Roberto Orci: Star Trek Sequel Script Draft Done By Christmas + Talks ‘Darker’ vs ‘Fun’ Theme | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Roberto Orci: Star Trek Sequel Script Draft Done By Christmas + Talks ‘Darker’ vs ‘Fun’ Theme June 14, 2010

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Roberto Orci, who is writing the Star Trek sequel with Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof, gave an update on the project in a new interview. The script should be done at the end of the year. Orci also talks about fan feedback, Abrams directing decision, and the possible darker theme. Details below.  

 

Bob Orci’s Star Trek update

Bob Orci talked to IGN at the CBS upfronts in May where he was promoting Hawaii Five-O. IGN got him to talk about his other projects, Cowboys and Aliens and Star Trek. Here are some quick highlights on the Star Trek sequel:

But the most interesting bit of the article was the question about the theme:

IGN: Second movies, including Wrath of Khan, are often the dark chapter. Things often get pretty intense. Are you going to go in that direction?
Orci: Well, it’s weird. We got kind of a mixed review in terms of the darkness or not in the first one. There was genocide of an entire planet, Spock’s freaking mother died, Kirk’s dad died… But it’s like, "Well, it wasn’t very dark!"
So I think maybe thematically, because we don’t have the burden of an origin story, we can play a little bit more with the theme and it can be a little bit more complicated. But I still think we like fun. Star Trek has always been funny. Even Wrath of Khan has got some great great, great fun in it. I think it will be equally confusing for some, but I do think we get to jump right into it now. 

For more from Bob on Star Trek and Cowboys & Aliens, read the full interview at ign.com.

 

POLL: Should Trek get Dark?

What say you? Like the mix of dark vs. fun in Star Trek 2009, or should it go in a different direction in the sequel?

[poll=593]

 

Comments

1. DJ Neelix - June 14, 2010

Looking forward!

2. DJ Neelix - June 14, 2010

*to it

3. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

Sweet, I can’t wait.

Tell us your ideas and storyline, we will tell you if it is good enough to be the sequal and make 500mil :)

4. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

*sequel

5. Phil - June 14, 2010

@3…as I recall, when ST09 details began to emerge, those who voiced some level of support were browbeaten into submission by the cannonistas, who insisted it was garbage, and fled to the fan flicks in droves. My trust in these boards to determine if the sequel is worthy is iffy, at best…

6. JulienBashir - June 14, 2010

Does the fan who made one of the “cool suggestions” get a share of the movie’s box office?

7. Gary Neumann - June 14, 2010

The thing is FUN or Funny, I’m all in for FUN FUN

8. James - June 14, 2010

As long as it’s not too dark, i’m good

9. MvRojo - June 14, 2010

Haha…so if Abrams decides not to direct, would that mean he’s not excited about the script. I’m kidding, but that’s not the best choice of words by Mr. Orci.

10. Rach - June 14, 2010

Here goes a fan suggestion. Listen if you wish:
I think that the sequel should be a little bit darker. Just a touch though, because Star Trek should always have that underlying sense of hope and pride, you know what I mean? But since the first movie was basically everyone proving themselves as captain, science officer etc, I think the second movie should start to test them. Also, the second movie needs to lead into the third. Since you went back and changed Trek history, you can do basically anything. I’d make the hugest threat the federation has ever come across come into play. Of course throw the main characters into danger, but still make it a fun adventure movie. :)
Hope it helps?
xo

11. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

#5

Oh sorry to hear, that must have been before my time posting here :)

Send to me boborci and team, I will review and give feedback. I love movies and sci fi and love to theorize on the universe/mankind .

You guys are so lucky, how fricken cool is it to write a movie for star trek let alone the reboot and now the sequel!

12. allmybestbill - June 14, 2010

William Shatner in this one?

13. GarySeven - June 14, 2010

Mr. Orci is right- genocide/destruction of Vulcan is pretty dark…I think there are few parallels in the series that were that dark. Planets were destroyed, but not Spock’s homeworld. How about something serious but not quite as sad? Also, I am most concerned about the decrease in Roddenberry’s humanistic message in the movie. It seemed to prioritize action over any type of message. Star Trek’s contribution was not that it was mostly action. …all movies have that now. Star Trek is ABOUT something. I hope to see that in the next movie.

14. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

Doesn’t matter on a tone as long as the story makes more sense this time and defintely no redos of Khan.

Also Orci no more destruction of the iconic pnaets in the Trek universe. Vulcan being destroyed in the last movie was a painful part of the movie.

At least this film is out of canon from the rest of Trek so it doesn’t matter as Vulcan is still in the prime universe.

You did a great movie with Star Trek XI but to me it still had a few problems and I hope you lose these problems with the next script.

Star Trek XI was great for moments but I felt the script was a mess, a more focused script would be ideal for next time and please no Khan.

15. Ran - June 14, 2010

Less nonsense action scenes. Please.

16. Polly - June 14, 2010

FINALLY!!! Yay! Progress! News! Joy to the world!

As far as darkness goes, I think if they really want to go darker then let them, but if they turn it into some kind of horror movie then I will ditch this new series. Not all of Star Trek (oh lordie I could never) but these new movies, yes. Btw, anyone notice that there’s no name for them yet?

I mean, the destruction of Vulcan was pretty dark, I think that people thought it wasn’t just because you didn’t see all of the Vulcans dying off one by one in horrible deaths. Plus that one scene where you see that girl (on the Kelvin) flying in the air, hanging onto the side of the ship and screaming for help and then being hurled into space. Dunno where your morality is but that was pretty dark.

17. fred - June 14, 2010

just let the guys write it and see which way the story takes them, i personal would perfer the same type of tone as 2009 but that might be to light for the type of story they are telling,the one thing i do want is the charactor to maintaine a sence of wonder,fun and the team spirit even if the rest of the story is dark like ds9 where they had there dark moments it was still at it heart a star trek programe. i do agree with 9* comment he real should choice his words more carefully

18. Cogitator X - June 14, 2010

Absolutely not. Flavor of the moment “dark” is being WAAAAY overdone in SF. Not to mention, ST is about hope and a bright future. If you need “dark” watch every freaking thing our right now.

Personally, I want to see if Abrams, Orci & Co. are capable of making a good original movie. I really enjoyed ST 11 but let’s be real it was a compilation of all the ST movies that went before with very little original material. Hopefully, they’ll also keep some of Abrams sillier ideas like the metaphysics & sideways universes far away from Trek

19. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

#16

A sci fi pitch fork into the head/skull is pretty dark also imo :)

Just give us your version of the Klingons and 2 races fighting over sci fi resources and tie in allegory, insert some sexy scenes, pivotal suspense crying/sad scenes, gut wrenching omg did you see that owns scene and roflao that scene was so funny oh and some epic special effects that made part 1 dusty.

Michael G back as music guy and more epic Star Trek titles.

20. ety3 - June 14, 2010

I know these guys can do quality stuff with the right people, and they’re with the right people.

I’m still hoping for some good Prime Directive and Klingon drama (a la “Errand of Mercy” and “A Private Little War”).

21. Peter F - June 14, 2010

I’d like to see a Trek movie actually deal with exploration, and finding new worlds for once, though if they wanted to fold in homages to original Trek, my favorite classic episodes had derelict ships or colonies and a spooky alien mystery at their heart…

22. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

Star Trek XI is a good movie but I treat it as a separate entity from the rest of Trek.

I felt the new movie forget the chain of command when it came to promotions.

23. OneBuckFilms - June 14, 2010

I think, in terms of tone, a little darker, a little more serious, but with the same general sense of fun.

How I’d go:

- Something being discovered, more of an exploration theme than a typical bad guy.
- Having this unknown be a tangible threat, with an air of mystery: What IS this thing that threatens to kill us?
- Have this story test the characters friendships, and allow the friendship between Kirk, Spock and McCoy to be deepened and explored.

It should live up to going boldly where no man has gone before.

24. gracliper - June 14, 2010

Yes, there were a lot of deaths on STXI, a whole planet, and the reason is a vengeance of someone who had lost an entire planet too. I don’t think that deaths are what makes a thing darker, I think it’s the complexity of things. Like evil, pure evil, not justified evil. But often when we have a villain with no reason the story gets lame. Most of the time but not always.
That’s the appeal of The Joker and even, remembering Quinto, his Sylar. They are evil and smart, not the kind of cheap evil. Sometimes our dark side even love them. And even when we have no villains, we can have a dark situation, like torture and terrorism. But is it what the producers are thinking for the franchise? I don’t think so.

So, I don’t vote for “dark”, I vote for “smart”. A darker ambient in a lame story don’t make it better.

25. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

#22

Times of crisis/battle and losses, you promote who you can, sides they only had 2hrs to show us how they got there. We didn’t need to see a long winded application to become x officer y commander z captain.

26. fred - June 14, 2010

22″ i read somewhere that one of the reason for his promotions to captain well overnight was the prime spock and thats he reaso he was on earth if that had been the case still not realy buying but would have been nice if it was in the script

27. somethoughts - June 14, 2010

#24

I would love to see Quinto with a goatee. If Nemesis and the last Star Trek wasn’t done and all those episodes that dealth with the mirror mirror universe a mirror mirror movie may have worked.

How fricken cool would it have been to see a sneak peak picture of Quinto sporting a goatee for evil mirror mirror Spock?

I am hoping they do the Klingons/Khan and or origins of life story.

28. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

rising through the ranks as they did in the new movie havd me yelling WTF? a few times. Well into myself.

29. Trekman - June 14, 2010

Here’s my suggestions:

-More Spock/Uhura (just two words: Pon Farr)
-Bring back Gaila!
-Introduce M’Ress or Arex
-No 3-D (I know the studio will pressure you, but don’t give in!)
-More Bones

30. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

20
Add a stronger plot to the mix.

Less Spock/Uhura
No 3D

31. Holo J - June 14, 2010

Why is it movie have to be so “Dark” these days. I mean the real worlds dark enough. Why not have an adventure more in the spirit of Star Trek. A movie that is intelligent, interesting and fun? Every movie that comes out at the moment is always billed as “Darker” than before. I hope this time we get a story with more exploration incorporated in the plot

32. Robman007 - June 14, 2010

The rank issue was not an issue. They just saved us having to sit thru a trilogy of movies to get to the expected end, like another trilogy of movies that blew so bad.

I’m excited about the possibilities of new adventures without the cannon baggage. Bring on the new voyages of THE starship Enterprise!

33. James - June 14, 2010

My suggestions:

-absolutely no Spock+Uhura.
-more Diora Baird and Gaila.
-more ship classes

34. allister gourlay - June 14, 2010

FUN, DISASTER, FUN…. AWSOME REVELATION…. then film number 3!

35. Jeyl - June 14, 2010

Here are my pointers.

- I’d rather have a more serious film than a darker film. And since nothing about the story to Trek09 was ever taken seriously, I can’t see it being that much of a problem.

- No more labeling or treating characters as comic relief. Scotty shouldn’t be making funny comments or being the butt end of every joke every time he shows up on screen.

- Uhura must do better. She was bad in this movie. Vulcan is collapsing, it has minutes before it’s destroyed, and when given an assignment to alert Vulcan to evacuate where every second matters, she leaves her post. Let me reiterate. Vulcan has *minutes* left. I think if Uhura cared about the lives of all the innocent men, women and children on Vulcan, she wouldn’t just leave her station and question Spock on something he most likely has all figured out, being a Vulcan and all. This is a good example of exposition that actually hurts the film, because Uhura was portrayed to be this very serious character that took her work very seriously. It only got worse when she leaves her station not once, but TWICE in a critical situation just to see Spock off before he beams to the Narada, and again when he beams back. This is so bad, Chekov actually does Uhura’s communications work when he is the one who hails the Narada while Uhura is seen running in the background back to her station.

- No more pointless skills. Just because you have characters say they are awesome at something but it ends up never paying off is time not well spent.

- There is more to romance than just having it happen out of the blue. What is it about these two that they find themselves attracted to one another? How did they first meet? Did they go on a date? Who confessed their attraction first? What did their friends, family think of their relationship? I’m not opposed to a Spock/Uhura romance, it just needs substance.

- NuKirk is an a**hole who I have no respect or appreciation for. If you’re going to have him be the center of attention, I would at least like to ‘care’ about him rather than wish him the worst possible fate ever to be bestowed upon a Star Trek character.

and finally

- Star Trek needs more women that can hold their own, and not be limited to Short Skirts and stripping scenes.

36. Sunfell - June 14, 2010

Two words: Vulcan Yoga. No pon farr- we’ve seen that.

I want something good to look forward to. Something new, interesting, and butt-kicking.

I know you guys can do it, Bob.

37. allister gourlay - June 14, 2010

Just dont forget the new audience you have captured guys im sure you wont…as for Shatner…. dont bother… let it become its own thing… not your fathers Star Trek!

38. allister gourlay - June 14, 2010

oh and new engineering set please!!!!!!!!!

39. Darryl - June 14, 2010

There should be an option in that poll for “let the writers create what they feel is right. I trust them, Trek is in great hands”.

40. Hugh Hoyland - June 14, 2010

Well if JJ doesnt want to direct the movie, and Shatner cant be fit into the story, maybe they can have Shatner direct it. :]

41. Thomas - June 14, 2010

I just want the movie to be good. They need to take everything that was successful for the last movie and expand upon it. This team now has learned what works and what doesn’t. With the pieces all in place, they just need to figure what’s the best story they can tell.

42. Thorny - June 14, 2010

Star Trek 2009 was dark, but the action kinda disguised it. I don’t mind if the next movie is in the same style, but please don’t destroy another important world, and you’ve made your point, so no more killing off major characters.

Some fans complained about the action and “sex” in Star Trek 2009, but it seems to me TOS had more than its share of gratuitous fistfights (usually with the world’s worst stuntmen stand-ins) and Kirk getting the girl-of-the-week. Even Spock, McCoy, Scotty, and Chekov got the girl once in a while! (Kirk must have been having a bad week.) So, basically, I have no problem with action and mild sex in Star Trek 2012.

I’d like to see a contemporary issue addressed in 23rd Century analogies, as TOS often did. The energy crisis would seem to be a good potential subject. So would an environmental disaster a’la BP in the Gulf (although two years from now, our short-attention-span society will have forgotten about that.) Perhaps both: a new, highly efficient system to create/harvest antimatter goes horribly wrong, and Kirk & Co. have to save the day. Throw in Klingons, who are skulking around trying to steal the secret system and we have opportunities for fistfights and ship-to-ship combat. Bring in Carol Marcus as the antimatter/protomatter expert assigned to the Enterprise to help in the crisis, and she and Kirk hit it off. The movie can end with Carol back home discovering she’s pregnant. Then, as others have suggested, the final scene of the movie can be Spock detecting a derelict ship on sensors, and the audience sees that the ship is the S.S. Botany Bay.

43. A Kirk for the rest of us - June 14, 2010

Script idea:
Evil Intergalactic Corporation through criminal neglect causes damage to the very fabric of time and space. Despite repeated attempts to fix the problem, the Corporation cannot contain the ever increasing damage as reality itself threatens to unravel. Finally, after months of standing idly by the President of the Federation sends Kirk and Crew to fix the problem.

This of course bares no resemblance to any current events in our time.

44. A Kirk for the rest of us - June 14, 2010

@borci – feel free to use this idea…

45. Julian - June 14, 2010

My ideas:

- the Klingon sisters, a big Klingon Supremacy
- Bones and Spock watching Jim driving as partitian in a futuristic Stock Car Racing, watching him with googles, discussing his nervwrecking crazyness!! Many holographic lights, loops, maybe a station in space. Many flares, I bet JJ would make such a thing wonderfull!
- funny moments: 3D chess, allergy reactions, ponfarr, Bones and Uhura, more Gaila and Cupcake, more Spock&Bones, more Kirk/Bones/Spock

46. stealing the enterprise - June 14, 2010

i am very excited to hear the script will be done this year. i think bob has great handle on what makes good star trek. i love everything about the movie especially the choice in kirk. i had never heard of or seen chris pine before so it was easy to accept him as the new capt. and he did a great job of capturing the essence of kirk. when i heard quinto was spock i stopped watching heroes just so quinto would be spock and no one else. im glad star trek is back and im so happy that they finally got it right.

47. Trekman - June 14, 2010

Oh yeah, and maybe we could see more of how being the captain puts a burden on Jim, you know…the loneliness of command, being isolated from the crew. He used to be the life of the party, the lady’s man, but not anymore. And maybe after years of fooling around with women, he finally falls for ONE woman…but realizes that now that he’s the captain, he can’t have her. That’d be more like good ol’ TOS Kirk. You know…Captain Angst.

48. Hugh Hoyland - June 14, 2010

My thinking is that a story that is very “dark” can also have plenty of humor/fun in it as well. Yeah there was some tragic moments in the film like the Kelvin and Vulcan being destroyed, but honestly we didnt actually see a lot of people die horribly right in front of our eyes (like millions of Vulcans being swallowed up by the ground for example), so by and large I think the movie was mostly fun while dealing with some serious issues at the same time. The most tragic scene IMO was with George Kirk and his wife, which we did see and hear in detail, so that hit home to me.

49. Thomas - June 14, 2010

46. Trekman

Your idea of Kirk falling in love with someone he can’t have is easily the best idea I’ve read so far. It can add an extra dimension to NuKirk; the idea of starship captain as someone whose devotion to duty engenders a great deal of personal sacrifice.

50. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

37

Thing is I prefer my father’s Star Trek but this is still a good movie

51. virgin vulcan basement nerd - June 14, 2010

Tholians are interesting. Orions are cool too and there wasn’t an explanation as to why at least a couple Orion women were in Starfleet. Might be neat.

I’m thinking non-humanoid aliens would be cool though just because of the possibilities with computers these days. A planet more trippy than Avatar and Alice in Wonderland would be sick.

52. Quarksbartender - June 14, 2010

Carol Marcus?

53. Tarrax - June 14, 2010

@42 (good number BTW)

Hmm, and how about the corporation having signed a deal with the Federation limiting their responsibility should any sort of disaster happen.

Seriously, if Bob & Co just use new material, and don’t rehash something from a previous ST movie, I will be a happy fan. ;)

54. KingDaniel - June 14, 2010

A dark, miserable Star Trek film?

No thank you. Please don’t let BSG ruin Star Trek the way it did Stargate.

I’d much rather a fun film with a sense of adventure.

55. Schultz - June 14, 2010

I think Orci is wrong in saying that ST09 was dark in terms of the destruction of Vulcan, parents dying etc. It’s the way it’s portrayed on screen and embedded in the story, and that was *really* light.

