a smart little system you devils. Of course, you always have to wade through the…well…them um…you know? Right? I mean you get…what I’m saying there, right?

BTW, hey Bob! Always good when you drop in!

Hugh Hoyland – At no time should a good writer, director, editor, FX person, or any person involved in film leave behind story for FX and pomp! AVATAR is a groundbreaking, game-changing film, but the story is always being served by what you see. The visuals are part of the process, but they should never fully be the process. That is bad filmmaking.

148. boborci - January 17, 2010

141. dalek – January 17, 2010

The ambiguity you point out is surely the result of our indecision on the matter. Originally, we had intended, and wrote, a scene in Kirk’s house with his brother and stepfather/uncle/GregGrunbergburg/insertbetter.

George Kirk left the house first, and then Jim stole the car. But JJ and the amazing editors had time and editing and pace considerations which lead us to what you saw. I loved when I saw it cut together.

So as it stands, canon is ambiguous on the matter. Only what’s on sceen counts.

149. boborci - January 17, 2010

147. colonyearth – January 17, 2010

Ha! We’re not in covert collusion but Anthonyhe sure has a way of framing a debate in his articles! Who can resist?

150. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

Bob

I remember many months ago you mentioned that you were proud about sticking to “canon” except for one key thing. I don’t remember ever hearing what that one thing was….now that the movie has come out, and been analyzed ad naseum, could you please enlighten us? Thanks!

151. boborci - January 17, 2010

150. Harry Ballz – January 17, 2010

Sheesh. I’m sure many could be pointed out, but I can’t remember what I had in mind. I vaguely recall saying that. I’ll think about it.

152. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

151

Ooooh, goody!! I thought maybe it was putting Delta Vega in such close proximity to Vulcan so Spock Prime could watch his home planet implode!

153. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

Bob. I wanna see the Excelsior, Abramsverse style. Any chance of that? Didn’t take two hours to promote Kirk. You could move Sulu right along.

154. boborci - January 17, 2010

153. Desstruxion – January 17, 2010

Interesting.

155. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

Then the inevitable….Enterprise B.

156. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

Or Enterprise-A could be an Excelsior class. New universe, unlimited possibilities.

157. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

Hello Bob! honor to meet you, your busy these days. Great Job on Star Trek, Transformers (are you writting T3 as well?) Lost and the other projects your doing and/or have done. The fans do appreciate your work.

158. gracliper - January 17, 2010

I hope to see everything you’re pointing out guys.

But first, the glorious five year mission. :D

159. gracliper - January 17, 2010

YEARS. :P

160. Sunfell - January 17, 2010

No questions- just a comment for you, Bob:

I know that you and your colleagues will create and deliver a kick-ass story. It won’t be perfect, but hey- perfection is overrated. The fangirls will want to see Spock go into Pon Farr (poor guy!) and the fanboys will want to see Uhura kick serious ass in that minidress (poor gal!). I want to see Spock do some Vulcan martial-arts exercises, and school Kirk in a bit of Suus Mahna. Add Uhura, and hey, it’ll write itself, won’t it?

Mostly, I just want to see good storytelling, and maybe a few more female characters in the mix. I want to laugh, cry, and maybe throw something. (Or not- they’d kick me out of the theater.)

I remember the screams of horror when Spock’s death was revealed in Wrath of Khan. That was a wrenching scene- one of the best ever. You guys shouldn’t have to go so far as to kill Spock (again), but I know you’ll come up with something as astonishing and powerful for this next movie.

I look forward to the summer of 2012.

161. Captain Dan - January 17, 2010

@153 – In the book Star Trek: The Art of the Film, one of the Federation Armada ships was designed to be named Excelsior. I’m not sure if it was made in the computer or put in the fleet at all, but its in the book :)

I’m sure you mean the NX-2000 though which of course becomes Sulu’s ship and was my favourite ship for some time, particularly in ST VI!

In the next Trek I’d love to see more Fed ships, but not necessarily the Excelsior.

162. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

“Hugh Hoyland – At no time should a good writer, director, editor, FX person, or any person involved in film leave behind story for FX and pomp! AVATAR is a groundbreaking, game-changing film, but the story is always being served by what you see. The visuals are part of the process, but they should never fully be the process. That is bad filmmaking.”