Both deaths were quick, sudden, while the death of Spock’s mother was even almost a “shit happens” moment, rather unemotional, while Kirk Sr.’s death was bathed in heroism, but not in tragedy. If these incidents had any psychological (negative) impact on the characters, it wasn’t dramatized and didn’t surface, except in some universal themes (Oedipus thing w/ Uhura, Kirk’s lost youth etc.)—i.e. kitchen psychology and a psychosocial butterfly effect across years. Not really the stuff for good drama.

The destruction of Vulcan was done in an almost cold voyeuristic approach, with the audience being completely reduced to passive recipients, mirrored by Spock witnessing it from afar. In comparison, the destruction of Alderaan with Kenobi’s reaction in the Falcon was a deep, mystical moment. Nothing of the like in ST09.

56. Steve - June 14, 2010

I’d be surprised if the sequel isn’t appreciably darker. I mean, it almost has to be. You’ve got a young crew venturing out into the cosmos…. the odds that they’ll run into some bad situations is pretty high, if you ask me.

The Abramsverse Klingons seem legitimately scary and could be lurking anywhere.

57. philpot - June 14, 2010

enough on the Trek sequel – im looking foward to Cowboys and Aliens more!

this is the first Sci fi western right? i dont think anyone would ever count Wild Wild West

after that and Trek 2 we need bob to write Indy 5

58. Trekman - June 14, 2010

#54 – Although I’ll agree with you that Obi-Wan’s death may have had a lot of resonance, I’ll disagree with you on Alderaan. At least we knew Vulcan from a host of previous episodes and movies. Compared to that, the destruction of Alderaan was a quick blip on the emotional radar screen.

59. CmdrR - June 14, 2010

Darker? Does that mean killing off characters?

“ST2012: Spock Must Die, Kirk Must Die, & Uhura Must Eat”

I’m sure they can fix the title between Christmas and the premiere.

60. jas_montreal - June 14, 2010

I’m sorta relieved a bit, by orci’s interview. I do like the fact that he acknowledges fan reaction towards the themes.

Regarding Vulcan being destroyed….. I think the reaction to 6 billion ppl being killed in a movie is hard to create.

61. Jim Nightshade - June 14, 2010

Hmmm I hope Mr Bob O does not confuse the difference between FUN and FUNNY-they are not the same thing—and they mean different things to different people–10 min enterprise fly over for fans fun….general public not so much, although a minute or three would be ok….That kinda moderation should be applied to the whole movie so it will be accessible to fans and new fans n general public….now funny can be funny to all audiences at the same time….no smart talking ethnic robots please..not funny hehehe….oh yeh wrong movie franchise…uhmmmm…..A lotta people in this article have great ideas…I also trust bob n alex to do trek right….we fans want more of the same plus some fun and some funny too…I also agree that going too dark would ruin trek that is not what trek is, but I think the trek writers know this already…..we wont see a ron mooreish bsg style look and story I am sure….Carry on Mr. Orci and crew and give us some hints what the story is about sooner or later will ya? THANK YOU SIRS

62. Oh no, Odo - June 14, 2010

Just make the phasers shoot beams instead of electric bullets please, that’s all I ask.

Phaser = phased LASER

Phaser in Star Trek 2009 = glow bullets

63. I'm Dead Jim - June 14, 2010

Yes, there were some very dark themes and I’m not entirely sure why it didn’t have a dark feel in spite of that. Maybe it was the intensely bright bridge that spoiled the darkness? As much as I loved the movie, I’d love to see the Big E bridge have a dimmer switch installed for mood lighting.

64. I, Mugsy - June 14, 2010

Dear Mr Orci – if you’re reading…

Star Trek was MEANT to offer an optimistic view of our future. The films kind if buggered things up because, as there was only one film produced every 3/4 years, there HAD to be spectacle, and they HAD to attract not only the hardcore Trek fans but the general public too. They were also unfortunately trying to compete with Star Wars in the earlier days too. The films – with the exception of The Motion Picture, and Voyage Home, had more in common with war/revenge movies than the science fiction of Star Trek at its best, in the 60s.

Is it not possible to have a film without some badguy(s) of the week, and go back to what Star Trek was MEANT to be about??!? EXPLORATION!!!

I am bored to tears of Klingons, Romulans, talk of Khan returning etc etc etc. The new crew are in place now, ready for their 5 year mission. It would be cool to go in a NEW direction rather than take the easy route out by churning out something that’s been done before, or that the general public expect. Star Trek should be about raising the bar of storytelling, rather than a bit of popcorn entertainment…

Lets have this new crew EXPLORE STRANGE NEW WORLDS and NEW Civilisations eh? There’s so many AMAZING potential alien vistas which are now possible with CGI complimenting today’s model makers, it would be such a shame to have yet another space based drama. Imagine some of the awsome sci-fi book covers of the 60s/70s bought to life on the big screen – THAT level of imagination would be great to see again. Trek isn’t The Dark Knight, and never should be. In my opinion Khan was a wrong step forward for Trek in terms of tone, though I admit I am probably in the minority on that one. Yes there needs to be drama, but I believe Trek needs to be steered back to the tenants of its original opening monologue…

Lastly, please don’t leave the whole destruction of Vulcan thing either – something as huge as that NEEDS to be addressed sensitively. As does what happend to Spock Prime, and his role in perhaps locating a ‘New Vulcan’? Perhaps feature that as the subplot?

Please buck the trend for another hero/villain tale of revenge, and go back to some good old fashioned morality tales for today’s audiences, something that makes them THINK once they’ve left the theatre. Trek at its best always did that.

Here’s hoping for some truly awsome exploration of some strange and new alien worlds, mixed with drama, humour and great character moments, as only Trek at its best can.

Thanks,

I, M

65. The First Son of Krypton - June 14, 2010

I’m going to be vapourized Im sure of it… but please, for all that is good and great in the world. Give us KHAN!

To all the cannonistas and naysayers…. ‘Let them eat static’

66. I, Mugsy - June 14, 2010

P.S. one of the few things which REALLY bugged me in your otherwise superb movie was the fist fight in the bar at the beginning of the film. We’re led to believe that Starfleet officers are a bunch of thugs in uniform spoiling for fights in bars at the slightest provocation?! I’m sure meat heads such as that would never have made the service in the first place. I’m sure that wouldn’t have sat well with Mr Roddenberry. Yeah it’s a nit pick, but it does sort of take me out of the Trek Universe everytime I see it.

67. I, Mugsy - June 14, 2010

No.65 – Yawn! You want Khan watch The Wrath of Khan, or Space Seed. Its been done before man!

68. Yammer - June 14, 2010

I want it to be exactly like TOS. I insist on all the original cast members being returned, in their original appearance. I insist on cardboard-grey sets, spinny nacelles, thick blue eye makeup on Spock, and many closeups of Kirk (who should be fat). The monsters should not exceed the realism standards defined by The Gorn and The Horta.

69. The First Son of Krypton - June 14, 2010

Lets face it… if we are all REALLY honest – Space Seed kinda sucked.

TWOK only worked as a film as, much like TUC, its much darker and a whole different film compared to the other Treks.

Batman has had numerous Jokers over the years and boy dont get me started on the amount of Lex Luthors recentlly… we want Trek to stay mainstream then we need to use the iconic villains.

Admit it, Khan fits that bill

70. Bill Peters - June 14, 2010

Would Like Klingons and Gorn in the next film, Bob Please also introduce on screen as a character Nurse Chapel, Also a bit dark but not too much so keep the mix you had in the last film dark, with light moments and that feeling of hope at the end. Also try to give Scotty to do more Engering stuff and please don’t kill off Kirk or Spock or MaCcoy. Also please try to give us good Character Moments!

71. et - June 14, 2010

You know, I wouldn’t have called TWOK “dark.” Sure, it’s about death, but it’s about facing death. There’s something quite redemptive about the theme of it: “The needs of the many out-weigh the needs of the few.”

Kirk has never faced death, and Spock shows him how by giving himself up for a greater good. I’d call that more mature than dark.

I’d really like to see an ST09 sequel that shows us how Kirk goes from a space cowboy to the man we see in TOS who stands up and says, “I am responsible for the lives of 300 crewmen.” …or at least take a couple of steps in that direction.

Oh yeah, and Klingons. Let’s roll out the Klingons, peoples!

72. Pro-Khan-Sel - June 14, 2010

Well, Darker? =KHAN.

Trek unverse dosen’t need Nimoy right now, He (Spock Prime) got what he wanted, to wish young spock well. The last thing spock prime needs to do is hang around, warning of the possible future. I doubt Nimoy would want a role like that.

There probably will be a major Klingon battle at the start of the movie. Then Khan, And then at the end, Carol marcus. (who won’t be featured again until”Wrath of Khan (1982) Which will be years away.

I understand the comments about exploring other ideas, I.E Spock prime, kirk Prime, Pon Farr, Tholians Etc. To me, most of those ideas could and have been told in other media, Boks comics, games Etc. (for fans who MUST have them). It seems to me that alot of tie-in stories are featured in novels and comic books, that frankly don’t sell as well as movie tickets. Im going with the “Big Money”. in other words. KHAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

73. Hugh Hoyland - June 14, 2010

Ok they visit a Strange New World, then what? Whats the dramatic arc after that? Im not knocking the idea, Im just interested in what could be the conflict that would arise from this. And also what exactly does “Dark” mean anyway as far as a movie goes. I suspect so many fans have so many different ideas as to what “dark” means in the first place. Some may think a lot of gore is dark, or that all the characters are sad/mad or something of the sort and that makes it “dark”.

I actually think that Ridley Scot (who many claim makes mostly dark movies) explained it best.He wants his movies to be “Raw and Real”.

74. Selor Kiith - June 14, 2010

To all those “Hey lets explore!”…

really?

2 hours of just mapping an unknown planet or nebula with some weird “scientific mystery”?

I mean… really?

Exploration of some sort is good for a 40mins Episode but not for a 2 hour feature movie…

Maybe some Trek, mixed with good ol’ Sherlock Holmes and Tholians as the Enemies, invading the Federation or whatever…

75. rtrj - June 14, 2010

I agree with # 21 & 23: exploration, alien mysteries, NO Khan please!
..to explore strange new worlds…

76. Trek Lady - June 14, 2010

Oh dear…the whole, “Let’s make it DARK” thing which is becoming so predictable in Sci-fi. Quick, we don’t want our fans to become complacent – we want to SHOCK them and ROCK THE BOAT so let’s do something cutting edge – which ironically is no longer cutting edge because everyone else seems to be doing it too – and kill someone off or make all our characters unlikable or so screwed up they can hardly function! How original!

(This is not necessarily aimed at Trek, but at much of what else is out there these days.)

Now having gotten THAT off my chest, I don’t mind a taste of darkness as long as the underlying OPTIMISM that makes Trek unique among sci-fi franchises is STILL respected and highlighted. Maybe if the “darkness” is shown as more of a struggle between the best and worst of our natures, with the best winning out…

Because I WANT to like these characters, dammit! I want to respect them! I want to admire and look up to them! They can have flaws, but they should be trying to rise above their weaknesses.

*For example -blowing Nero to bits when the blackhole would have finished off the Narada still bothers me a lot. It was gratuitous and unnecessary and was a case of stooping to Nero’s level. It took a bit of shine off this new Kirk and Co. I’ve had to fanwank it by saying, “Well maybe they were afraid his ship would re-emerge somewhere else intact if they didn’t destroy it.” – but I would have felt better if that had been freely stated.*

Granted, no one is perfect, but I prefer my heroes at least try to achieve greatness and not settle for portraying the worst in humanity. And yes, I do think of the characters in Trek as heroic. We have enough examples of the mundane failures of humanity in our faces everyday. People would benefit from someone to look up to, even if they are only fictional characters. Some of us really DO try to be better people every day. I want to see that as shown to be something worth working towards.

77. No Khan - June 14, 2010

Lets see something New!

78. What is it with you? - June 14, 2010

Hey, if BobOrci is reading this, then Bob, you must try to put in your missing Shatner scene from the first movie. It so perfectly summed up WHY these people do what they do, and evoked that explorative spirit that is so critical to Trek.

It also provides a reason to explore the building frienship between Kirk and Spock. I’m sure they don’t fully trust each other yet, and this provides a perfect means to shake them Both out of that at a crucial moment.

The only issue I see is Nimoy… If he provides the message from Kirk Prime, then he might have to be given another cameo..

And you know what? That’s just fine with me!!!

79. Damian - June 14, 2010

I think you could do an exploration story with some sort of jeapordy involved. You can combine elements of a dark film with elements of optimism and seeking out new life at the same time.

I think suggestions about the basic plot are now too late. I think Orci and Lindelof have the basic plot outline in place already. There is still plenty of time to the movie, however, so I imagine some good suggestions can still be incorporated.

A few thoughts of my own:
No Khan (Ricardo Montalbon played the part perfectly).

No Shatner (the new actors deserve the chance to grow, Shatner whether intentionally or not, being who he is, will steal the show. He is a much different type of actor than Nimoy)

I would like a Scott Bakula cameo as Archer, however (he loved the new movie, and was thrilled to learn his character is still alive. He said he is willing to do a cameo if asked and his appearance would not interfere with the story.) I liked Bakula in Enterprise and anyone that has worked with him has always had nothing but good things to say about him. It would be a nice nod to the hardcore fans like myself.

A more serious Scotty (I have belabored this enough in other posts, so I will not dwell in that here).

More Kirk-Spock-McCoy (Pine, Quinto and Urban did an excellent job, and this relationship should be developed further). I believe this is a friendship that should transcend the realities.

I personally do not have a major issue with Spock and Uhura as long as it does not destroy the Kirk-Spock-McCoy friendship.

80. Damian - June 14, 2010

I wanted to clarify my earlier remark. I realized that it may seem blasphemous for me to say I would like a Bakula cameo, but not an appearance by Shatner. There are two reasons for this

(1) Bakula said he is willing to do a cameo. I think it is clear that Shatner would want a significant part in the new movie.

(2) Shatner is a legend in Star Trek and his acting style is significantly different than Nimoy. Nimoy could be in a new movie without overshadowing the cast. Shatner can be over the top and I just believe, that no matter how good Pine is, Shatner would steal the show. That would not be fair to Chris Pine. Bakula would play a part that was not recast, therefore there is no danger of comparison. His style is also much different than Shatner. He would be content, I believe to play a part as simple as him touring the Enterprise (ala DeForest Kelley in Encounter at Farpoint) or giving them new orders (ala Kate Mulgrew in Nemesis). I just can’t see Shatner being willing to play a similarly insignificant part.

81. Dom - June 14, 2010

Star Trek 2 doesn’t need to be lighter or darker: it simply needs to be faithful to the feel of the original 60s TV show which was grown up enough to encompass the full spectrum of dark, light and shades of grey.

People have become used to the larger than life, almost self-parodic style of some of the characters and their real-life counterparts in later years. The original show was infinitely more subtle and cleverer than that. If Star Trek 2 can capture the tone of the first season or two, then it should be fine!

82. red dead ryan - June 14, 2010

#80

I think a Shatner cameo would work well in the sequel. But I have to agree that Shatner would probably want a fairly large role, which would overshadow and potentially minimize Chris Pine’s Kirk. Cameos can in fact be quite effective, such as DeForrest Kelley’s appearance in “Encounter At Farpoint”.

The only other cameo I’d want to see is Scott Bakula as Admiral Archer. Perhaps a scene similar to DeForrest Kelley’s in TNG. Admiral Archer and Scotty walk down an Enterprise corridor, revealing that Mr.Scott found the “prized beagle” with Archer telling Scotty of Trip Tucker’s abilities and heroics as an engineer.

83. Kelso - June 14, 2010

I don’t care what they do, so long as it is awesome.

84. Brett L. - June 14, 2010

More Bones please!

85. Desstruxion - June 14, 2010

-No Nimoy this time. No Shatner…yet.
-Some of that seeking out new worlds would be cool this time.
-Abramsverse Excelsior please!
-Promote Sulu sooner than later.
-No Khan ever.
-Archer (cameo) at official christening of Enterprise.
-Porthos returns.
-Lots and lots of new starships. Daedalus class, Valiant class, DY sleeper ships, NX class and their re-fits? etc.
-Kirk hooking up with Carol Marcus.
-This time she tells her son who his dad is.
-Meaner Klingons with new style ridges.
Just a few thoughts.

86. Tom - June 14, 2010

All sounds great with one exception. I know I should not feel this way but am extremely disappointed that Leonard Nimoy will not be asked

87. That One Guy - June 14, 2010

Didn’t they say they were going to have this done by LAST Christmas?

Then again, that was prior to the extended release date.

Carry on, good sirs! Make it good….

88. StarFuryG7 - June 14, 2010

I loved “The Dark Knight” even though I’m not a big fan of Comic Book movies, or of Batman in particular for that matter prior to that film, but that was the choice I went with in the above poll and was disappointed to see it place second presently . . .

***Yes – The Dark Knight of Star Trek (23%)***
Yes – A little darker than Star Trek 2009 (39%)
Same tone as Star Trek 2009 (31%)
No – lighter tone than Star Trek 2009 (7%)

It made for an interesting poll question though, and it’s about time that “Star Trek” has a film that’s as dark as “The Dark Knight” produced for the franchise, even though some might care to argue that ST09 was in fact that “dark” given Nero’s actions throughout the movie.

89. StarFuryG7 - June 14, 2010

By the way . . . a clarification in the sequel about it not being the prime universe sure couldn’t hurt either while you guys are at it, typing away at your keyboards.

90. captain_neill - June 14, 2010

as long as the next movie actually has a plot then it doesn’t matter if its darker or lighter. As long as it is recognisable as Star Trek.

91. Trek Lady - June 14, 2010

Just have to add this.

I have seen a couple people asking for a “hook up” with Pine and some lady friend. I personally vote no. One of the things I really disliked about TOS were the disposable, “girls of the week”. I am not interested in Kirk’s sex life. Or Spock’s or Uhura’s really. I want to see them doing the whole “exploring new worlds and new civilizations” thing. If I want to see people making out, I can just walk down frat row on a Friday night, or these days, just flip on the TV. Show me something I can’t see everyday.

92. siphunclekaiju54 - June 14, 2010

We’ve already seen Star Trek try to be dark, and what we got was Nemesis. The first movie was fun and sets up the original series timeframe, which was fun too. So I’d like to see this one be loads of fun, more like Raiders of the Lost Ark in space than The Dark Knight.

93. Dee - June 14, 2010

Just Star Trek and SOON, please!!!!

94. Schultz - June 14, 2010

#58 (Trekman): It’s not about *our* emotional involvement with Vulcan/Alderaan and their respective destructions, it’s the *films’ characters’* involvement with the planets and these events. Huge difference. ST09 doesn’t work in that respect. Star Wars does. If the characters are not involved, neither is the audience.

95. Bill T. - June 14, 2010

Just a suggestion: Harcourt Fenton Mudd.

If they go “dark” – hire Pkillip Seymore Hoffman.

If they go “fun” – hire Jack Black.

96. Jonboc - June 14, 2010

We don’t need dark brooding Star Trek. TOS was colorful, exciting, suspenseful, funny….but it was never dark and brooding. Let BSG handle that. People were applauding and smiling when they left the theater after seeing Star Trek 09. There’s nothing wrong with that. Just more of the same please…don’t overthink it.

97. craig keith - June 14, 2010

92

Trouble is Nemesis would have made a really good movie if we had a hald decent director … The script and story were really goood … i just think it was a huge mistake to put a director into the chair who kno sod all about trek ……..

off topic i know but still ……..

and btw im well up for admral Archer showing up ….. infact id prefere it on Shatner …… only beacuse with shatners kirk is in it …. they would have to invent a preety lame excuse to get him from the prime timeline and explain why he isnt dead …… wereas archer can walk right in with no explantions with it would be easy to do and better for the film …..

98. Horatio - June 14, 2010

Fan feedback in the writing process? Sounds like a marketing tool, but I guess such a “creative process” is to be expected in movies with a budget of 100 million USD or more.
I’d still prefer something original, creative, spicy and controversial over lowest-denominator pop-art.

99. brody - June 14, 2010

Wow, am I glad that most of the loopy fans posting in this thread are involved in writing the sequel…

100. Chuck Watters - June 14, 2010

It would be nice to see tubby do a cameo but I don’t think he would .

101. Paul Fitz - June 14, 2010

My thoughts. . .

Have carol Marcus, breaking Kirk’s heart.
Have some references to each other trek, like Dax, Guinan, T’pol, Number One! (all great female characters).

Make it genuinely thrilling, with a genuine threat which is seen to devestate something/somewhere on, or near earth, more starfleet ships, more alien starfleet command officers, more decompression scenes (it was really eerie!). I’d also like to see the Enterprise being trashed in some way.
MORE EXPLORATION!!!

Less – Gimmicky comedy, sexisim and Keenser!

102. JimmyMac - June 14, 2010

Roberto,

Please make the Enterprise a character in the sequel this time!

Thanks,
Jim

103. DaveK69 - June 14, 2010

Like it or not Khan is recognizable to Trek fans and the general public as a whole. No single Kilngon (of that era), no single Romulan, no other nemesis in the TOS era universe (Not Harry Mudd) gives this movie that leg up with ALL audiences.
Go ahead, any who believes that Khan is mistake, tell me if it’s done right you just simply cannot support it.
Khan is The Joker. What is needed is the right actor to pull it off and the right story to contain it within the inception of the “Space Seed” timeline. This movie doesn’t need the “Avatar” allegory or a brand new villain whom everyone will flatten like Nero who had a 45 second back story not contained in the deleted scenes or a comic book. You can do that with Khan. Let the new timeline find Khan found by someone else (doesn’t matter who) and be faced later in a battle with Kirk the Enterprise. Let the beginning build Khan’s exile from earth. Get a great star (Tom Hanks seems interested) to face Khan in the beginning who will not have the same original success Kirk had.

For the studio Khan makes it a $350 Million movie.

What sounds like a better tagline…..

“The Enterprise faces the unknown……again”?
or
“Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!!!!”?

104. Mel - June 14, 2010

Please don’t make it darker! The last time some PTB thought it was a good idea to change the tone of a franchise, the result was the HORRIBLE series Stargate Universe!

Star Trek was never dark and depressive and that shouldn’t change! It is positive about the future. It has a lot of humor and fun.

105. Oz - June 14, 2010

My two cents for the suggestion box:

-Kirk suffers through the death of someone under his command for the first time. Good opportunity for a sit down talk with Bones and the harsh realities of command.

-More Kirk/Spock/Bones together.

-Kirk and Spock playing chess.

-More Bones/Spock verbal fencing.

-Strange New Worlds

-Proper Engineering Set

-A little less of comic relief Scotty and more Engineer Scotty.

-Movie could start with the exciting reimagined climactic scene from a fan favorite TOS episode, like The Doomsday Machine as a teaser, then move into your new story.

Trek is in good hands, I know the lads can deliver another terrific movie.

106. Damian - June 14, 2010

I know I am in the minority here, but I loved Nemesis and believe some of the fault for its poor showing was when it was released. Don’t forget it was going against Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and Die Another Day, all substantial hits. Paramount should have waited a few months, it probably would have faired better.

Nemesis was not perfect, and perhaps with another director it would have been better, but I still remember thoroughly enjoying it. But I am a little biased as I love all things Star Trek. I even found things to like in Star Trek V.

107. Driver - June 14, 2010

Think “The Ten Commandments” meets “Avatar”. No, think “Casablanca” meets “2012″, No, “”The Wizard of Oz” meets “ALIENS”. No, “Rebel Without a Cause” meets “Saw”. No, uh, just write a good flick, please.

108. Bobby - June 14, 2010

Here’s another vote for exploring strange new worlds. Most of the TV show(s) were about exploration, not fighting some bad guy of the week. And often when there was a “monster” the theme was that understanding leads to peace (think, the Horta), not phasers on kill lead to peace.

Most of the movies are standard bad-guy-of-the-week shoot-em-ups. I know, that’s standard hollywood. But that’s yet another reason why a good film of exploration will seem fresh and original.

Less space battles and blowing up planets / fleets.

The first movie was a good start, it got the crew together and set up some neat new takes on Treknology. Now lets see them use it for something other than blowing stuff up with kewl lens flares in the background. :-)

109. Mel - June 14, 2010

@ 105

I agree with most of your points, although I don’t mind how Scotty was portrayed. I especially like your teaser idea of on old TOS episode.

I personally would add:

- No Spock/Uhura romance. Break them up!

- I want to see a Horta! It doesn’t have to be a big role. Just show one for a few seconds!

- Include an Andorian and a Tellarite into the Enterprise crew. It would be again enough if we would see them shortly walking through a corridor of the Enterprise for example.

- keep Keenser

- Please don’t use the Klingons, Romulans or any TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT enemy alien race like the Borg, Cardassians, and so on. If you use an already known enemy alien race, it should have already be seen in TOS. But don’t use the Klingons or the Romulans, because too many movies are already about them. Create a new enemy alien race or even better use one, which was already shown in TOS like the Gorn or the Tholians!

- no Khan

110. gracliper - June 14, 2010

Must have:

- Klingons

- More McCoy

- Relevant and optimistic plot (the Trek signature)

If you want to pick something from the original, mirror universe is cool. And I wonder how the mirror universe of THIS ALTERNATE universe would be. The same as the original storyline?

Logic would dictates that Spock, being half vulcan, in order to help repopulate the vulcan race should end the relationship with Uhura, since it serves no purpose and can only generates children less vulcan. He can even be torn between this and his “love” for Uhura because, as we know, he’s half vulcan. But I don’t know a human female who will let his lover only goes around pon-farr-ing with another female and be really ok with that. It could be a plot but you want to know how much I want to see of it? Only the conclusion: they not being together.

111. DeShon Steinblatt - June 14, 2010

I like that it will be “equally confusing for some”. They don’t need to bring the movie to a screeching halt just to explain trivia for the nitpickers. They don’t need to reiterate that it’s an alternate reality in each and every sequel. Nobody cares about which universe is which except the hard core trekkies who like to pretend that it’s all real and want to know every stupid detail.

Skip that crap Lindeloff/Orci/Kurtzman and “JUMP RIGHT INTO IT”!

112. sean - June 14, 2010

If there’s one thing I’d like to see in this movie, it’s the continuation of the Spock/Uhura relationship. It made sense, and it’d be a shame to just toss it out the window.

113. MarkT - June 14, 2010

So the planet Vulcan and its billion+ population is destroyed and that is not ‘dark’ enough? Or do you just mean that everyone has to be in a bad mood?

114. DC - June 14, 2010

Since supposedly fan suggestions are being considered, less lens flare and less bright/more down to earth ship interiors. But not so down to earth that a brewery is still doubling for engineering.

115. DaveK69 - June 14, 2010

I have to say to those who want a brand new alien…..

ST:TMP – V’ger – unknown adversary – Did well in the box office – an ok movie.
ST II – Khan – known adversary – Good box office – great movie
ST III – Klingons, planetary phenomenon – Good box office – good movie
ST IV – Allegory, Time travel – great box office – very good movie
ST V – unknown adversary – medium box office – Eh movie
ST VI – Klingons, conspiracy – good box office – very good movie
Generations – unknown adversary, klingon…kinda – good box office – eh movie
First Contact – Borg – very good box office – great movie
Insurrection – unknown adversary (The guy who killed Mozart) – ok box office – eh movie
Nemesis – Clone, Romulans – bad box office- ok movie – bad opening date.
ST 11 – origin story, Romulans, Time travel – great movie, outstanding box office,

Unknown adversaries made bad movies and bad box office’s for Star Trek. What do you think the meeting for the next Star trek was like between Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof across the table from Paramount?
I think they said that an action filled trailer with powerful music and a menacing looking adversary along with preview reviews made this movie $100 million more than we thought it would make.

How does a trailer look with an exploration of the unknown with visuals taken of the Enterprise flying near a nebula and saying hi to a passing alien species plays?

116. Thorny - June 14, 2010

Please, not a “Dark Knight” for Star Trek. That movie wasn’t just dark, it was black as midnight at the north pole on the winter solstice. I saw Dark Knight in the theater once and bought the Blu-Ray and watched it once. I don’t think I’ve watched it since, and I have no desire to (at least until Batman Begins 3 is imminent.) That definitely is not what Star Trek is about. Star Trek is about hope and optimism for the future, not the deepest fears and darkest recesses of the human soul. Leave the dreariness to Gotham City, and please give us a bright, optimistic 23rd Century Earth. That doesn’t mean I want a “happy, happy, joy, joy” movie, Star Trek 2012 can still have real danger and desperate situations, put Kirk in a position where he has to make decision where someone will live and someone else will die. That’s what command is all about. But not a relentlessly bleak movie about a deranged, sadistic murderer like “Dark Knight”. Khan in “Space Seed” wasn’t nearly that insane, he only went mad after Marla McGiver died on Ceti Alpha V.

117. Tom - June 14, 2010

#78 what is it with you?

You hit it on the head. That scene at it’s core or something similar would be awesome. I think most fans liked that scene as it was written. Hopefully Bob Orci will utilize this great scene. The only issue is getting them to do it. Perhaps an outake of Leonard plus a voiceover if he won’t appear. I was hoping he would be stoked to be in it should Bill Shatner get in. However it seems he is serious about his retirement. They also don’t want to beg

118. Mr.Scotty - June 14, 2010

NO SHAT. For the love of god, how many ‘send offs’ does the old cast need? I love em too but enuff is enuff!!! Its a new reboot so let it go on with new cast & adventures. You people who just wanna see endless old cast go back to your basement with the TOS VHS tapes ok?

119. Thorny - June 14, 2010

118. Amen!

120. Dadio - June 14, 2010

What I would like to see in the sequel is to have Kirk, Spock and Bones go on a away mission together. I miss those days.

121. boborci - June 14, 2010

So a little darker is what the polls indicate so far?

122. Andy - June 14, 2010

15

None of the action in ST09 was “nonsense” each action beat lead to a significant plot point in the movie. None of the action slowed the movie down or was just added for shits and giggles.

123. CarlG - June 14, 2010

@95: No Jack Black PLEASE. How about Alfred Molina or Paul Giamatti instead?

I’m kind of sick of “dark” to be honest. No question it can be done well, but even the grimmest parts of Trek like STVI or DS9 still had an underlying sense of hope and optimism. Can we keep Trek as a series that shows what humanity is capable of at our best?

124. C.S. Lewis - June 14, 2010

Dear Mr boborci &al:

Please consider writing something… worth writing for posterity beyond summertime time killing money machines for Paramount Inc?

As they say in New Jersey and Brooklyn, “dark, schmark who cares?” if there is no point to it all.

While Star Trek was not Shakespeare, the writers were none the less well acquainted with the Bard of Stratford-upon-Avon, whatever his true identity. Their stories engaged at rather a higher level than “boom” and “zoom” and other hormonally redundant onomonopia.

Just sayin’.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

125. Jason Radd - June 14, 2010

Remember Spock can add to the technology scense he came from the future, but with caution.

126. DaveK69 - June 14, 2010

Is defeating an evil presence not optimistic?

The next movie cannot play out like an episode of TOS. The best episodes and movies play out like a game of chess. They are strategy games. Opponents who in the beginning start out with equal skill when the board is set. Different styles, knowing when to sacrifice, and having to sacrifice for the greater good. It’s what keeps the interest going. This is not a Disney documentary, and even those documentaries come with a little darkness.

If you want self contained, optimistic episodes of Star Trek then watch what you have, or hope for the next TV series. Movies are about what will play to the largest possible audience, and of course making that movie appeal to the largest audience possible.

The Trek universe has expanded exponentially with this last movie, and Paramount will want to expand it even further….. even overseas.

127. Oz - June 14, 2010

This notion of “darker” is a little nebulous. I suspect what many of us are wanting is more of the type of powerful scenes along the lines of that terrific opening where George Kirk sacrifices himself. It’s remarkable how much impact that had, considering it was a fairly short amount of screen time. Sure, Trek 2009 was a death-o-rama with wiping out most of the Vulcans etc. but jeopardy/death seems to have more of an emotional impact when it is on a smaller, more personal scale.

I think it would be a big mistake to go all dark and loose that bright sense of family and optimism. That doesn’t mean you can’t make us care about somebody and then put them in harm’s way in a manner that makes us all weepy though Mr. Orci. I guess the trick is to find that balance, and I wish you guys luck.

128. StarFuryG7 - June 14, 2010

#116. Thorny
“Please, not a “Dark Knight” for Star Trek. That movie wasn’t just dark, it was black as midnight at the north pole on the winter solstice. I saw Dark Knight in the theater once and bought the Blu-Ray and watched it once. I don’t think I’ve watched it since, and I have no desire to (at least until Batman Begins 3 is imminent.) That definitely is not what Star Trek is about. Star Trek is about hope and optimism for the future, not the deepest fears and darkest recesses of the human soul.”

Can you say “Balance of Terror”?

129. StarFuryG7 - June 14, 2010

#121. boborci
“So a little darker is what the polls indicate so far?”

Now, Bob–it’s not nice to toy with the good people here like this. :)

130. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - June 14, 2010

@121

So far… but you should wait to see in a few days after most every one who votes here.

What do you meen by DARK? Darker sets? Darker Lighting? Darker Plot? How do you really make Star Trek Dark? Wasn’t Gene Roddenberrys vision of the future, Postive/Light. Dark sounds so Negative.

131. StarFuryG7 - June 14, 2010

#92. siphunclekaiju54
“We’ve already seen Star Trek try to be dark, and what we got was Nemesis.”

True, but there were a lot of problems with “Nemesis,” and with the franchise in general at that point in time; that’s why moviegoers voted ‘no confidence’ in TPTB hierarchy by not going to see that movie.

132. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

121

Bob, when we say “dark”, we’re not talking BSG-brooding. We mean dark, as in a very scary enemy/entity…..remember being young and when you saw the first Alien movie? Remember the anticipation of wanting to see the monster? And then, when we finally DID see the monster, it scared the living sh*t out of us? THAT kind of dark would be good.

The Gorn on steroids?

Oh, and more McCoy, making it a true triumverate!

133. Anonymous Coward - June 14, 2010

Sure, a planet was destroyed and an entire civilization was erased (two, in fact), but it’s not like the film dealt with that in any way.
None of the main characters (Kirk, Spock, McCoy) seem much broken up by the loss of parents and spouses (well, McCoy is a drunk, but that doesn’t seem to concern anyone either).

By all rights, the 2nd film would deal with all of that aftermath, but it doesn’t sound like that is going to happen. I’m guessing the next film will come from yet a third parallel universe. Maybe a universe where shit that happens actually matters.

134. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

triumvirate! damn typos!

135. Xai - June 14, 2010

“121. boborci – June 14, 2010
So a little darker is what the polls indicate so far?”

So it seems. And I have to agree as well.
May I suggest that the ship crew actually be “boldly exploring” or helping to Terraform (Vulcanize?) the new Vulcan colony planet when the new Villain or Threat comes about?
It’s always been the “only ship in the sector” game for poor Enterprise when the threat arrives. Can you avoid that this time?
What would appeal to me is a “city on the edge of forever” type story. (Not a literal re-make COTOF).

And Bob, does it look like your bro-in-law dons the cape again?

136. Xai - June 14, 2010

Evening, HArry S. Ballz

137. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

Evening, Xai, my old friend……

138. Xai - June 14, 2010

We need Stanky

139. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

Oh, yeah, Stanky would add so much class to the joint!

I, too, would like to see Brandon Routh return as Superman! He did a great job last time around! The movie was bad, but he was superb!

140. TOY - June 14, 2010

Either way the first film did well enough (and I was so pleased it was made), although at the end of the day I wouldn’t be surprised if they had hoped for even more box office after the global marketing campaign. This 2nd film really counts, it’s a chance to cement this direction as a one off or stabalise it’s future. They took risks in the first with Vulcan etc but they needed to show this timeline is not a predicable one and no doubt have the feedback for the Kirk/Spock/Bones dynamic. Cannot wait to see how they tackle the tone and story, I for one will be looking forward to it and trust they will and pretty sure we’re in for some surprises.

141. Robman007 - June 14, 2010

I’m not hoping for a Space Seed remake. If we must have Khan, then I’d love to see it include the Klingons some how.

Khan would be a bit harder to come across. It is about 6-7 years earlier in this Trek then when he would be discovered, and he was discovered in parts unknown during the TOS. He’d be way out in the boonies during this next film.

Dirty playing viscous Klingons would do. Just like TOS (just far less campy and slimball like)

As long as we have no V’ger, Sha’ka’ri, Briar Patch, Vol, Nazi like planets or Space Hippies, we shall be good.

142. Zebonka - June 14, 2010

A film can deal with darker issues while having a light tone. That’s what made some of the TOS movies so great.