ColonyEarth, I agree. And Avatar has indeed changed the game. My suggestion as a fan to Bob and the team while writting this story is to do so with the idea of shooting it exactly the same way JC did with Avatar. Technically that is, obviously in the context of the Star Trek universe, not Pandora.

163. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

161 – I saw the Excelsior in particular you are referring too. I liked that design (and all of the new ones) as well. NX/NCC-2000 would be great to see. With that said I’d like to see all of our favorite ships in Abramsverse style. I know it’s not practical to have all of them in the next few movies but if the design wizards from the last movie put out a speculative “what if” book with them in it I’d buy it.

164. nuSpock - January 17, 2010

Bob…regarding your rules on Time Travel, even within said rules, if you were to have another character from oldTrek in the new film, in a majorly important role, Ben Sisko from Deep Space Nine could still factor in, based in that he ascended into The Celestial Temple to be with The Prophets at the end of the DS9 series finale and that The Temple is a nonlinear domain where one could basically view the whole metaverse…so Sisko could pop into any timeline he chose from The Temple…

It was said awhile back that torture was an issue that might be explored in the new film…theoretically, if the story involved some Vulcan refugees taking refuge on Bajor, and the Cardassians beginning an early Occupation thereof, Sisko could exit The Temple and help Kirk and crew liberate the Bajorans and the Vulcan refugees from under Cardassian rule…

Just an idea… :) Feel free to use it if you wish :) LOL

165. Ironhyde - January 17, 2010

Hey, Shat can be in – no problem. Just because we didn’t see it being emphasized in the first movie, there’s no reason to believe Spock Prime NEVER gave Young Spock that holorecording of Kirk… no reason at all. Of course Spock has it. And maybe in the next movie he’s challenged morally and ethically… and that holorecording becomes not only a reminder of the trust he must maintain in Kirk, but of what the universe expects of him and what he is capable of.

166. Ironhyde - January 17, 2010

And while I’m at it, I also wanted to point out that I think NOT using Spock Prime in the next movie is actually more of a gimmick than using him. I mean, this hero from the future comes into our timeline and then he’s just gone in the next movie? No explanation, nothing. That’ll just emphasize how much of a cameo he was, and how he never really was part of the universe or the story. Honestly, I would have been confused and irritated if Doc just never appeared in Back to the Future 2. No?

167. . - January 17, 2010

I know I’ve said so before, but since I see Bob Orci on the board I’m just being brave to mention again that I would love to see Bill Murray have a spot in the next movie (maybe more than a cameo).

168. Sarah - January 17, 2010

Sorry, that post was supposed to have my name with it.

169. Drew - January 17, 2010

Why won’t the people on this site stop trying to destroy the momentum of the new Star Trek? I’m sick of hearing about time travel and cameos. Each and every one of the cast of the original series are jokes in the industry. All of them. Even with Shatner’s pity Emmies. Leave it alone.

Abrams has made one of the only real Star Trek Movies ever made and you people want to poison it with the schlock of the past.

This new series needs to go forward on its own and create new stories. This pathetic fawning for something that’s long gone needs to come crashing to a close before this new franchise becomes nothing more than a bunch of catch phrases and caricatures like the old Star Trek movies.

170. Chris Fawkes - January 17, 2010

@169

Amen!

171. dalek - January 17, 2010

#148 Thanks for your answer Bob. I guess, as you probably won’t be going back to Kirk’s childhood again, the result is up to interpretation. I think the decision to cut the backstory was the right one. It was important to establish that Kirk was rebellious and wreckless and jump ahead as fast as possible. Might have felt too bloated otherwise. I think the pacing of the movie was appropriate to the story. Unlike others I didn’t think it moved too fast at all. Nemesis is an example of very poor pacing and unecessarily long dialogue scenes.

172. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

Hey 169 I thought everyone on this site was allowed to have an opinion. Guess I was wrong. That “pathetic fawning” that you refer to is in my case an appreciation for the entire history of the franchise. Without it’s history the new stories that you (and I) look forward to would not exist. You said that the new Trek movie (which I like with all of the others) was “one of” the only “real” Star Trek movies ever made. I’m just curious which other films you consider to be “real” Star Trek. That is if it’s ok with you that I’m curious.