143. captainkirk - June 14, 2010

I want to see Klingons in the movie but not as villains, maybe have them work with the crew of the Enterprise somehow. I would also like to see McCoy get a bit more back story.

144. Buzz Cagney - June 14, 2010

So Shatner will be in it. I assume he will be ‘asking’. Or does that prvilege only apply to Mr Nimoy?

145. www.chrisfawkes.com - June 14, 2010

What i would love to see is a re enactment of Kirk fighting the Gorn commander but directed by Quentin Tarantino.

Could you imagine the build up of suspense and the feeling as Kirk emerges as a true hero and victor over a more powerful enemy.

146. Buzz Cagney - June 14, 2010

what colour is a Gorn’s blood?!

147. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

…and the Gorn has trouble with excessive flatulance…………..the title?

GORN WITH THE WIND!

148. Harry Ballz - June 14, 2010

FLATULENCE!

149. Buzz Cagney - June 14, 2010

With the tagline ‘I might be cold blooded but I do have a heart’.
Its an exploration of one gorns battle to find true love.

150. braxus - June 14, 2010

Oh the Empire Strikes Back of sequals. Interesting. Maybe it will be the Star Trek crew take a journey to Hell and back.

151. cd - June 14, 2010

Well, here is my idea for the sequel that I threw out here about a year ago…

“OK. Put Carol Marcus in the sequel, pregnant with Kirk’s son, but she goes on the Enterprise with Kirk. Federation about to go to war with Klingons. Big battle. In a scene parallel to opening of first movie, Carol goes into labor during attack and is evacauted, but the shuttle is destroyed by the Klingons. Kirk is out for vengenance against the Klingons. Kirk and Spock go under cover on the Klingon’s base on Organia. Kirk is conflicted between his mission to gather intelligence for StarFleet’s attack, or just kill as many of the Klingons (lead by Kang) as he can right there. He is also compelled to help the Organians, who don’t seem to be want to help themselves…
Oops. I meant Kor.”

You can adjust darkness by whether Carol lives or dies or baby lives or dies and Kirk’s reaction. The Klingons are taking advantage of a perceived to be weakened Federation, since Vulcan was destroyed. Kang/Kor is a warrior who would rather fight honorably than administrate/subjegate a people who can’t defend themselves. We get to see Spock and Carol Marcus knowing each other as referenced in TWOK.
Just some ideas.

152. Buzz Cagney - June 14, 2010

#150 wasn’t that Nemesis? Oh, no, that was One Audience takes a trip to Hell and back.

153. Pro-Khan-Sel - June 14, 2010

#115 Excellent points!

#144 If only shatner would be more reasonable.

154. Chasco - June 14, 2010

Quit with the Spock/Uhura thing. It’s unprofessional and, from a Vulcan pov, totally ooc. TOS Spock had a constant battle to suppress his human side and emotions. Sadly, you have already blown all that angst totally out of the water.

Quit making Scotty the comic turn. Let’s see him commanding the ship (or, at least, proving that he can command some respect).

Stuff Keenser out an airlock at the earliest opportunity. Better yet, get it transferred to a remote outpost before the film even starts. It clearly has no place on a Starship.

Redesign Engineering!!!! A Starship does not run on steampower.

No Shatner. No Khan. Bring Chris Doohan back and give him some lines (he could replace Keenser)

Send the ship exploring, for goodness sake. That’s what it was for! Find something different, original, outside the box, and DON’T resolve the problem(s) with a space battle. Or a fist fight. Dare to be different.

155. cd - June 14, 2010

And…
Kang/Kor may be initially the villian, but circumstances (the Organians?) will dictate that Kang/Kor work with Kirk. They develop a common respect. Federation/Klingons still at odds at the end, but with the Organian Peace Treaty a more constructive competative conflict. Or not. >;>}

156. Chadwick - June 14, 2010

Dark is good but we can’t leave out the optimism that star trek is. I just want a big battle scene with many many ships, thats all I want a big big battle no one on one submarine warfare. To see the Narada take out 40 Klingon ships would have pushed Star Trek epicness to a new level.

157. startrekker - June 14, 2010

Honestly Jeyl you seriously need a new hobby constantly bashing Star Trek now we know you have a different view from the rest of us but I enjoyed Star Trek 09.

158. Nemesis4909 - June 15, 2010

Don’t get me wrong here, I loved the new movie; I thought it blended modern cinema “needs” with what Star Trek fans wanted very well, the cast did great and the story was decent.

What I would like to see in the sequel is a “Star Trek movie” because there have been very few of those. “The Motion Picture”, “Voyage Home”, “Final Fronteir” (yes that’s right) and “Insurrection” (again think about it” were the only true Star Trek movies, in terms of Gene Roddenberry’s original concept, those 4 movies capture that. The rest are all movies with Star Trek characters in them and good as they may be they aren’t Star Trek as it has been on tv.

Star Trek has the most potential on tv as you can tell these Strange New World stories and social/political/religious allegories without having things blow up and not bore mainstream movie audiences.

The writers looked to “Wrath of Khan” for movie one, try looking more to “The Motion Picture”, give us a mystery and a crisis; wouldn’t that be awesome?

159. Will_H - June 15, 2010

I gotta appreciate writers that listen to the fans. Hopefully this time our feedback will be even more included, because I saw tons in the first movie where I said to my self, “a trekkie would have caught that error,” so hopefully there wont be as many.

160. The Chief Engineer - June 15, 2010

Hey Bob. Think i’d like to see, like many others, more Scotty. Perhaps him even sitting in the chair as 2nd officer. Oh and some miracles from the miracle-worker. Cheers.

161. Ben - June 15, 2010

I would rather not go down the line of 2nd film must be a lot darker than the 1st film thing. Just keep it similiar to the 1st.

As far as the story goes: please NO old stories.

As for the Characters: more Bones (Urban) and Scotty (Pegg) please

Regardless of who’s going to direct it: I’ll be watching.

162. Bill Peters - June 15, 2010

More of the same tone in the next film, Klingons and Gorn please they would make interesting Adversaries and please give someone a on-screen role and Nurse Christine Chapel. Also more Kirk,Spock,Bones moments and have Scotty being more like Scotty!

163. Jim Nightshade - June 15, 2010

i like the idea of a scott bakula cameo as an old admiral archer–scotty thanx to spocks equations now figures out how to retrieve the beagle which of course brings him to the big e before they leave spacedock-porthos the 12th anyone? he could also mention his ship was also an enterprise and it was archer who authorized this ship also be named enterprise as a nod to enterprise and mccoys christening of tngs ship–geeky fan boy moment indeed mr orci but also typing up the beagle loose end from first movie-despite my love for a new adventure i have to agree most epic movies are hero vs baddie or bad guys–if using kahn make it different–even very different to reflect alternate jjverse same things not happening in same way–lastly write it so its a great nuff script s jj will want to direct again–people saying spock was too emotional etc-remember this is a younger spock who has the destruction of his world n his mother to legitimize his tough control over his emotions–plus with age comes wisdom n better emotinal control even tho he learns by tmp that emotions n love are what make humanity special-spock uhura-my only beef with this relationship was that it totally drops the pon farr vulcan history–or do they only date every seven years–uhura was kinda wearing the pants with their relationship anyhoo haha

164. John - June 15, 2010

Seems to me that the tone of the film is reflective of what’s going on inside the characters themselves. In the last film, our characters may have encountered harrowing and “dark” circumstances. But each of them, even young Spock, had a youthful vitality that saw them coming into their own as individuals and members of this crew. That post-collegiate high when life is all laid out in front of you permeated the whole feel of the piece. It WAS the piece – new movie, new cast, new chapter, new stories.

Since that emergence has already taken place, I would suspect the next story to focus more on the relationships between the characters. And I would guess that the writing team is trying hard right now to find a villain who will elicit that interplay in a meaningful way.

I bet that they’ll try to solve the MEANING OF STAR TREK problem by incorporating a sort of natural disaster to (very indirectly) highlight current events. And then they’ll compound that disaster by introducing some opportunistic alien who has either caused or is allied with the forces causing the crisis.

Or I could be completely wrong and they’ll surprise us all with something better than what I just thought of in 10 minutes sitting here on my couch.

Good luck, gentlemen!

165. Bernd Schneider - June 15, 2010

The Trek movies have always been darker than the TV series (which is perhaps the main reason why I generally like the latter better). And Abrams’ Star Trek was dark – with its amount of violence, with the unprecedented genocide, with the brash and dysfunctional crew that stumbles through the plot and fails and, perhaps most importantly, with everything that happened being part of a divine plan. It’s the darkest installment of Trek ever made, and one that lays the foundation for a new dark universe.

Those who gave Orci the impression that it should be still darker and those who voted “dark” in the poll should make up their mind whether they still want it to be Star Trek, or whether they have been spoiled by a general trend in science fiction.

And I can only repeat the request: No Khan, please. It’s a new universe. Treat it as such!

166. DJT - June 15, 2010

I can’t wait for this movie. I am curious as to what Bob and crew have in mind for this one.

167. Cygnus-X1 - June 15, 2010

Well, I have to admit that J.J. did not seem to have been overburdened on the making of the first film, despite the many other projects that he had going on at the time, as I feared he would be. So, he’s earned my, and I dare say our, trust in that regard.

As for the theme, it’s also evident now that J.J. and his producers know how to make a film appeal to mass consumption. So, I’d encourage Orci and Kurtzman to go ahead and give J.J. some thematically rich, even challenging material to work with. I’d refer back to the first two Star Wars films here….

Films today have very much lost the ability to appeal to intelligent, older, more sophisticated viewers, whilst also appealing to kids, and everyone in between. One of the main reasons why is the ubiquitous premise in films today that the producers need to worry about every member of their audience, or a majority of them, understanding every level of what’s happening in the film. When I was a kid and I’d see a movie like Star Wars that had things going on in it that I didn’t understand, it intrigued me and made the film seem all the more mysterious, deep and meaningful: There was something damned interesting going on there, and I was very curious as to what it was. And, since there was enough going on in the film that I DID understand—the broad strokes in terms of plot, dialogue, relationships and of course, action—there was no chance of me losing interest. Translation to producers of Star Wars: Multiple viewings throughout my lifetime.

So, given that J.J. & Co. are going to be adept at crafting the film for mass consumption anyway, go ahead and give them some deep waters in between the bikini-clad islands of mass-consumption plot points. Give them thematic material for the ages. Give them dialogue that becomes classic American literature, such as can be found in TWOK: “Of all the souls I have encountered in my travels….” And, you can make it even better than in TWOK by not paraphrasing dialogue from classic literature that may have inspired your themes (Moby Dick).

So, while the first film was very poppy, J.J. & Co. have earned my (our) respect by bringing a wealth of fans into Star Trek that never before would have been interested. My non-Trekkie girlfriend was actually excited to see TWOK with me, because she’d seen J.J.’s Star Trek and had enjoyed it so much. And she was so receptive to the film and its characters, about whom she went into the viewing already caring and liking, that she experienced the film in much the same way that I or any Trekkie would—she got upset when it looked as though Spock wouldn’t make it and even nagged me afterward as to whether he would come back in STIII. She even laughed at the one-liners: “Then, this’ll be your big chance to get away from it all.”

Bob, you’ve got a rare opportunity here to make a really deep and meaningful and rich film that will be cut and packaged by an adept pop-smith so as to appeal to a wide enough audience to maintain profits in the realm of what Paramount is expecting, AND you’ve now got a humongous built-in audience.

So, go for it. Take some risks—and what you’ve said thus far suggests to me that you are thinking along those lines. Write not just a classic Star Trek film; write a classic FILM film.

Make a film that Gene would be damned proud of.

168. yeti - June 15, 2010

Darker? Perhaps, bit of a difficult one that really. The essence of the new movie and more importantly the fun and adventure is what really worked for the new film.
I think the crew or perhaps the characters need something to lose, impossible odds against the great unknown. An omnipotent villian aka Motion Picture.
If we keep on having antagonistic revenge bent characters (not forgetting that Nero was kind of a Khan character) then it starts to get repetetive.
That’s why First Contact is so great, the enemy is not a tangible individual, and perhaps the same could be said for the voyage home (I know people are devided on that one.)

Characters need to have something to lose, against an undefinable adversary (yeah difficult) and a fleet broken to its knees, in fact on the brink of destruction, Pike is injured and scarred in this almighty earth bound Starfleet battle protecting the federation….now that’s gotta happen. Perhaps Kirk feels responsible for Pike injury’s?

Well …..it’s just a thought :)

169. Devon - June 15, 2010

Bob,
I am not sure what would be best. However, I hope you do take in to consideration that the first 10 minutes of the most recent film is usually considered to the best part of the film (and the rest of the film is very good I though too) and is also considered to be among the most memorable 10 minutes of Trek film history. You guys did that SO f****n well. So maybe that’s the ticket?

Also, I hope Christmas isn’t cutting it too close for a summer 2012 release.

170. Holger - June 15, 2010

There were the “dark” elements in the plot of ST09 that have been mentioned: parallel-Vulcan destroyed, parallel-Kirk’s father died, and the whole Nero story. But, and I say that in favor of the movie, the main characters didn’t behave like typical dark movie protagonists (cynical, depressed, insane, etc.). And the movie wasn’t dark visually – also a great advantage over today’s predominant style in SF films. In that visual respect, Nemesis was much darker. (However, the plot was so ridiculous that it’s really hard to consider it dark.)
As for the next JJverse film: If it’s gonna be darker than ST09, that may actually decrease the probability I’m gonna watch it from 0.01 to 0.001.

171. Devon - June 15, 2010

#66 – “We’re led to believe that Starfleet officers are a bunch of thugs in uniform spoiling for fights in bars at the slightest provocation?”

We saw that “The Trouble with Tribbles.” In this film, we’re supposed to believe that undisciplined cadets tend to start some problems.

172. philpot - June 15, 2010

stuff i want in the sequel:

-Khan as the main villain
-vicious TOS/Trek III style klingons (maybe even kruge)
-Abrams style Reliant & Excelsior
-various TOS stuff cameoing/referenced/easter egging (but not centre stage, e.g. Guardian of Forever, Doomsday machine, gorns, cloud killers, corbomite, evil kirk, talos IV, tholians, wild west, Mitchell, rand, No 1)
-Klingon BOPs
-Twilight Zone/Outer Limits/early TOS style freakiness/eeriness
-ripped shirts, dropkicks and kirk Fu
-mushroom style spacedock (was missing that in Trek 09)
-C Marcus & genesis
-Matt Decker
-big name supporting role (Starfleet Admiral Harrison Ford?)
-system interupting nebulas
-death of a major character (Sulu?)
-federation starship vs. federation starship carnage
-2001/TMP/Abyss/Black Hole/Raiders style menace/wonder/unknown
-enterprise blown up or *really* badly damaged
-more references to the prime timeline/alternate future
-Scott Bakula Admiral Archer cameo
-Shatner as Kirk Prime cameo (not via timetravel…maybe retro footage?)
-Patrick Stewart as Picard cameo (again not neccesarily via timetravel…ancestor?)
-’long stream’ phaser beams
-subtle changes – like various different FX/sound FX for transporters, warps, etc and changes to phasers, commuincators, uniforms etc (always fun to spot the changes when there was a new trek film in the 80s)
-more TWOK style uniforms and field jackets

173. D. Enright - June 15, 2010

A.S.F Please forget the Spock /Uhura thing. Make Kirk, more like Kirk, and less of a jerk than he was in the first movie. Give Carl Urban MORE to do. IMO he, really captured the McCoy character. Get back to Kirk. Spock, and McCoy as the main characters. To me, the relationship between those three characters IS Star Trek in it’s purest essence, We need to see more of that. And most importantly….. give us something ORIGINAL and NEW…not another “redo”, “reinvention”, “rehash”, or “re imagining,” of an already existing story.

174. BiggestTOSfanever - June 15, 2010

I think the “A little Darker” part of the poll means “more serious.” The villains can be dark but Star Trek is about OPTIMISM, and the Enterprise crew needs to show that. Kirk and Spock should have some sort of discussion about killing Nero while playing 3D chess for closure. There has to be and allegory for something that matters to the present.
No Khan
No Shatner
Have Chekov find Amanda’s pattern in the transporter.
Yes to the Gorn
More strong female characters.
Have a landing party scene like in TOS on some strange planet.
About Engineering, to keep that canon, remember that this was supposed to be Pike’s Enterprise and Kirk got it early. We never really saw Pike’s engineering but now that Scotty is here he can fix it up.

175. John - June 15, 2010

Hey Bob maybe you should delve into what Nimoy was talking about the other day, about how he wanted to explore the Klingon culture in Star Trek 6 and failed doing it. Wishing he wrote how and why the Kiingons were, are such an angry culture, and what better place to get an idea from than from the great Nimoy?

176. Star Pig - June 15, 2010

More serious — but FUN! I would be against anything too dark. Dark doesn’t really sell unless we’re talking Batman…and Star Trek should not be like Batman. Oink!

I thought the last film was dark enough! OINK!!!

Snort!!!

177. ProperTrekkieUk - June 15, 2010

How about a Klingon prisoner hinting at a potential invasion whilst border skirmishes with the Klingons are costing a lot of lives…potential torture storyline…the greater good etc etc?

More Kirk/Bones/Spock interaction
Engineer Scotty please
New Engineering set
Nurse Chapel (rescued from crashed ship – possibly abused by Klingons?)
More ‘Federation’ crew members (an Andorian?)
Moooore ships!!!!
Admiral Archer storyline
Hints at Pike’s previous command of Enterprise (Number 1 etc, keep purists happy)
Beam ship phashers (like the Kelvins), keep handheld phasers as they are (liked it)
No Keesner (?)
Lots of veeery veeery subtle easter eggs
Hints at ST3, but self-contained in that we can move on from time travel stuff and focus on it being Star Trek again…

One thing, I liked the very engineeringly engineering of ST09, BUT what I felt was lacking was a central control room. I mean its all very well pipes and stuff, but if you have to run from one end of the pipe to the other to stop a warp core breech then, well your dead. So, whilst I would keep the pipes, design a central control ROOM (not panel) and I think that’d work. I mean, watching TNG, DS9, Voyager, its not hard to imagine that outside of the main Engineering room their are pipes and things that lead to the thrusters, impulse engines and nacelles…so yea, it works, if Engineering has a central rool (I mean modern Naval ships have pipes and things, but also control room!)

I would, however, loose the brewary set for wherever Uhura was supposed to be when Kirk went to find her…I mean what were those tanks supposed to be??