173. dalek - January 17, 2010

#172 Don’t worry too much about what others say. I have no time for people who choose to use these threads to persecute other fans for their opinions, and you shouldn’t either. Nobody is right and nobody is wrong. And certainly, nobody has the right to tell you that you are wrong, or I am wrong, unless we are factually incorrect.

Enjoy the discussion Desstruxion. It’s quite rare for fans to have this opportunity to interact with writers.

174. ryanhuyton - January 17, 2010

Well, I’m certainly grateful to Bob for responding to my post. Now if he can just pass it on to J.J. we’ll be in business. Heh heh!

175. Desstruxion - January 17, 2010

Agreed 173. Like the name too. Looking forward to new Who.

176. dalek - January 17, 2010

#175 Thanks me too! It looks promising!

177. Syd Hughes - January 17, 2010

I’d like to sorta see time travel, with chunks of the Narada popping out of the other end of a red matter black hole in 2160 or so, obliterating the NX-02 Columbia for fanwankery purposes and also to open the movie with a scene that reflects the opening scene of Trek 09. That way you get a theme going, like how every classic Star Wars movie opened with a Star Destroyer.

Anyway, the chunks of Narada land on some nearby uninhabited planet, and remain undiscovered up until 2262. Then the story can be set against a scramble by the Federation and Klingons to get their hands on the technology first.

178. Sci Fi Guy - January 17, 2010

OMG NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

NO MORE FREAKING TIME TRAVEL!!!

Good Lord! What is this? The Time Tunnel???!!!

If I were JJ, the answer to the time travel question would have been “Not no, but HELL no!” My god, can’t these people come up with just ONE original idea for this film?

Klingons…Khan…Time travel.

Tell ya what — I’ll just stay home, save money and pop in a DVD of one of the old films. I mean, if we’re going to just watch rerun story situations with new production design, actors and FX…who needs that?

Might as well stay home and watch the old stuff!

179. Hugh Hoyland - January 17, 2010

All of what hollywood produces is “old” stuff, just updated or re-done. The idea with making movies is making money, thats the bottom line. I want to see the next Star Trek succeed at the box office. So my suggestions are based on what is making the most impact at the box office. Whats the big thing now? AVATAR, what other movie was a box office smash? TRANSFORMERS 2. Even if fans trash these movies the people who made them must have done something right because the general audiance is going to see these movies in droves. Those two movies are what I would use as a template for the sequel. Mix those two with the most well known Star Trek villian, Khan, and you might produce something that will not only interest Trekies, but also the broad public. (or if you wanna be really brave use the Gorn, CGI style like JC did with the Na’vi)

180. Blake Powers - January 17, 2010

I wish I had a good question to ask.

181. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

#169 Drew- “you people want to poison it with the schlock of the past”

Drew, I think you’ve hit on the title for the next movie…..

Star Trek: The Search For Schlock!

182. Grimmy - January 17, 2010

My 2 cents.

Want Kirk Prime in the next flick with no time travel, no convoluted tricks?

Just have Kirk Prime appear to PineKirk in the form of a vision (somewhat like Head Six in BSG), which could be attributed to Spock Prime & PineKirk’s mind meld in the previous film. It’s common Trek lore that when a mind meld happens, the two individuals retain an imprint of each other. Since Spock Prime mind melded with Kirk Prime on multiple occasions, a part or Kirk Prime would exist in Spock Prime’s mind. When Spock Prime melds with PineKirk, some of that residual impression of Kirk Prime could be passed on to our new Kirk.

So, kind of like a milder version of the Katra-pass between Spock Prime and McCoy Prime, PineKirk could be suffering from some after-affect from the meld, which manifests in the form of visions of Shatner Kirk. This could be a sub-plot that develops through the film and then comes into play in the climax.

So, everybody wins. Shatner gets to do more than a cameo (and as an interactive character, not a recording), and figures into the resolution of the story. It requires no retconning or long explanation, and is well precedented in Trek lore. It would not be Kirk Prime “in the flesh,” but it would be true to his character, and the easiest way to see Shat as Kirk one last time. Everybody wins.

Mr. Orci, if you happen to be lurking, feel free to play with it. Unless of course, you guys already thought of this avenue and shot it down. Which is possible.