That is all, for now

178. What is it with you? - June 15, 2010

What I would like to see:

EXPLORATION for new Vulcan home world(s).

1)Meet interesting/frightening aliens who aren’t pleased about this new settlement in their sector, even if the word is uninhabited (a potential allegory about current issues in Middle East).

2) Kilngons become paranoid that their territory is next, and Kirk/Crew must battle on two fronts.. Perhaps Klingons come to aid of this alien race.

3) Kirk defeats Klingons and aliens, but it is a hollow defeat because he is left uncertain about the morality of the resettlement…a good allegorical aspect, with very real modern relevance, which is part of all good Trek.

4) Defeated by Kirk, the Klingons realize they are not the match they thought they were for the Federation (and Kirk’s legendary status is solidified). Their paranoia and anger grow.

4) Khan emerges at end of movie (his ship is intercepted by a defeated and lumbering Klingon vessel), and he begins the process of exploiting the paranoia of the Kilngons to become their leader…

Next Movie: Khan leading an army of angry Klingons with the goal of conquering the entire Federation…

Can you imagine, Khan leading a whole fleet of Klingons!! The battle would be glorious! (and of course, allegorical in the sense that Khan would be a Hitler-like figure).

179. philpot - June 15, 2010

178 – well Khan did mention that Kilingon proverb in Trek II – could that be seen as a slight hint at an alternate reality where hes conquered the Klingon Empire?

i like the idea as #103 has mentioned of another Federation vessel led by Captain Hanks finding the botany bay and getting totally POWNED by Khan who then kill everyone and steal the federation ship…and then start attacking the klingons causing a war between the federation and the klingon empire (plus we learn more about the klingon history as Nimoy pointed out the other day of wanting to explore all that in TUC)….so itd be kind of like 2 villains like in Dark Knight – Khan who is a nutjob psycho causing a heap of trouble (joker) and Klingons who arent that aggressive to the UFP at the start but due to khan stirring s**t up becoming an really formidable enemy to the Federation (Harvey Dent)

i hope if we do see Khan in the new series of movies its in the sequel and they dont make us wait for the 3rd one in 2015 (which will hopefully be about the borg and explore how they came to be)

180. philpot - June 15, 2010

oh and agree with those who say they dont want the sequel TOO dark

we dont need to see Star Trek Deer Hunter any time soon

maybe about the same level of ‘darkness’ as Empire Strikes Back or TWOK or even ST09 which although were pretty dark at times had a good balence of fun stuff

181. DrOBoogie - June 15, 2010

Why are “dark” and “fun” the only options? Why can’t a movie be serious, yet hopeful, without being a comedy or having an abundance of sadism?

I would say only that Star Trek is about hopeful exploration, and the sequel should reflect that.

182. Admiral_BlackCat - June 15, 2010

I’d like to see Khan and the Klingons. Either working together or the Federation/Enterprise crew must work with one to stop the other, and then get double-crossed.
Bring back Sarek. I loved Ben Cross. Maybe Sarek has the katra of Surak from the Katric Ark.
And of course T’Pring!!
Cause some tension between Uhura and Spock. Not to mention Sarek would get involved and force his son to make a choice between the two.

183. Desstruxion - June 15, 2010

Seems a lot of people like Khan. I could deal with Khan in the sequel…….if he were “Borgified”. Or maybe the Klingons could be over run by the Borg and their entire civilization could be assimilated. That would tick them off and make them meaner. Or maybe they could just steampunk the whole movie and have wooden starships with steam powered aether nacelles. Oh yeah….I’m onto something here.

184. philpot - June 15, 2010

182 ‘And of course T’Pring!!’

Megan Fox yes?

183 – i think youve been watching too much ‘Soot Trek’

185. janice - June 15, 2010

I want to see a “hopeful” sequel and no death of ANY regular character.

The MOST important thing for me is to see Captain/Admiral PIKE in the sequel. Pike has to be there!

186. Admiral_BlackCat - June 15, 2010

184
I was thinking Rachel Weisz. She has expressed interest in the sequel after all.

187. Horatio - June 15, 2010

They seriously need to have a Spock/McCoy gripe session in the sequel.

188. Dennis Bailey - June 15, 2010

#6:”Does the fan who made one of the “cool suggestions” get a share of the movie’s box office?”

Possibly if it’s not some variation of the same suggestion made by 6238 other fans. LOL

189. T'Cal - June 15, 2010

“35. Jeyl – June 14, 2010
Here are my pointers.

- I’d rather have a more serious film than a darker film. And since nothing about the story to Trek09 was ever taken seriously, I can’t see it being that much of a problem.

- No more labeling or treating characters as comic relief. Scotty shouldn’t be making funny comments or being the butt end of every joke every time he shows up on screen….”

I agree. Humor has its place but I don’t want it at the expense of the characters. This happened a lot in GEN, INS, and NEM and a bit in FC especially with Worf and Data, two great characters with rich histories. I would really like to see those movies with the failed attempts at humor edited out. They would improve markedly.

Scotty/Peg has great potential in this new series of films and he should not be pigeon-holed as comic relief. Bones/Urban has the potential to provide intelligent humor, as was done in the last film. With Spock/Quinto, however, humor is iffy and great care must be taken; it might work in a fish-out-of-water type setting but that well can’t be gone to too many times before it gets lame. We can’t have lame.

190. www.chrisfawkes.com - June 15, 2010

@ 145

You are a genius. Great story idea.

191. ladymac111 - June 15, 2010

I’m all for a “Dark Knight” vibe, but really, what’s darker than genocide?

192. Ran - June 15, 2010

I don’t care what the film is all about. Just make sure the writing is acceptable. Don’t dumb down the movie for crying out loud.

193. Charla - June 15, 2010

I love the optimism Star Trek offers the viewer, especially in these uncertain times. People of different ethinicities, gender, and races coming together to achieve greatness and save the world! Kicking butt!! That is why I loved, loved the new movie-

I guess that is why I would appreciate the next Star Trek to be similiar in tone as the first. To me, the movie struck the perfect balance of all major themes, providing the viewer with drama, action, romance and comedy.

I would like to see a longer movie instead of a “Dark Knight” of Star Trek. Star Trek stands apart from this genre of movies and in my opinion should stay unique from the other movies of this time.

I don’t worry too much because Star Trek is in good hands as proven last year. I look forward to 2012!

194. I am not Herbert - June 15, 2010

Darker? No, but get rid of the stupid bridge lighting / lens flares!

Lighter? NO!! Use intelligent humor, get rid of the infantile pandering!

It needs to be more SERIOUS. You killed Vulcan, but you can’t kill LOGIC.

It MUST be more REAL, more BELIEVABLE, and make more SENSE.

Don’t try to make it “cool” with “flash” and “bang”!

Make us think “WOW!” at how seriously you took it, how real you made it, from a true Star Trek POV.

Make it REAL SCI-FI STAR TREK, not meaningless fantasy schlock.

195. Michael - June 15, 2010

Yes, PLEASE jetison the Budweiser plant for 23rd century tech for an enginering deck! For the love of Jesus! That was just lazy sh**.
Uhura was young…hopefully she’s maturing to more professional.
For Pete’s sake, stop w/ Scotty being an SNL skit!
When Chekov becomes more serious, it’s time to reboot that ASAP!
Hope we see Chapel & Rand, maybe transporter chief Lt. Kyle. Maybe a tease w/ Lt. Kevin O’Reilly.
Oh, and MUST have another red shirt bite it!
I’ll say this an move on….add a non-stereotypical gay man, and make it subtle..not Will & Grace’s Just Jack!
JJ only really made a Bridge/Transporter set look right. Medical was off some how. The Enterprise sets were 20th century lazy industrial garbage.
The film was a hit Paramount….TIME TO BUILD DECENT STANDING SETS again! I know ya sold your Trek stuff to the fans……time to make new sets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

196. Harry Ballz - June 15, 2010

190

Chris, self-praise is no recommendation! :>)

197. AJ - June 15, 2010

As for making Star Trek ‘darker.’ let’s turn to STIII’s line from Bones when the Enterprise is burning up:

Kirk: “My God, Bones. What have I done?”

McCoy: “What you always do: Turned death into a fighting chance to live.”

Orci/Kurtzmann were channeling that sentiment as the Kelvin exploded, and 800 lives were saved.

It’s central to the TOS ethos, and Pike made a point of underlining that point to young Kirk in the bar. Regardless of how “dark” the next Trek film is, its heart must remain in the right place.

198. John - June 15, 2010

@ #167 – Cygnus-X1

I couldn’t have said it better. Bob, if you’ve made it this far and didn’t read #167, GO BACK!

199. I am not Herbert - June 15, 2010

…oh, and PLEASE try to convince JJ NOT to direct…

200. NuFan - June 15, 2010

Please ignore everything in #167. I don’t want a movie aimed at middle aged trekkies. They have plenty of Star Trek for themselves already.

Keep making them for my generation. In the same style as the reboot.

201. LWR - June 15, 2010

Just don’t let Damon Lindoff write the ending.

we may get a close up of shatner’s closing eye from Generations, and then find that everything that happend in this movie and the reboot was a nexus reality.

202. Kirk, James T. - June 15, 2010

I think darker might be cool, little more intense and emotional on a different level to that of Star Trek (2009) but the essence of the first movie, the fun and the excitement plus the “watchability” of it should remain the same.

Also as with a lot of sequels I’d rather they kept the plot simple. Thats not to mean that they cant delve into the characters and the plot itself but when writers start adding more and more to a story (Transformers 2, Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3) it becomes far too complex and people switch off.

Star Trek 2 should be Fun but also more about these characters, the relationship between Kirk, Spock, Bones and Uhura facing larger dangers/threats than were present in the first movie…

203. I am not Herbert - June 15, 2010

Does “watchability” = flash bang for the slack-jawed droolers?

no thanks

204. Thorny - June 15, 2010

I didn’t mind Keenser all that much in ST 2009. If he’s back in ST 2012, that’s okay with me. Just a cameo, though.

The new movie definitely needs Christine Chapel to make a bonafide appearance, not just a cameo/namedrop, and not just pining for Spock all the time. The other characters all had at least one good scene in ST 2009, give Chapel her scene in the next movie.

Don’t load the movie up with too many villains. If you must go to Khan, then make the movie Kirk vs Khan. Don’t throw in Klingons, Romulans, and the Gorn, too. We don’t need Star Trek to be over-the-top like Batman Forever or Spider-Man III. Frankly, I’d prefer the villain to be Kor this time around and set up Khan for Star Trek 2014.

205. LCDR T'PAU - June 15, 2010

There will be a different opinion for every Trekkie/Trekker out there. For mine own part, I lost interest in DS9 when the story devolved into the war with the Dominion. Even though the space station did not travel through the Alpha Quadrant, the worm hole offered such potential for discovery in the Gamma Quadrant — which is why VOYAGER was born. I strongly believe the Xindi war ruined ENTERPRISE — there was so much pre-TOS that could have been explored — and the last year only delved into a small part of it. For instance — what brought about the Prime Directive?

As for the “darker” reboot of BSG — I stopped watching it — it became a soap opera in space — I never became “involved” in the characters or the story — just like I never became involved with the story or the characters on “Lost” — and SGU is a darker version of VOYAGER. I certainly have had no interest in “Caprica.”

There is no question that there was war in the history of the Federation and Star Fleet — war with the Romulans, the Klingons — but that was not the focus of the Federation or Star Fleet — and given that the new Star Trek movies are still TOS-era — even if in an alternate time-line (for which I am VERY thankful) — there are stories to be explored without going “dark.” Exploration — science — seeking what is not known — and maybe getting into a bit of a tough situation that requires some fancy thinking and some action to get out of — but with integrity and the Prime Directive intact — and something about the human condition under these circumstances.

Each of the Star Trek series and episodes (except for ENT) had at its center some question about the human condition — some moral or philosophical problem that was at least examined in some way — I did not find that in ST XI at all — even with the understanding that the movie was intended as the introduction to the new cast etc.

206. boborci - June 15, 2010

124. C.S. Lewis – June 14, 2010

Then I’m sure you are aware that Shakespeare was the script doctor of his day. King Lear, for example, had been written half a dozen times before in various forms.

207. Wojie - June 15, 2010

Star Trek (sub-prime) II:
Enterprise is schlepping a boatload of Vulcans, incl Ambassador Spock to New Vulcan. Distress call… oooh! lookasee! Ancient derelict… DY-500? no, 100!
Amb. Spock fires a torp -kaboom. “The needs of the many, and this one, outweigh the needs of the few. Trust me on this”

No Khan; move along.

208. Kirk, James T. - June 15, 2010

203: Watchability means you can watch it over and over again. Films such as The Dark Knight, Avatar, Lord of the Rings might be amazing movies – and they are – but you can’t watch them over and over again – where as films like Star Trek (2009) and Iron Man (1) you can because there fun and enjoyable movies, just how movies should be.

209. Kenneth Of Borg - June 15, 2010

It has to be Klingon. It will be Klingon.

210. thebiggfrogg - June 15, 2010

I am a huge nuBSG fan. Darkness fit the story, but I don’t want Trek to travel that road too heavily. The Trek universe ought to be a different beast. Optimism and exploration and new wonders need to be a part of this. As I’ve said, ad infinitum leave the war Trek and the villain du jour (or day old viilains for that matter) alone for once!

211. I am not Herbert - June 15, 2010

“Iron Man” I can watch over and over…,

ST09 I saw twice, only making me disappointed and angry.

ST09 has a very low degree of “watchability” IMHO.

The repeat viewing only confirmed and increased the scope of my displeasure.

212. Losira - June 15, 2010

Star trek must always be a family affair be it the movies or TV. I agree story lines must have a conflict be it a person…alien. Or a serious situation sinario, to make it work. However, excessive violence, antiheros explicit.sex does not make trek. I say tone it sesibly and impliment a good story with consistently strong character. Both equaly men and women. No matter what side, good or b and if we want a dark plot, watch the news . Trek is about a better way of life, and a more evolved way of solving our problems. Not about today,s standards of problem solving.UHuuuuu! Trek helps lay the blueprint of a better way of thinking and behaving ourselvies, but more important we need to to keep trek family friendly the strong message of trek is ment to be shared with our kids. The Next Generation

213. Mr Phil - June 15, 2010

I like the idea of contrast in a story – TWOK has some pretty serious personal stories, family tragedies etc, but always with a sense of hope and optimism for the future. Empire Strike Back is similar, pretty bleak ending but resolute and united for what is coming…
Seems a good way to end a chapter which will lead more directly into a 3rd film.

It’d also be good to see a bit more of a meaningful story which relates to current events, it’s what ST has been good at in the past.
But no whales please, we’re British.

214. Harry Ballz - June 15, 2010

As much as I like Nimoy, the whale idea in ST:TVH was stupid! If they didn’t capture George+Gracie, all they had to do was go out to sea and get two more whales! Where the frig is the tension or suspense in THAT??

215. Red Skirt - June 15, 2010

#206, so in addition to being the “Supreme Court”, you’re “Shakespeare” now? It all makes so much sense now … ;-)

216. Shatner_Fan_Prime - June 15, 2010

#214… You’re kidding, right, Harry? The crew knew they could find whales at sea. They were hoping to get the two from San Fran for the sake of convenience. The suspense came from having to remain undetected while they built a whale tank and found a way to power the ship (and save Chekov), not to mention the danger and uncertainty of time travel.

217. Damian - June 15, 2010

I don’t have an issue with a dark theme, which is ambiguous as some have noted. Deep Space Nine was probably the darkest of the Star Trek universe. You had a war, an admiral attempt a coup, and Section 31. This actually served to make the Federation more realistic. It was too utopian before. Anything involving humans will not be perfect. Yet for its flaws, the Federation was still an overwhelming force for good. Starfleet officers by and large still fought for what was right. The new film can be dark, and yet optimistic all at the same time.

I’m glad the writers take the time to seek input. There are some good ideas out there, maybe some things that will make the film better. I loved the idea another poster noted about having a teaser before the credits showing them facing the Doomsday Device or maybe something else familiar from the original series. I don’t want the movie to be about something we have seen in the original series, but a teaser sequence has a lot of potential.

#172–Your movie would be about 5 hours long ;)

218. KirkK - June 15, 2010

I’m sure when they set out to do Star Trek, they had some kind of idea where to go from here. After lots on thought on the idea, basis for the second movie came to me after several viewings of ST09, it is as follows.

The Klingons, were attacked by the Romulans. Thats exactly how they will see it. They will want retribution. The Federation will side with the Romulans as they know its not really their fault. Spock won’t like this position, still upset over the destruction of Vulcan and not quite in control of his emotions. Creating friction between himself and Kirk. Of course allowing for the introduction of characters Kang and or Koloth.

Kirk has to be put in a senerio where by his actions, he earns the trust and respect of his crew. I’m sure we can agree, he kind of was given the Enterprise in the last movie. Make him earn it. The center seat is a heavy
burden to carry.

Lets see why the Klingons mistrust the Federation and why they respect Kirk as a warrior. Sounds like a good Trek movie to me. IMHO.

Kirk, out.

P.S. I also have a idea to get those nacelle end caps RED that ties in, away from that every thing has to be blue motif. (hint: way to go Scotty, you really are a miracle worker)

219. LWR - June 15, 2010

Here is a great character driven, dark and humorous movie..

Since ST 09 was a time travel movie make it like back to the future 2 with Spock trying to go back in time and set things right.

the first thing he does is go back and bust those damn lens flares…but in the process he creates a chain of events that is disaterous to the universe as we know it.

see the fabric of time cannot afford to be severed for yet another time, so Spock works closley with a strange scientist guy and the other 2 versions of himself to use mr scot’s transwarp beamy thingy to help bridge the enxus of the universe to put things back the way the were.

problem is the scientist is Soran, and he sets out to steal mr Scott’s transwarp beaming thingy and escape across the universe.
being such a brilliant scientist he realizes that he , it does not take him long to realize that with combined left over pieces of red matter,not only can he get to the nexus, but he could control time and space as well!

the power to use the nexus of the universe ( i just wathced generations on cable, can you tell?) and control the outcome of pasts and futures..

now, the enterprise is comand to follow in hot pursuit and some sace fighting takes place and all that good stuff. with things looking bleak, our evil scientist mixes the transwarp beemy thingy and the red matter to interject and causes the chase to takesthem deep into earth’s past.

the ensuing conflict comes to a close with the bad scientist dying and Kirk and company saving humanity and it’s future once again.

problem is the transwarp beemy thingy is stuck in the past on this island.( did i mention it looks like a donkey wheel, by the way…) .
Kirk can’t take it with him because it will cause the fabric of the universe do do something or another.
so Spock wisley tasked crewmman redshirt to stay behind as a guardian of sorts. protecting the island until mankind is ready for the awsome power they have had to leave behind.

a parting shot shows that crewman redshirt has a broken foot, and in teh cast it only looks like he had 4 toes.

the enterpeise slingshots around the sun and we fade to black with STAR TREK appearing on the screen in block letters.

Heck that makes as about as much sense as season 6 of LOST, anyway.

220. Jorg Sacul - June 15, 2010

Remake “The Man Trap”, in the style of the original Alien. There. now Bob, send me my check :)

221. Sci-Fi Bri - June 15, 2010

My idea is about the setting… the location

the ending credits CGI was really nice, and we’ve seen in Avatar that having a planet NOT named Earth at the forefront of the movie action is no longer box office death.

So, I’d love to see the crew get out to the frontier of Federation space… instead of earth, maybe a scene or act where we see older fed ships like the old Daedalus class ships and the hard work of terraforming the final frontier. I’m picturing awesome CGI and shooting locations like Hawii, Argentina, or Austrailia… something exotic…

Also, the skies don’t have to be blue ;-D

~~~

222. Capt Pike - June 15, 2010

Suggestions:
1. Kirk has to grow up, show responsibility, we get it that he had a tough time growing up but at present he has no redeeming quality in that he should be respected and command respect from the crew.
2. More Kirk/Spock/Bones interaction in whatever situation they face and they have to assume the same basic roles from TOS in this. Spock as logic, McCoy as the conscience and humanity, and Kirk wrestling with the decision and then sticking to it.
3. Less Scotty as comic relief and more of him being an engineering genius. Peg is a natural comedian and I’m not saying to abandon it completely though.
4. Nix the Uhura / Spock romance it was a square peg in a round hole in the first movie.
5. Introduce some old characters like Chapel, Rand, Gary Mitchell, Commodore Wesley.
6. Plot must have a moral dilemma, make it a sort of morality play (Shakesphere referenced earlier)
7. A three dimensional chess game between Kirk / Spock .
8. No Khan for God’s sake.
9. Turn the damn lights down on the bridge, looks like a freaking apple store.
10. You have established all of the main and supporting characters, good job on that. Now make us emotionally invest in them and care whether they succeed or fail, live or die.
11. Pike needs to be in this one as well, Perfect casting and performance by Bruce Greenwood!

223. Patroclus - June 15, 2010

Mr. Orci,

Please:
Heroic gay male
Heroic gay male
Heroic gay male
(A continuing federation character)

Thank you.

224. Kirok - June 15, 2010

Please for the love of God make the movie darker….those lens flares were hurting my eyes!

225. Anthony Thompson - June 15, 2010

Perhaps Scotty’s little buddy Keenser can be the “heroic gay male”. haha

226. FromtheFuture - June 15, 2010

I have arrived in your time period from the future….and I can say without fear of contradiction that your will LOVE the second movie….and lose your frickin’ minds over the 3rd through the 5th movies. After the third movie, a large faction of you will branch off from mainstream society and form a type of “trek universe” called, obviously, “the Federation” . This group will be largely credited for starting the “Peace through Exploration” movement which will lead to the utopian society I live in in 2079.

227. Gary - June 15, 2010

Cast Betty White as a Klingon.

228. Naniite - June 15, 2010

The movie should open at the tail end of the Doomsday Machine with Mr. Shatner as Commodore Decker! Yes he dies again. Then slip right into the new plot, no Galactic War though! Wouldn’t mind seeing a Nasty Klingon She Goddess that rivals Khan, in someway violates Chris Pine!
Then Adm. Pike and the crew opens up a can of Whoopass on the empire!

229. RM10019 - June 15, 2010

Bob, I think it’s clear that you guys struck just the right tone with the first film. Fans loved it, casual moviegoers loved it and it was reviewed well. Granted this film can’t be ‘the same’, by definition. But keeping that balance between action adventure and human drama (which has a depth and darkness inherent) is your task, and I know you guys are up to it.

By best advice for the film and franchise is to make this film as original and fresh as possible and tease Khan at the end for a third, and HIGHLY anticipated sequel to this installment.

230. Patroclus - June 15, 2010

#225,
Having the Keenser character take an unexpected heroic, non-comedic, turn would actually be interesting, especially as most don’t seem to care for the character. I would personally though, prefer the gay character to be human.

231. Philip Dunlop - June 15, 2010

Excuse me for skipping the replies on the forum – I’ve been away for the past week and I’m playing major catch-up, but the quotes from Robert Orci outlined above lead me to be very optimistic about this sequel. He’s kept his ear to the ground, and I think he’s picked up on the right elements. Yes. Vulcan was destroyed. But the movie didn’t delve as deeply as it could have in just how big an impact that is on the Star Trek universe. I guess that was what gave a lot of fans reason to be disappointed: Vulcan, a lynchpin in the Star Trek universe, was wiped out, and it was soon forgotten because it was deemed that the survival of Earth was more important to move the story on. Whereas, in Star Trek VI, the destruction of the Klingon empire, despite their being adversaries at the time, bore far more wide-reaching consequences in terms of the story of the movie. I think Orci now sees the balance which fans want while also getting the grasp of what will attract non-fans into getting their arses on cinema seats. So that’s very exciting. As for the even-numbered Star Trek movies being “darker” – that’s not necessarily true. ST IV wasn’t so dark. It was the “comic relief’ of the six TOS movies. I don’t think that is something the writers of the current iteration of the Star Trek universe should think about when writing this movie; just think about writing the best film they can. Then, when it comes to writing the next one, try to out-do it by writing an even better one.

If I’ve echoed what previous people have said here, then I apologise.

232. rogue_alice - June 15, 2010

Darker? But still with generous blinding lens flaring.

233. captain_neill - June 15, 2010

Well you’ll do whatever the mainstream wants so why bother making suggestions.

234. captain_neill - June 15, 2010

I still angry at Bob and Alex for destroying Vulcan and Romulus.

235. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - June 15, 2010

@234

I agree how do u destroy Romulus in the Prime Timeline….. Besides the Romulans are just as advanced as the federation…. Would they evacuate the planet at the first sign of trouble while they were asking Vulcan for help….. Makes no sence. With that said I still enjoyed the movie.

236. Ironhyde - June 15, 2010

Personally, I want to see the Dax symbiont. It was a female at the time McCoy was a student. Emony was her name and I guess she was in gymnastics or something. And the implication seems to be that she had a bit of a romance with McCoy… “he has the hands of a doctor” … =P Check out Trails and Tribble-ations for this backstory.

I want to see Dax.

Otherwise, fix the frantic camera and disruptive flairs. And give the story some kind of message that people can think about afterwards, as many others have suggested.

Same tone as STXI would be fine in my opinion.

237. the quickening - June 15, 2010

Genocide of an entire planet, Spock’s mother died, Kirk’s dads’ death, are not examples of darkness, just examples of script writers attempting–and rather cheaply–of invigorating a story that was rather weak to begin with. Time travel, again, please. TREK has used the gimmick of killing major characters for dramatic effect, way too much. Like time travel, it too has become tiring. True darkness is about tone producing a lasting effect of reflection, more than contrived situations to move a plot along.

238. NuFan - June 15, 2010

Well a few of the old-timey fans are being quite snotty. I can see why the original franchise died if they were so opposed to change.

Romulus is not a real place and no actual Vulcans were harmed in the making of this film, since there are no actual Vulcans.

239. Trek Lady - June 15, 2010

238

Critiquing and criticizing aspects of a film is one thing. Criticizing other people/fans is bad form. Some of the old-timey fans may indeed be a bit snotty, but you are not making the younger fans look particularly appealing yourself.

240. ChristopherPike - June 15, 2010

I can see no way any suggestion I might come up would ever make me happy with the Nero universe. Let alone being accepted by those who are apparently happy that it has permanently closed down the original ENT-TOS-TNG one.

241. Harry Ballz - June 15, 2010

234

Hey, that’s a great Hulk imitation!

238

Tell that to the good people of Vulcan, Alberta!

242. G - June 15, 2010

@ 121. boborci – June 14, 2010

So a little darker is what the polls indicate so far?
————————————————————————————————
Don’t confuse them, Bob. They probably think you’re talking about lens flares.. by “darker”, they just meant “Less bright” in the next one.

243. v'ger23 - June 15, 2010

Suggestions / hopes for the new film:

1. A balance of “fun” and “intensity” that was present in the best of the Star Trek films (TWOK, TSFS, FC, etc). “Intensity” doesn’t mean “dark,” but it does mean dramatic, serious, and potentially game-changing for the characters.

2. Challenge, explore, and test the friendships and relationships of the crew, with particular focus on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy’s developing brotherhood. Star Trek’s greatest attribute is those characters and their relationships to one another. Get more into that, even if it means sacrificing a “fun” scene or an “action” scene.

3. Bring a “boldly going” aspect into the story. Maybe kick it off with the Enterprise mid-mission, exploring a new world and seeking out new life or whatever, and develop the primary plot from there.

4. Go with a totally different formula, away from the “we have to stop the madman obsessed with vengance from destroying planets.” Maybe make it a quest film with more of an “Indiana Jones” feel to it, where the crew is actively seeking to achieve something, getting into adventures across the galaxy, rather than trying to stop someone else from destroying something.

4b. The “villian” could be attempting to keep the crew and ship from their goal, rather than the opposite. You can still develop a great villian without there being a vengance / personal motivation.

5. No wars, no Khan, no political dramas. That’s fanboy garbage.

6. Don’t worry about taking risks because a few fans are upset about Vulcan and Romulus being destroyed. Part of what made Trek 2009 so great was that the drama was REAL because we knew that all bets were off and that anything could happen. Leverage that “clean slate” you’ve developed with the alternate reality bit, and continue to challenge the fans past their comfort zone. Those of us that are worth keeping around will love you for it. I beg you on this one…keep pushing the boundaries of what the “hardcore / purist” fans will accept.

7. No crossover crap. No TNG or DS9 cameos. Only do Shatner if it is an essential and organic part of the story line.

8. Pike was a great character. It would be cool to see Bruce Greenwood back, even if it’s for a cameo, as a continuing mentor and surrogate father figure to Kirk.

Make it as fun and exciting as the last Trek film, and I’ll be a very happy moviegoer!

244. Desstruxion - June 15, 2010

In the next one they should have a coolant leak in the warp core and in a moment of desperation, Scotty could shove Keenser into the hole and save the ship once again. It’s just crazy enough to work.

245. Rusty0918 - June 15, 2010

#233

Yep, I get the feeling we’ll get another “Transformers 2″ and critics will praise it like it’s the “Dark Knight.”

246. Disinvited - June 15, 2010

#238.

I would have thought by now history would have taught that STAR TREK never dies. And most assuredly not because some corporation declares it so or loses interest in it.

You can call us snotty all you want but the fact is you could not exist as some sort of a Trek fan today, to bemoan our attitudes toward it, if we had not refused to accept the numerous empty corporate proclamations of death in the first decade of its existence. And I dare say the identically empty ones this side of the millennium are just as meaningless.

If ST ever truly dies it will be because of its so-called fans willingness to rollover and accept said corporate decrees without challenge.

247. Thorny - June 15, 2010

235… You’re severely underestimating the challenges of evacuating a planet. It probably isn’t possible to evacuate an entire planet. Even evacuating a small percentage would be a huge challenge.

Let’s say Romulus’s population is 5 billion people. If Romulus had 100 ships each capable of carrying, say, 5,000 people (Titanic or USS Nimitz size, but five times more than the Enterprise-D) it would take 1 million trips to move everyone off the planet. This ignores the possibility of birth rate being greater than death rate, which would drive up the number of trips.

And where do you offload 5 billion people?

248. Jack2211 - June 15, 2010

55 – I disagree.

I think Trek 09 packed a heck of an emotional wallop. And I also disagree with the claim that TOS was all about allegories and contemporary issues. There were really just a handful of those, and a few were of them didn’t work well. The best of Trek is stories that are, essentially, about people – the city on the edge of forever, where no man has gone before, Balance of Terror, court martial, the devil in the dark. I could go on.

I also think that the frequent use of time travel and rebirths (Spock, data, sort of Yar) kind of dulled the impact of Trek death and destruction. I like how this movie changed that.

Generally, I say don’t listen to the fans too much… Tell a good story and stay away from TNG aliens (and TNG etc. plots generally) nods to the fans (look what Delta Vega got you), in jokes and please pile on a lot of adventure, emotional stakes, smarts, and, especially, strange new worlds and boldly going where no man has gone before. Trek 09 really felt like Star Trek, an adventure — and not pointless action (a complaint often made by others here, and I disagree).

Keep it up!

249. Xai - June 15, 2010

203. I am not Herbert – June 15, 2010
“Does “watchability” = flash bang for the slack-jawed droolers?”

Frankly, if you are already against the next movie without having a clue about any of it, no one here will care if you see it or not.

Don’t go. Simple

Count me as a “slack-jawed drooler” I guess… I liked it.

250. nuSpock - June 15, 2010

#23 so basically what you want is a more action-packed, updated version of the 1979 film? :S

251. CarlG - June 15, 2010

@116: Actually Dark Knight was wierdly optimistic if you think about it. Remember the two ferries? The inherent goodness in the average citizaens won out, despite being terrorized by the Joker, and neither boat tried to blow up the other — not even the boatload of hardcore convicts.

So it may have been a dark movie about a psychotic madman, but in the end it was about proving the madman wrong.

252. Harry Ballz - June 15, 2010

Xai

I agree, I liked it, too. It reminded me of how much FUN Star Trek was all about.

Also, I think Chris Pine gave an amazing performance as Kirk. Not an easy thing to do.

253. red dead ryan - June 15, 2010

I vote for both Khan and the Klingons in the sequel. I also want to see more of the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triumvirate. No silly gimmicks like expanding hands. Same amount of Keenser, with a more serious Scotty.
Archer cameo. A real engineering. A huge space battle involving many Star Fleet and Klingon ships. A heavily damaged Enterprise with phaser burns and torpedo holes. Better lighting on the bridge. No Spock/Uhura romance. More Constitution class ships.Nurse Chapel. More Pike.

Not too much to ask for, I think. :-)

254. dmduncan - June 15, 2010

Darker is cool. But also…uplifting. Sort of like fried ice cream.

And yay! As a fan posting on this site, I guess I’m one of those “consultants” too.

But I would like a consultant badge. A delta shield, please…with a “brain” graphic on it.

255. red dead ryan - June 15, 2010

#252

I agree with your assessment of Pine’s performance as Kirk. No one will replace William Shatner, but Chris Pine has put his own impressions on the role.

256. red dead ryan - June 15, 2010

#254

If there is one person on this thread who deserves to be a consultant, it’s you, dmduncan. Many times on this site you have explained Bob’s time travel mechanisms better than he has! :-)

257. Jeff - June 15, 2010

It’s simple really. They should just get Nick Meyer to write and direct it, so it’ll be good.

Oh, and I hope they don’t call it “Star Trek 2: Revenge of the Fallen” as that would be a bad idea.

258. Thomas - June 16, 2010

243. v’ger23

“Maybe make it a quest film with more of an ‘Indiana Jones’ feel to it, where the crew is actively seeking to achieve something, getting into adventures across the galaxy, rather than trying to stop someone else from destroying something.”

I always thought this would be an interesting idea for a movie; it could combine the idea of exploration of the unknown and be that “quest film” you were talking about:
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Phase_II#.22To_Attain_the_All.22

259. Cygnus-X1 - June 16, 2010

—-200. NuFan – June 15, 2010

Please ignore everything in #167. I don’t want a movie aimed at middle aged trekkies. They have plenty of Star Trek for themselves already.

Keep making them for my generation. In the same style as the reboot.—-

1.) I’m not middle-aged; I’m 35. (I can’t help hearing that in Eric Idle’s voice.) And my gf (whom I mentioned) is 25.

2.) Did you even READ what I wrote? I spoke about making a film, like Star Wars, that appeals and satisfies on many levels: to kids, old folks and everyone in between, including young adults with poor reading comprehension and a fear of learning.

3.) Your knee-jerk reaction to the suggestion of a film having rich dialogue and thematic content typifies the very problem that I was trying to describe. But, don’t worry your pretty little head over it: As I mentioned many, many times, we have every reason to believe that JJ & Co. will be making the next ST film appeal to the unwashed masses, no matter what kind of thematic content is likely to be in it, hence my suggestion to give JJ & Co. some rich dialogue and thematic material to honey-glaze and package with a bright red bow, as they are so adept at doing. I promise that you won’t get anything deep and meaningful out of the next film if you don’t want to, and you can just munchy-munch away and enjoy the experience, as you did the first film, none the wiser.
———————————————————————————–

@ 198. John

Thank you. I’m glad someone else gets it.

260. somethoughts - June 16, 2010

Interesting Nimoy has a spot in the next movie if he wants in but the shat gets the shaft. 10min aged kirk played by shatner please :)

I would love a mystery space quest type movie showcasing the crews friendship n problem solving skills wrapped around great character driven drama dipped in suspense n special effects deep fried with allegory about who we are. The case of the missing cloaking device, cloaked planet right next to earth and has been there for millions of years, something weird like that…

261. JulienBashir - June 16, 2010

Because the way I see it, Kirk relieved Pike only for some period of time, until he got out of the wheelchair. I don’t want to see Pike back in that wheelchair. That would be a friggin’ waste.

262. VZX - June 16, 2010

Dang. Somehow I doubt that Bob Orci will read all these messages. It’s a lot!

I voted for the same level of “darkness” as the first. The destruction of Vulcan was enough death for me. I say split up the crew, like in The Two Towers, to fight a big, epic enemy that will take 2-3 movies. But, keep it light-hearted, sort of on the order of the Indianna Jones movies.

263. Desstruxion - June 16, 2010

Maybe the Enterprise could return poor little Keenser to his home planet in the next flick. When they arrive they could be surrounded by a whole fleet of little starships. Then Keenser could draw a weapon on Kirk and commandeer the Enterprise. Then in a deep voice (like Darth Vader) he could order the crew to the transporter room where they will be taken to a penal colony on his planet. They (Keenser and family) would then begin wreaking havoc on the galaxy in the Enterprise. While in prison, Kirk would befriend a human by the name of Khan (a man from 1990′s Earth). Kirk and Khan work together to free both crews and escape. Together they find a way to defeat the Keenserites and get the Enterprise back. Once back on board, Khan pulls a weapon and orders the Enterprise to “Ceti Alpha something or another” and once again imprisons the crew in a crappy old sleeper ship called “Botany Bay”. It could be a trilogy.

264. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - June 16, 2010