183. Trekluver - January 17, 2010

@boborci

Any idea if you guys will do a Q&A with trekmovie.com before scripting? It would be nice. Oh yea and btw, Khan is a top villan spot in my book or a renagade robot or something but please don’t do Klingons! It’s been done too many times and besides I didn’t like the new look you guys gave them. I might like it if we saw their skin every now and then but if you all do go Klingon then be sure to include both types of Klingon because we can’t go lose from canon now can we? :) Go ridges!

184. Harry Ballz - January 17, 2010

#182

Grimmy….not bad, not bad at all! One of the more original suggestions I’ve ever seen posted at this site!

185. jesustrek - January 17, 2010

“Boborci’ eres el original ? sabia que entras por aqui a ver datos de los fans, si eres tu es un gusto me gustaria charlar contigo soy Mexicano y pues al verdad te estan dando duro los gringuitos.

Soy fan desde chico de Star Trek y creo necesitas apoyo y mas de un compatriota te dejo mi correo jesussalinass@hotmail.com me gustaria intercambiar opiniones contigo y por que no ser tu acesor de apoyo.

Gracias Saludos

186. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

#185

Would someone be so kind to translate for me? Bob? :)

187. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

I always loved stories about the improbable hero that was a bullied nobody who was nothing more than a dishwasher or grunt who becomes high warlord to save humanity or something. There is always a fine line between heroism and villainy.

King Arthur, Mr. Anderson/Neo, Jake Sully, Luke Skywalker, Karate Kid, Kung Fu Panda, Peter Parker and James T. Kirk.

188. somethoughts - January 17, 2010

Shrek also, this pattern fits the top 10 world wide grosses.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/world/

189. ryanhuyton - January 17, 2010

#185 Just wants to chat with Bob Orci in Spanish. Share his opinions.
Its just a guess since I don’t know Spanish. Not all Trekkies speak English.

190. boborci - January 18, 2010

185. jesustrek – January 17, 2010
“Boborci’ eres el original ? sabia que entras por aqui a ver datos de los fans, si eres tu es un gusto me gustaria charlar contigo soy Mexicano y pues al verdad te estan dando duro los gringuitos.

Soy fan desde chico de Star Trek y creo necesitas apoyo y mas de un compatriota te dejo mi correo jesussalinass@hotmail.com me gustaria intercambiar opiniones contigo y por que no ser tu acesor de apoyo.

Gracias Saludos

——————–

Translation:

Bob Orci, are you really him? I knew that you came to this site to mingle with other fans — if it is you, it’s a pleasure to meet you and i’d like to chat with you — I’m Mexican and the truth is the gringos are really giving you a hard time.

I’ve been a fan of Star Trek since I was a kid and I think you need support, especially from a compatriot. I’ll leave you my email xxxx. I’d love to exchange ideas and be your support.

————

to which I say, MUCHAS GRACIAS!

191. Hugh Hoyland - January 18, 2010

Bob, still working on the story?

192. Daniel - January 18, 2010

I’d sure like to see Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer in future Star Trek films.

193. Daniel - January 18, 2010

I’m not sure but perhaps we were never told how long Phlox’s race lived. Would be nice to see John B. make an appearance as well.

194. Zebonka - January 18, 2010

No one aside from T’Pol or Hoshi deserves to ever be in Trek again. End of!

195. somethoughts - January 18, 2010

#190

Thanks for the translation Bob!

196. Rhett Coates - January 18, 2010

How about Nichelle Nichols as MOTHER of [Zoe’s] Nyota Uhura? Jolene Blalock as an elder T’Pol (who, perhaps — hopefull — was NOT on Vulcan during the previous film), and yes: I agree that Scott Bakula as “Admiral” Archer would be an interesting cameo if written write. Or, right. (Writer’s joke there.) If one has read the novel based on the eleventh movie, the last paragraph shows the transporter on the Big E activating by itself (perhaps like it did in TOS episode “The Enemy Within” with no one there), and lo and behold, PORTHOS appears — or, rather, Porthos’s descendent or another beagle who is also named Porthos in honor of Archer’s beagle aboard the old NX-01, nearly a century before. I have no idea what might trigger the transporter in such an instance, but it’s possible Bob and Alex could indeed craft a scene that takes that to a new extreme in the next storyline’s plot…..