@247

You bring up a good point. But i would believe that the Romulans would have thousands of ships. They had great battles during the dominion war with thousands of ships on both sides. Plus you ask the federation for help and they send in an armada with thousands of ships to help evacuate and you greatly reduce the number of trips you would have to take. Plus im sure there are many other transport ships that are designed to take 5 or 10 thousand people like a troop transport.

265. Trevor John - June 16, 2010

JUST BUILD A PROPER ENGINEERING SET THAT LOOKS LIKE ITS FROM THE FUTURE PLEASE. THIS IS NOT THE UNITED FEDERATION OF BUDWEISER.

Thank you,
Trevor John

266. Uncle Joey - June 16, 2010

kirk prime PLEASE

267. v'ger23 - June 16, 2010

@262

If I were Bob Orci and I read half of the bloated, rambling crapola that sometimes lands here as “suggestions,” I wouldn’t read much either.

268. Melonpool - June 16, 2010

Wow! I can’t wait to get my Star Trek Movie Consultant check!

269. Buzz Cagney - June 16, 2010

Opening scene…… Kirk fighting the Gorn as in Arena. No explanation needed for the fans. And new fans will enjoy it. End of scene Enterprise flies on its way. Perhaps the ramifications of Kirks victory could become clear at the end of the movie setting up Trek 3.0?
I’m sure Bob and Alex will be able to put a novel twist in there somewhere to make it fresh and ‘new’.

270. Anthony Pascale - June 16, 2010

Hi Bob

It is always nice to see you drop by and interact with the fans. Yes it does seem the poll indicates going a bit darker, not that movies should be made based on polling of course!

And of course ‘dark’ is a simplistic term. But when i voted for ‘a little darker’ i meant ‘more complex’. As you and Alex have pointed out, the origin story is behind you. Now you are free to add nuance and complexity to the characters. But in the end, I do believe that Star Trek must always have a core of hope, that is what the franchise is all about, hope for the future. But that doesn’t mean that all the characters need to be perfect.

271. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - June 16, 2010

@270

I couldnt have said it better. More Complex is always a plus!

272. ML31 - June 16, 2010

Just spend some money on an engineering set and we can pretend the brewery never happened!

273. S. John Ross - June 16, 2010

I’d just like to see the characters challenged this time.

And I don’t mean “another snarling threat shows up, to be defeated by a series of silver platters handed to the protagonists at nauseating angles to make it feel challenging.”

274. VZX - June 16, 2010

I’m really surprised that the poll is showing “A little darker.”

I thought that Star Trek fans were optimistic about the future and enjoyed the exploration part of the Trek stories as opposed to death and destruction. Huh. Go figure.

275. S. John Ross - June 16, 2010

#274: “I thought that Star Trek fans were optimistic about the future and enjoyed the exploration part of the Trek stories as opposed to death and destruction.”

The poll is about tone, broadly, and doesn’t specify “death and destruction.” The last movie had death and destruction a’plenty and it came across as frothy and trivial. I think many of us who fancy a “darker” sequel aren’t specifically hoping for “death and destruction” (I’d just as soon see less of it, since it’s easy, and I’m not a fan of easy) but substantial character drama we can sink our teeth into.

276. Dan - June 16, 2010

Star Trek isn’t supposed to be dark, well not as dark as the Dark Knight. Star Trek is supposed to be smart, funny, and inspirational, exciting, makes us learn about ourselves, our humanity!

277. frankie fox - June 16, 2010

How about this..
very dark, with Kirk going rogue and we wind up with the evil empire of the alternate world.. but make No. 3 at the same time, equally dark, but with a restoration of the original time line. Hmm?

I am a bad boy, no?

278. dmduncan - June 16, 2010

@256: Thanks!!!

279. Yammer - June 16, 2010

243: terrific post.

I slightly disagree with “political drama” being taboo. I certainly do not want to see anything obvious or preachy — even XI was a bit on the nose for me regarding the allegory. And we do not want to go the way of the Matrix, which dissipated the momentum of the fantastic original by delving deeply into the imaginary backdrop at the expense of character development and interaction.

But, I do think that what science fiction does best is serve as allegory, as a way of dealing with issues from a different angle. Rendering the Vulcans homeless certainly opens up tremendous storytelling opportunities to examine what it means to be a refugee, in a persecuted diaspora, and maybe to examine what it would mean to be a colonizing power (“I have found a suitable planet…”).

But if I were Boborci et al, I would hold that one off for another film yet because then we would be getting a multi-film arc, and for some reason I think that smacks of TV series rather than movie.

I agree with the sentiment of getting away from the trope of World-Threatening Villain Du Jour and finding another source of conflict. As David Gerrold points out in his first Trek book, good drama in Trek comes down to Kirk making hard choices. It is heroic of Kirk to dive after Sulu, but that was his “impulse to leap without looking”; what would be really meaty drama is Kirk making the impossible choice. Prime Directive vs preventing genocide; saving his ship vs saving his friends.

Plotwise, seems to me that TOS got some good stories out of the Enterprise as an imperfect arbiter of disputes. Maybe we could have something like Piece of the Action, only good.

I would also like to see the use of truly mind-bending FX. It was wonderful and necessary to see big ship engagements in Trek09, but with today’s technology we could put the crew into impossible environments. You know that litho by Escher where people are walking around in a house with variable gravity directions? Like that.

280. Yammer - June 16, 2010

con’t

I am full of eye deers…

Anyhoo, another suggestion Boborci, or observation, is that space opera feels hokey and dumb because aliens are not alien enough. They are us, in latex makeup. I certainly don’t mind that for Federation members, but science fiction opens the door for far more radical modes of being, not just fancy gadgets. As much as science fiction is an opportunity for allegory, Trek is also an opportunity for speculative thought-experiments.

What if a species worshipped death rather than life, or sought dishonour rather than honour? What if they perceived more than our three (or four) dimensions? They would be truly alien, as opposed to the cod-Orientalism that passes for aliens in most SF series.

281. FromtheFuture - June 16, 2010

…of course, I should point out that in 2019 there will be a major uprising between Star Wars and Star Trek fans which will result in a unified group addicted to both….aw, hell….who am I kidding…it’s happened already and the sides never really do get together, but remain divided like Charlie Sheen and any female he has ever associated with…..

282. moauvian waoul - June 16, 2010

Trek 2: Smart, sexy, serious. In short, make it for adults. The kiddies will just have to keep up, like we had to. Some of us don’t live in the suburbs. Don’t even want to. I like my sharp edges.

283. Thorny - June 16, 2010

279… I can never again see the illustration of the Escher house without thinking of “Futurama” and Bender falling up, down, and across stairs while Fry tells the real estate agent, “I don’t think we want to pay for a dimension we won’t use.”

Anyway. we’ll see how well such bizarre dimension-bending imagery plays out in “Inception” next month. Frankly, I’m not excited by it, and I hope Trek 2012 doesn’t go overboard with the visual effects just to keep up with the Jones (the Avatars and Alice In Wonderlands of the world.) The effects should assist the storytelling, not overwhelm it.

284. Yammer - June 16, 2010

283, right of course, not a giant FX reel but a story which is invigorating and which can bring us Strange New Worlds, part of the mission statement of Trek.

It seems odd that we are still basically watching WW2 style action in Trek, just in space. We have gravity, normal planes of up and down, battleship and airplane action. That’s fine, I groove on it, it is just old hat.

285. Robofuzz - June 16, 2010

We need Klingons. The Klingons had Narada and it’s crew for 20 years at Rura Pente. Surely they gleaned some advantage over the federation that put them ahead in the Federation/Klingon cold war that was so much a part TOS. Just imagine what the Russians would have done with today’s technology during the Cuban Missle Crisis.

I can think of lots of possibilities: Klingons with 24th century cloaking technology, improved disrupters, etc. That kind of technology would shift the balance of power and make the Federation the underdogs. Think of the TOS episodes where the Klingons and Federation were competing with each other for a planet – now reimagine those with the Klingons having a technological advantage.

I could see Spock Prime violating the non-interference directive to save the Federation by imparting to them technology that would rebalance the two sides.

Just a few thoughts.

286. StarFuryG7 - June 16, 2010

#256. red dead ryan
“Many times on this site you have explained Bob’s time travel mechanisms better than he has!”

The one time I was here to see it, it was a lot like watching someone blowing bubbles under water until they were out of air, only to then realize they were too far from the surface and without an oxygen tank.

And if you’ve got someone doing a better job of “explaining” a movie than one of its writers, that’s probably a good indicator that the writers could have done a better job on the script, although in this case they actually wanted ambiguity unfortunately.

287. Rusty0918 - June 16, 2010

Well, Orci…

If you are listening here…

You should put in another female crewmember (NOT Yeoman Rand or Nurse Chapel). I keep suggesting this one to you: have her be chief of security (no more Cupcake), get her some pants (no wimpy miniskirt), and make her a lieutenant commander. Ali Larter or Anna Torv anyone? Oh, and don’t make her anyone’s love interest.

That of course and a better engineering set.

You can have Khan in for all I care and have all the lens flares you want. You can even have Spock having all-out sex with Uhura. But these two suggestions are the top!

288. virgin vulcan basement nerd - June 16, 2010

Space Hippies.

289. moauvian waoul - June 16, 2010

Cause and effect. Events that transpired in the first movie should play out in the second, giving it more weight and realism. Perhaps the balance of power has shifted. Perhaps the Vulcan plight will lead to conflict. This story has yet to be fully explored.

290. Yammer - June 16, 2010

287

The brewery set is “canon” now as I understand the term. If it was shown, then that is how it is, or will be, or whatever.

However, like with TOS, they could build a secondary engineering section which might be more compact or more futuristic or more of whatever it is that people expected.

291. Jim Nightshade - June 17, 2010

I dont think Klignons should have any advanced tech due to having the naradu for two decades-remember the klignons never got access to it-which was how nero finally managed to escape-however-the naradu had borg tech–maybe that borg tech when in trouble as in end if movie-could have signaled to borg in this universe causing this borg to be aware of starfleet 85 plus years early–so we can see what kirk would do fighting the borg even tho he never did in the prime universe–borg queen origin type story-already done in one of the trek manga books-i also think the repercussions from the 1st film need to be shown-good luck to orci prime n co-

292. Admiral_Bumblebee - June 17, 2010

Klingons invading Earth and enslaving the humans.
Enterprise comes home after a classic TOS-style mission of exploration on an unknown world.
Crew is captured and tries to free earth.
Enterprise blows up.
Bones dies (“I am dead, Jim!”).

293. Admiral_Bumblebee - June 17, 2010

Oh and I forgot: Prime Kirk and Prime Spock show up to save day :)

Put Nimoy and Shatner in the movie!!!!!

294. Pierre - June 17, 2010

To Boborci:

Make a somber movie if wished, but optimistic at end
Klingons and Romulans are at the heart of Trek
Use known soundtrack for Klingons/Romulans
Kirk encounters Klingons/Romulans on first mission
Alien guest star must be very impressive as a K/R
S/U wedding stopped due to Klingons encounter
McCoy helpless – Uhura dies (character overshadows the main three)
No time travel
No flares
Main story to be timely (Ecological disaster on earth?)
Kirk & Spock save earth, again

295. Kenneth Of Borg - June 17, 2010

Given that the next film has to be Klingon what do you do for comic relief? I suggest you add a little Ferengi. They stand in such contrast to the Klingon.

296. Kenneth Of Borg - June 17, 2010

Did someone say Ferengi?

297. Trek Lady - June 17, 2010

You all *do* realize there are serious issues with “writers” actually using specific ideas from fans…these little things called “lawsuits”? That is why authors generally will not read fanfiction – because it gives them plausible deniability if their OWN idea should in any way mirror a fan story. That way the fan cannot come back and SUE for having their story idea used without compensation.

May sound crazy, but it has happened.

298. Admiral_Bumblebee - June 17, 2010

Why not make it a two part movie?
Part 1:
- Klingons invade the Federation, attack Earth and enslave humans – this could be due to the lack of protection from the Vulcans…
- The Enterprise is on a typical TOS-exploration mission and returns to Earth only to find it invaded by Klingons.
- The crew is captured and taken to forced labor by the Klingon “gouvernor”
- The crew escapes, manages to reclaim the Enterprise and flees, destroying the flagship of the Klingons

Part 2:
- The Enterprise and some other Federations ships that managed to flee are now outlaws as there is no Federation anymore. The Klingons rule over the Alpha-Quadrant.
- Kirk and the others plan for an attack to end the reign of the Klingons
- They assault Qo’noS, destroy the shipyards of the Klingons and take the Emperor hostage
- The final battle is between the Klingon “gouvernor” on Earth and Kirk, during which the Enterprise could either be destroyed or badly damaged

If the third Star Trek-movie would be the last, it could be even more epic, with the only way to stop the Klingons being Kirk traveling back in time to the point where his father died. He sacrifices himself and the Enterprise to stop the Narada before it can destroy the Kelvin, thus correcting the timeline so that Vulcan will not be destroyed and the Klingons cannot invade the Federation.

299. SDF - June 17, 2010

I have an idea. Since the timeline has changed why not bring back the alien villain from the Star Trek The Next Generation first season episode Conspiracy? There’s your dark theme right there.

300. virgin vulcan basement nerd - June 17, 2010

City on the Edge of Forever: The Movie.

Starring Jack Black as Captain James T. Kirk
Tom Hanks as Mr. Spock.
With Karl Urban as Leonard McCoy.
And featuring Gemma Arterton as Edith Keeler.

Wow! This started out as a joke but now I’m thinking I’d be lots of awesome….

301. virgin vulcan basement nerd - June 17, 2010

^ It’d, not I’d.

302. Buzz Cagney - June 17, 2010

#297 there are plenty of posters from outside the US on forums who would be happy enough to say ‘hey, I reckon that Orci guy read my post cos thats exactly what I wanted to see in the movie. Wow, how cool is that!’
without making the very next telephone call they make to a Law firm!
And I’m sure there are plenty of Americans that would see it the same way. At least i hope there are!
Besides, Bob has already listed us all as ‘consultants’ so I’m sure his lawyers would say we went in knowing we were being, well, consulted!

303. Buzz Cagney - June 17, 2010

#296 yes they did. Best ignore them. ;-)

304. moauvian waoul - June 17, 2010

Which is why general opinions like: should the movie be darker or a light-hearted romp, or some combination, and which characters we would like to are likely to be better recieved, rather than a plot or other more specific ideas. Though some of these ideas are interesting to read.

305. Buzz Cagney - June 17, 2010

As ‘consultants’ I do hope we will be getting a bit more than general opinions to feed on.
On second thoughts perhaps we’d end up with Star Trek 2.0: The Edsel Project, so perhaps we best leave it to the experts!

306. Desstruxion - June 17, 2010

Hey Mr. Orci, after you all get through re-imagining Star Trek (good work so far) could you please re-do Farscape? I miss it. Firefly as well? Space 1999 too. Course it’d have to be renamed Space 2099.

307. dmduncan - June 17, 2010

@297: I don’t think internet forum posts are copyright protected. You post at your own risk. As a fan, I experience my reward as the opportunity to contribute to the discussion.

308. FromtheFuture - June 17, 2010

In the year 2050 you will meet a “Borg” like species, called the Gramallan. They are not nearly as terrifiying as the Borg…and play a mean hand of Uno.

309. Rusty0918 - June 17, 2010

#290

Well, sometimes things aren’t that consistent. I mean for crying out loud, the BOP set changed from TSFS to TVH. So, that somewhat invalidates your argument.

But the female chief of security idea, that would be a big plus in my opinion for the next movie.

310. Buzz Cagney - June 17, 2010

#306 they will need to hit 40 years old before B&A would be interested.
;-))

311. S. John Ross - June 17, 2010

#307: “: I don’t think internet forum posts are copyright protected.”

Everything is, and everything isn’t. Anything written (even a tweet … even bathroom graffiti … can anyone tell the difference between the two anyway?) is automatically under copyright. But … it’s normally a moot point since copyright law really only kicks in, in practice, when large sums are at stake (federal courts don’t have time to dilly-dally because someone’s poem was used without permission on someone else’s poetry site, and things get even less convenient when crossing national boundaries, Berne Convention or no Berne Convention).

The more relevant point for this forum is that creative _ideas_ are never copyright protected, only works/expressions are. Ideas, similarly, may not be patented (only specific workings of them), and ideas may not be trademarked (though you can design a trademark to represent one) and ideas are not part of trade dress. Ideas, while we may treasure them in general, have no specific legal value or identity (by necessity – the lines are just too blurry).

The idea of a “they stole my idea” lawsuit is functionally an urban legend. For anyone to sue anyone for ripping them off, they need to have a strong case detailing, point by point, how a _work_ is a copy of another _work,_ and the similarities need to be strong, numerous, and clear to a judge who has more interesting things to think about. And even then, the side with the most expensive lawyer will most likely prevail.

Disclaimer: I ain’t no lawyer and me not no gud smart things. But I’ve been working in various forms of publishing for a couple of decades now, so I at least know the song and dance the legal departments go on with …

312. Trek Lady - June 17, 2010

311

“The idea of a “they stole my idea” lawsuit is functionally an urban legend.”

I am not saying the lawsuits had any merit. I am not saying they were a good idea. Frankly, I think they were silly. I agree with the posters who would be pleased to see their ideas up on the screen….

.. but authors HAVE been sued by fans who felt their ideas were stolen – and whether those suits were trivial or not, or even tossed out, authors and publishers till had to pay lawyers to make those determinations.

313. Harry Ballz - June 17, 2010

Trek Lady, I posted the very same observation months ago! It’s mine! You’ll be hearing from my lawyer!! :>)

314. Daoud - June 17, 2010

Okay, if to borrow from someone good, Mark Twain… I wish Boborci would take this quote to heart when penning Star Trek, Mark 2:

“Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.”

Explore. Dream. Discover. That’s Star Trek, the way it should be.

315. dmduncan - June 17, 2010

Aa©, Bb©, Cc©, Dd©, Ee©, Ff©, Gg©, Hh©, Ii©, Jj©, Kk©, Ll©,Mm©, Nn©, Oo©, Pp©, Qq©, Rr©, Ss©, Tt©, Uu©, Vv©, Ww©, Xx©, Yy©, Zz©.

I don’t know why I didn’t think of this sooner.

I am going to be SO rich.

316. Harry Ballz - June 17, 2010

Yeah, on alphabet soup alone!

317. Yammer - June 17, 2010

309

Did the set change? Never noticed. Great Bird said it was not a canon movie anyway…