The characters of Gary Mitchell and Carol Marcus, and even Guinan (Whoopi Goldberg), have been asked about to death, but I sense that if Bob and Alex craft a story that would benefit from those characters being there (or any others from the Prime timeline), they would go in the next story. It’s only logical (to paraphrase almost any Vulcan). Casting Dept. personnel would take it from there. I would LOVE to see how those characters play out in the new timeline. They both seem to have a profound effect on Jame T. Kirk in the original timeline, and if we take Gary’s statement to Kirk in the second pilot (WNMHGB), that he “aimed” that blond lab tech at Jim — and Jim’s startled response, “I almost married her!” ….. well, where do they go from here, now that the timeline is altered? Hmmm…….

197. Darren - January 18, 2010

If they wanted Shatner as Kirk in the movie, instead of time travel they could just show him as the “older” version of Pine’s character with some kinda plot point set in the future.

As for other cameos, I’d like to see some “Enterprise” TV series characters appear. T’Pol or Plox would be the more legitimate ones I guess.

198. BiggestTOSfanever - January 18, 2010

@ boborci
In the sequel, if there’s time travel, why don’t you have Kirk and Spock discover that the Guardian of Forever is the same Guardian in EVERY UNIVERSE! That would be soooo cool. After all the Guardian says there is only one of it and it lives in every time line.

199. Ernest 3rd - January 18, 2010

How bout NO CAMEOS, NO TIME TRAVEL.

“To Boldly Go…”

Are we ever going to see New life and new civilizations? Or have we been there so much that there are no new territiories. No more new stories can be told. How bout some seriously underused aliens like Tholians or Gorns?

Maybe even Klingons or Romulans. Would the Romulan Empire help their Vulcan cousins in this universe? Unification might come sooner due to Nero’s actions. The Romulan Empire might side with the UFP, making the Klingons more militaristic.

Just an idea.

200. Chris Fawkes - January 18, 2010

I’ve worked out the ultimate cameo scenario.

How about a story where young kirk while trying to save the universe gets sucked into some type of temporal nexus. While there he convinces older Kirk and Picard that the threat he faces is greater than Soran.

So after finding a little girl to go back and take care of Soran the two Kirk’s and Picard go back to the new timeline.

ok i’m tired and dribbling a little but if any part of that gets used i want royalties.

201. rogue_alice - January 18, 2010

“Also get Scott Bakula to reprise his role as Admiral Archer AND GET HIS DOG BACK!”

Yes, the beagle issue needs to be resolved. Serious here. Scotty is a bit tarnished (in my opinion) due to this.

He could even beam him back to the Enterprise engine room “where there’d be no Beagle at all.”

202. P Technobabble - January 18, 2010

Is there anybody who doesn’t really want to see any characters from Star Trek past, besides me??? I am all for letting go of the past. It’s gone, but it will always exist in your dvd player. I am all for New. Change. Different. Never-before seen. It’s not such a bad thing…… Sure, if any of these previous-incarnation characters show up in the sequel, I’m not gonna piss and moan about it. I simply do not see any reason to bring back any peripheral characters. The crew is who I really care about. Just my 2c, of course…

203. rogue_alice - January 18, 2010

#76. Yes!!!!

I, too, have always thought of the Enterprise as a character. And great points as to how “she” is an entity to herself. She sets the bar and example for all of Starfleet and that should be recognized.

Then again, I am a machine/robot/tech geek.

But, I love me some Miss E.

204. sans_shatner - January 18, 2010

I use to be opposed to the time travel plots. But, I have to admit that some of the best TREK stories involve time travel: TCOTEOF, Yesterday’s Enterprise etc.

And when you apply real theories of relativity to traveling warp speed, all the ships are actually time traveling relative to Earth or their respective home planets anyway. So as long as the story is awesome, time travel is just another plot device that needs to be used sparingly for good effect.

205. somethoughts - January 18, 2010

#203

The Enterprise becomes self aware through alien probe or phenomenon and takes the crew through a epic journey of time and space.

206. Janice - January 18, 2010

All I want to see is Bruce Greenwood back as Admiral Pike!
Pike should definitely be a part of the story—whatever the story is going to be. I”ll have faith that Orci and Kurtzman will come through!

207. Ralph Pinheiro - January 18, 2010

Mr. BobOrci, I liked this re-imagined Star Trek, but but I miss races of the original series as Tellarites, Andorians, Rigelians, Nausicaans, Deltans, Klingons …. I would like to see some of them again. They are part of the core of Star Trek.

208. scott - January 18, 2010

I’d like to see a sequel that has some of the grandeur and classiness of TMP, and with a bit more of the naval/submarine style warfare of TWOK. I don’t want Star Wars when I go to a Star Trek movie.

209. BeatleJWOL - January 18, 2010

Let Jeffrey Combs be the bad guy. There’s your cameo!

210. Ben - January 18, 2010

83. boborci – January 17, 2010

Wait, is it out yet?

It’s in Open Beta. Pre-order and you’ll get a free key.

211. Xeos - January 18, 2010

boborci –

Any quick tips on aspiring writers looking to start their career late? I’m 27.

212. BRYAN M. - January 18, 2010

I thank you guys for the”FRESH” look at our beloved characters, and in giving them “NEW LIFE” so to speak for the next generation of Star Trek fans. Since you have already established that the future of Star Trek as us “OLD TREKKIES” are already familiar with has changed with the events f this NEW story launch. I think you need to keep everything new and fresh and in fact continue to rewrite Star Trek history so to speak.Gene Rodenberry said it best when he described Star Trek as the journey of the imagination. Dont “RE-DO” Trek…”RE-WRITE” it. GO WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE!!!

213. Lars - January 18, 2010

Please…. No time travel. No reused bad guys. (Khan)

I want to see exploration – Brave new worlds. After seeing Avatar, I would only hope that the Enterprise can explore and find even more awesome worlds.

214. patrick - January 18, 2010

i’ve always thought that Shatner should appear as the EVIL-Captain Kirk from the mirror-universe.

who, like the Spock from his universe, would have a “sensible” side. and would be inspired to do something heroic and redemptive.

of course, the movie would also have to contain a broader plot than simply fitting Shatner into the plot.

215. Harry Ballz - January 18, 2010

Good luck fitting Shatner into ANYTHING these days!

“pass the fried chicken…..urp!”

216. doug_skywalker - January 18, 2010

@89: boborci – thanks for answering, btw. i meant more like we submit our questions a week in advance, you pick the top 20 or so, and answer them in whatever fashion you choose. this way it can be more in-depth.

for example, my question would be (and i’m sure everyone’s sick of this one from me by now): What is George Kirk’s official rank? i ask merely because he clearly wears Lt. Cmdr stripes.

217. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - January 18, 2010

#169 I agree

Boborci. Have you and JJ or even Paramount talked about doing a made for tv movie with DS9. I would not want to take away the momentum of your new movies, But I think a made for tv movie would be hugely successful. What are your thoughts?

218. Randy Johnson - January 18, 2010

Just a thought , but what about Colonel Green who killed millions in WWIII , Story could be he escaped to a planet where he now wants to devise a weapon to wipe out the klingons and save humanity – he is misguided of course , in the meantime the klingons take out a space station which has Kirk’s brother Sam on board , Kirk now hates the Klingons but struggles with stoppingGreen and let the klingons die!!!!!

219. dmc - January 18, 2010

Well that’s old news… the interview in that Wizard issue came out in October!

220. Chris Fawkes - January 18, 2010

218. I would like to see Kirk given a reason to really hate the klingons and his having to save them in the process of losing a loved one could really add some depth to that.

221. That guy... - January 18, 2010

What about utilizing the concept cut from the first film with a recording device given to the younger Spock by the older Spock containing messages from the Shatner Kirk except instead of it simply being one important message in one scene, it’s a series of messages in a subplot involving Spock coming to terms with who he is and with his relationship with Kirk in his universe. The messages could be an integral & essential part of the character’s growth in the second film and could give Bill Shatner some significant, meaningful dialog.

By the way, Bob and Alex, if you’re reading this you’re free to use this concept without fear of me coming back and screaming to the press or anything else that it was my idea. It’s yours. My reward would be sitting in the theater watching a great film and secretly knowing I kinda helped out a bit.

222. Jackson Roykirk - January 19, 2010

#20: “But Avatar has raised the bar big time. It shows that story is secondary to what the viewer sees.”

I disagree. Yes, it was spectacular. But it’s the situations and characters of the story that keep selling those tickets. Cameron is a master of creating those characters and situations (but sometimes not so hot at writing actual dialog.)

Avatar has a love story at the core, an initiation into manhood, an epic ascent to Messianic power, an ecological disaster, and tons of tragedy, pathos, the all-important “heart”, and ultimately hope. All wrapped up in a sci-fi war scenario with, yes, fantastic 3D visual effects.

Something for everybody, with enough depth and emotion to keep people going back for more. It’s hard to make all those elements work together so well. Really hard.

So maybe the 3D VFX hype is what brings people in for their first viewing. But to bring people back in again requires a deeper level of satisfaction than just really great eye candy. And repeat viewing is how you make the really big box office numbers.

223. Hugh Hoyland - January 19, 2010

Maybe I should have put that a different way. We have all read or watched those stories you mention before in one form or another. What I mean to say is that in the context of Science Fiction or Fantasy movie senario, the visuals are far important than they would be if you had a movie based only on a love story, or tragedy story ect. The great Sci-fi motion pictures have almost always had advanced visual effect, 2001 ASO, POTA, Star Wars, Close Encounters on up the line (even District 9). In the Star Trek motion pictures unfortunatly these stunning visuals have for the most part been missing, until Star Trek 2009.

224. 1701 over Gotham City - January 19, 2010

Cameos:
I vote if one should occur, then it should be open to TOS only… mayyyybeee Picard. The rest of the shows just don’t carry the same impact to make the cameo anything more than “oh, it’s that guy.”

Time Travel:
No reason to rule out any element that lends to the development of a good solid story. The writers are intelligent enough not to use it as a crutch.
And again… no Khan. Gary Mitchell, Harry Mudd, Kang, Kor… sure. just no Khan. Trek needs to move on and stop trying to relive the same film

225. Ranger Rick - January 19, 2010

Way to go on that pic of the Guardian at the top of this article. I just hope Harlan is on his meds or we’re in for another year of grandstanding accusations and threats of litigation.

226. Chris - January 19, 2010

The quicker Orci and Kurtzman move on to another project the better. I can’t understand how these two writers, and I use the term lightly, became so successful. They are hacks who are no better than fan writers in my opinion.

The new Star Trek succeeded despite their terrible writing. This is a testament to the cast (almost perfect in my opinion) and JJ (not the greatest director but did a great job nonetheless).

227. Maggie - January 20, 2010

I want to see Species 8472 remodelled etc in JJ’s universe – their storyline is far from developed and they could be a fantastic new enemy to replace the Borg. Of course, Janeway would need to be there to act as an advisor……slightly more than a cameo role but that’s fine by me. Kate Mulgrew rocks!

228. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - January 20, 2010

227 that would be awsome

229. The0ne - January 21, 2010

My nephews loved the movie and are beginning to come around. This is was of the funniest things to ever see happen in my life. They even ask and google for more info. How awesome is that hahaha.

Good work JJ

230. Amanda - February 4, 2010

#160 I agree (and not just with the Pon Farr LOL). I first started watching Trek as a little girl, sitting with my dad. As much as I enjoyed the action, the show has always been about the characters to me. Everything else is secondary. I would love to see more interaction and less explosions/phaser fights, etc. But an action film’s an action film, so I know I’m probably not going to get what I want. I just hope they truly take the time to explore the Kirk-Spock friendship to its fullest.

231. Phat Tribble - March 1, 2010

Shatner in a new ST movie? No, it would be hard to come up with a viable and justifiable storyline for him to fit in(no pun intended) at this point. UNLESS, he’s on a vid-screen in the background talk-singing “O Canada”!. (Sorry, just had to put that in there. But it WOULD be funny!)

Though I loved the new ST movie – including the new/alternate timeline – I hope the future movies rely on the characters, action, etc than on time travel.
BYW, what ever DID happen to Archer’s Beagle? They should at least have the dog in a future story. Enterprise’s new mascot, perhaps?
Chris Pine and the rest of the new cast did a great job. Looking forward to seeing them in more ST movies.

232. Jamie S. - March 10, 2010

With this new alternate time line, something I thought would be cool is if it turns out to be like the mirror universe. Perhaps the loss of Kirk and Spock’s parents have traumatized them enough to head down a darker path.

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