As for female chief of security, why not, but I have no inherent interest in that position. Onboard cop is probably something they need, to police the brig and to handle policing situations as they arise. And to die, being red shirts. But not someone in the command loop. (Technically neither is Bones but he is always around as Kirk’s confidente/PITA.)

318. Agent 1 of 12 - June 17, 2010

I love the idea of a 2nd Alternate time line Star Trek, and some of these ideas are great, but don’t we agree we just love this genre. I have found the inorder to develop characters in a movie beyond what was done in this ST2009, it takes time and more time. A TV series is what is needed. I know there have been issues in the past, but this is a brand new STAR TREK universe. It can go in any direction and the foundations that were laid out in the previous stories and ideology is changing and has changed. There is a new audience and now that they are watching Trek can servive on the televison once again. Lay the ground work then bring in the movie. Take it slow let it live in the hearts of this new generation as it has in the past generations.

My opinion….

319. dmduncan - June 17, 2010

I WOULD love to see Sam Rockwell reprise his Galaxy Quest role in ST.2012 as a neurotic chief of security who is nervously aware of the life expectancy of red shirts and who is determined to survive no matter what.

320. boborci - June 17, 2010

Noted, everybody. Thanks for opining.

321. boborci - June 17, 2010

262. VZX – June 16, 2010

Read ‘em all!

322. DeShon Steinblatt - June 17, 2010

—-200. NuFan – June 15, 2010

They have plenty of Star Trek for themselves already.

Well now, this is actually quite true. Hadn’t thought of it that way, but it is.

323. Harry Ballz - June 17, 2010

Bob

how about this……….the Gorn have been assimilated by the Borg, and have now teamed up with the Xindi to attack the Federation. The Enterprise, while responding, comes across the Botany Bay and revives the crew. Kirk enlists Khan’s help in defeating their common enemy. Big fight scene at the end Kirk/Khan and crew against the lizard/robot thingamajigs.

Well, “what do you think of my solution?”

324. S. John Ross - June 17, 2010

#312: “.. but authors HAVE been sued …”

Of course. Hence my use of the term “functionally,” in relation to some of the fairly outrageous beliefs that float around fandom.

325. Desstruxion - June 17, 2010

What about a borgified Zephram Cochrane?

326. red dead ryan - June 17, 2010

Harry, have you been drinking again? :-)

327. Harry Ballz - June 17, 2010

Ryan

why, yes, why do you ask?

328. red dead ryan - June 17, 2010

Just wonderin’!

329. somethoughts - June 17, 2010

Going through all the sequel possibilities in my head, feel free to laugh and make fun of them lol

1. Borgified Nero and Re imagined Klingons
2. Khan and morality of genetic engineering to better ourselves
3. Indiana Jones Space quest movie, going from planet to planet, solving galaxtic puzzle to help save a dying planet(s)/race(s) from doom.
4. The departed type movie for Star Trek, internal struggles of the Federation, USS Enterprise battles other Federation ships a la WOK
5. Enterprise destroyed in first few minutes of film, surprise torpedo attack by a cloaked ship and the start of the cold war with the Klingons
6. Crew goes on a insane mission to save Kirk from aging illness, hunting, gathering type movie with heavy costs.
7. Kirk and Spock are invited to a death match to save x because of y and z
8. Time Travel to popular periods in earths history to prevent artifacts and relics from being destroyed and avert invasion.

Feel free to pick your favorites

330. LorienTheYounger - June 17, 2010

It’s good to go a little darker. Not too much, though — otherwise you end up with the equivalent of “Quantum of Solace”. Too much dark sucks all the fun out of the movie.

331. FarStrider - June 17, 2010

@boborci: If you are still reading, here is my contribution to “Star Trek 2: The Search for Plot”. . .I believe you have to deal with the consequences of the first movie. The Vulcans are now an endangered species; in 129 years, the Romulans will be in the same boat (and in this timeline, Vulcans will be too busy trying to save themselves to think of surperfluous stuff like Red Matter – which probably is now outlawed, anyway). And while one might think that 129 years is enough time to find a planet, build the infrastructure capable of moving billions of people, build the infrastructure on a new world to accept those billions of people and then MOVE billions of people, there is one major hurdle: the Klingons see Nero’s spectacular escape as an act of war and are quite happy to oblige since they think the Romulans are obviously building super-weapons, and the Klingons a) want to stop the Romulans from deploying more advanced weaponry and b) want those weapons for themselves; so now the Romulans have incentive to ally with the Federation and the Vulcans (the enemy of my enemy is my friend) and the Klingons have reasons to want to stop that from happening. There are also factions within the Federation, the Romulans and the Vulcans who are against this alliance: Feds and Romulans don’t trust one another, and certain Vulcans (maybe even Spock) worry that reconciling with the Romulans would mean losinig their culture. So you have a “Journey to Babel” type situation where certain someones are trying to derail the peace process, no one trust each other, and the Admiralty is ride-herding Kirk because while it’s good PR to reward the young hero who saved the Earth from destruction with a captaincy, no one really believes he’s ready for the responsibility (and Kirk has to fail at something in order to grow, really). However, the Federation’s flagship has to be a part of this most momentous occasion and so our rather untested crew is dealing with all of this while trying to stop a war from breaking out. . . Oh. . . no to Kirk Prime, no TNG villains. . . and if you can avoid it, No Khan. . .(although I’ve actually thought of a fairly credible way to deal with him too. . . maybe for the 3rd movie ;-) ) This is a new Universe, let’s tell new stories in different ways. . .

~FS

332. Malcontent - June 18, 2010

I just hope it centres around some hammy megalomaniacal dude or strangely anthropomorphic alien force that wants to destroy the Earth for no good reason.

That’s what Star Trek is all about.

333. somethoughts - June 18, 2010

#332

You should re watch TOS and TNG episodes

334. Malcontent - June 18, 2010

I didn’t say Trek 09 was the only one to go down that path. Trek movies are usually rubbish, and I thought 09 was pretty good. It wasn’t deep though.

It would be great if a Trek movie could approach the sophistication and thoughtfulness of some of the Trek episodes, albeit not all or even most of them.

335. philpot - June 18, 2010

was thinking if ST09 was more ‘TOS’ in regards to the whole design, look and feel (uniforms, equipment, nancells, sound FX, lighting etc) then maybe the sequel could be more TOS-MOVIE inspired in relation to all that stuff

Obviously there were a lot of references, nods etc to the movies in ST09 but really it was a big budget updating of the 60s tv show – so perhaps the sequel could be like a big budget updating of the 80s original crew movies I-VI (or more specifically II, III & IV)…im not saying have the crew decked out in TWOK uniforms and have Pine sporting a thick black ‘fro but the uniforms could be more of that style (and have similar field jackets) the look of the bridge could be less bright/more TWOK, the sound FX like the warps/beaming/phasers could be more movie style, the warp FX could leave that lingering rainbow trail behind, mushroom style spacedock with the massive interior housing all the ships (instead of the K7 style), movie characters like C Marcus, Terrel, Kruge and movie ships like Excelsior, Reliant, Grissom, Klingon BOPs (obviously made over Abraprise style), more Horner-esque music etc etc etc etc…maybe even use the movie font instead of TOS?

perhaps thats what the end of Pike in the TMP style admiral uniform was suggesting – that the original crew movie version of star trek has been fast tracked (due to neros interference)

dunno if that makes sense…

336. janice - June 18, 2010

#261—JulienBashir

Absolutely Agree!!
I want Pike back and NOT in any wheelchair! That would be a total waste of Bruce Greenwood! Pike should be recovered by then!!

337. chuckie root - June 18, 2010

ST:11 was a dark and sucky place to be if you had pointed ears. Romulus is destroyed in the Prime time line and Vulcan in the alternate time line.

I’m kinda hoping they get it over with already and kill everyone else off and start fresh with the next film. Or at least have the crew marooned on some uncharted island with an underground Slusho machine and Tom Cruise playing an android version of himself.

338. Harry Ballz - June 18, 2010

“Tom Cruise playing an android version of himself”

…….and we could tell the difference HOW?

339. Chris Quigley - June 18, 2010

Now that timelines have changed and EVERYONES future is to be re-written, this could be a great oppertunity to bring in Characters from ALL Star Trek series. For Example Data could now feasibly be created at an earlier date. Odo could arrive a lot earlier but know exactly what and who he is. completley new Adversaries can be created. I think Abrams done a fantastic job with his interpretation and should be allowed to continue to develope it in his own unique way. His choice of actors impressed not only me but I’m sure many others but I did have my initial doubts. I don’t think he could have made any better choices. I can only ever dream of working on a Star Trek project but would at least like to be a fly on the wall on the next set. Whatever they decide, I am sure that the Majority for Fans and film followers will not be disappointed. GOOD LUCK TO THEM ALL……………Maybe they could find me a job over here in the UK connected with it in some way. Don’t ask, You don’t get!

340. S. John Ross - June 18, 2010

#338: “…….and we could tell the difference HOW?”

Due to legacy code lingering in its OS, the android would occasionally display recognizable human emotion.

341. Harry Ballz - June 18, 2010

Ah, but what if said legacy code was derived from a being totally bereft of human emotion to begin with? What if the original copy was simply imitating human emotion, like a parrot making noises that sound like words?

342. S. John Ross - June 18, 2010

#342: “What if the original copy was simply imitating human emotion, like a parrot making noises that sound like words?”

Ah. Well, in that case, the real Cruise and the android Cruise would be indistinguishable without a scan … and with sufficient masking technology, perhaps even the scan could be fooled.

Chilling notion: this may already have happened.

343. Scott - June 18, 2010

I do think that this next movie should be a little bit darker, however I don’t think that it should wipe away the humor and fun of Star Trek. The cast is young, have them in some hand to hand combat. The big question always is, what will the next one be about? It seems a popular theme in a lot of peoples minds is Kahn. Personaly I like the idea. I wouldn’t do the same story as the 80′s movie, but I would have Kahn as the villin. In the series, the Enterprise found Kahns’ ship; well what if in the movie it didn’t. What if anther ship found Kahn and his crew, but this crew couldn’t stop kahn, and kahn took control of that ship seeking to control Earth. How does the Enterprise fit into this? You could say that Kahn falls for a woman on the other ship, and while in battle with the Enterprise, she is killed. The first movie was great, but this next movie needs to be even better, it needs the action, the humor, and a bit more of the darkness.

344. StarFuryG7 - June 18, 2010

312. Trek Lady
“I am not saying the lawsuits had any merit. I am not saying they were a good idea. Frankly, I think they were silly. I agree with the posters who would be pleased to see their ideas up on the screen….
.. but authors HAVE been sued by fans who felt their ideas were stolen – and whether those suits were trivial or not, or even tossed out, authors and publishers till had to pay lawyers to make those determinations.”

J. Michael Straczynski was always especially wary of this, particularly back when he was producing and writing for “Babylon 5″. There was even an instance wherein he was actually in the process of writing a script when someone decided to introduce a story idea on one of the message boards he frequented that was too much like the script he was already writing for one of the show’s episodes, at which point he tossed what he was already working on and wrote another script in its place, feeling the one he was already working on had been compromised by the guy who posted his story idea.

That’s how concerned he was about a potential lawsuit.

345. StarFuryG7 - June 18, 2010

339. Chris Quigley
“Now that timelines have changed and EVERYONES future is to be re-written”

Dude, please …don’t even get me started on that again . . .

346. Red Skirt - June 18, 2010

#344 – ”That’s how concerned he was about a potential lawsuit.”

Yes, but that’s small potatoes for the writers who penned the original screenplay “The Clonus Hor –” … I mean “The Island”.

347. VZX - June 18, 2010

321. boborci – June 17, 2010

Oh. Well. My bad, I guess.

I’m glad you read em all. It’s awesome that a film-maker will take the time to actually listen to their audience. It is much appreciated. But please don’t pander to the fans, just make a great Star Trek movie!

348. keenan bryson - June 18, 2010

Please go with the Khan story and really make him evil. Khan was twisted in the old movie but I want to see him try to take over the Enterprise after being rescued from the Botany Bay and trying to murder Kirk with a 2010 twist. This story has so much potential and the 60′s version while great couldnt push the tale to the limit because of the times and the money; now the story can really be told on a level folks never imagined. I would also like to see these characters relationships and friendships with each other REALLY defined in this sequel. I would love to see Kirk meet Dr. Marcus and maybe in the 3rd they get hitched or she gets knocked up and leaves him; your choice. Maybe that’s a good ending to #2; Dr. Marcus gets knocked up and tells him he is too reckless to be a daddy and leaves. Above all I want to see MORE McCoy/Kirk/Spock interaction. That was the strongest element of the series and the old movies.

349. StarFuryG7 - June 18, 2010

#346. Red Skirt

In all fairness to Joe Straczynski, I don’t think he tossed out the script entirely but rather tossed it aside temporarily after the message poster posted a similar story idea to the message board/newsgroup that Joe frequented. I think he got the guy to sign a waiver, and then produced the episode later on …and if I’m remembering correctly the episode that had been put on hold over that situation turned out to be “Passing Through Gethsemane” –one of the best episodes that series had to offer, so it wasn’t a total loss ultimately. It just required some patience and a little bit of special handling in order to proceed and eventually get it produced.

I love that particular episode too –it’s one of my favorites.

350. Robert - June 18, 2010

The new origin movie really sucked donkey d**k.I was really disappointed in the way it turned out.The ship was on earth ? Come on people!Every idiot knows that something that large has to be built in space.And as for the way the crew met,that was rubbish.Everybody who ever followed ST knows how ,when and where they all met.Make a better movie or don’t try at all!

351. somethoughts - June 19, 2010

#347

I don’t think boborci is pandering to the fans, he’s keeping a open mind and respects the fans opinions and ideas. Fans have good and bad ideas, I am sure he and his team will filter them.

352. somethoughts - June 19, 2010

#350

I believe boborci explained that the final assembly occurred in space but was built in iowa as a way to honor George Kirks heroic sacrifice.

Not everyone will enjoy a relaunch of a restaurant, the goal is to appease the masses which they done, not to singular folks like you :)

Reviews: Check
Box Office: Check
Successful reboot leading to sequel: Check
Foreign Box Office: needs work
Making Robert happy: impossible

353. Harry Ballz - June 19, 2010

Final result: Priceless!

354. StarFuryG7 - June 19, 2010

@ #350.

I have no problem accepting the new Trek on the basis of it all being set in an alternate universe. Unfortunately nothing in the movie actually stands to indicate that as being the case.

355. S. John Ross - June 20, 2010

#346: Naughty, naughty :)

#352: A restaurant? :/

356. Basement Blogger - June 20, 2010

Here’s some suggestions from a Trekker.

1. Stop trying to mix “Star Wars” with “Star Trek.” “Star Trek” is science fiction. Remember the series had science advisors. Star Trek has stood for great science fiction for over forty years. See “City on the Edge of Forever” “Doomsday Machine” and TNG episodes “The Chase”, “The Best of Both Worlds” “The Inner Light” etc.

2. Don’t be afraid of letting the audience think. There was some confusion over Nero’s motivation which was explained in the comic book prequel. The alternate timeline plot device could have used a couple more lines. Don’t make the same mistake as “Lost.” by not explaing things. Bad Robot likes MacGuffins. You’re not making “Kiss Me Deadly”, avoid them.

3. Complaints about the tone of the first one are primarily the way you wrote the young KIrk. He’s a punk. In the series, Kirk had wisdom. See “Arena” “Journey to Babel” etc. I agree that Trek always had comedy but it’s sarcastic tone in the your film that’s bothersome. Avoid the “Galaxy Quest” influence. And by the way, I enjoyed “Galaxy Quest.”

4. Stop trying to make another “Khan.” We’ve already seen the plot about the guy seeking revenge. See “Insurrection”, “Nemesis” “Star Trek”

5 Stay true to Roddenberry. The Great Bird of the Galaxy” had ideas on racism, war, the ecology, etc. He wanted to end racism by putting together a multi-racial crew. Mankind was working together for a greater good. The “Doomsday Machine” was a nice essay on arms control. “Star Trek IV” was about saving the whales! By the way, that’s a relevant theme in light of the oil spill. Unfortunately, it might be old news by the time your movie comes out. And about that “prime directive’ stuff….

6. Stay true to the canon. Okay, you’ve blown up Vulcan, leaving the Federation to the protection from the Klingons and Romulans from the pig guys Tellarites! Yikes. I smell bacon. Thankfully, you explained that the old timeline still exists. However, don’t go wild with your new timeline, like making Picard a vintner.

7. Get some space exploration in the films. Isn’t that the primary goal of Starfleet? And you don’t have to put in a lot. Just enough, to make young kids yearn to look to the stars like we did when we first saw the star field in the opening TV credits. There are some in NASA who cite Star Trek as their influence in getting into science.

357. Cygnus-X1 - June 20, 2010

@ 356. Basement Blogger –

Well said. I don’t agree with you about the tone in the first film—I was neither bothered by Kirk being a punk in his youth (he is considerably older in TOS, and has had time to mature) nor with any sarcasm in the film—but I think the rest of your points are more or less on the mark.

I particularly agree with you about adding a few lines of explication or amplification about the alternate timeline, as well as Nero’s motivation seeming weak in the film. You’re the only person, besides myself, whom I have seen to take issue with Nero’s motivation in the film. Orci has never addressed the issue, which seems odd to me because it’s one of the more substantial issues to be taken with the film, I think.

The best explanation that I have seen, in rejoinder to my complaint about Nero’s motivation, was that Nero, as his Roman namesake, is written to be an irrational, crazy berserker who doesn’t need much motivation to go on a genocidal rampage. But, that seems pretty weak, to me.

358. FarStrider - June 20, 2010

@357 Nero’s motivation: I’m really not certain what more you want said about it. . . Vulcans and Romulans have enough bad blood between them that those who became Romulans left their world of origin nearly 2000 years before. . .and while the Romulans and the Federation were reluctant allies during the Dominion War, their relationship, at best, is still strained. . .Spock promises to save Romulus, gets there too late, but still has to deploy the red matter to save all the other worlds (including Federation ones) in the path of the hypernova. What does that look like to someone who has lost everything that ever mattered to him when his world died? To someone raised in a militaristic society like Romulus? It looks like the Federation and the Vulcans got rid of an enemy, and made it look like an accident. . . for me, Nero’s motivation is a whole lot more understandable than Khan’s ever was. . . Khan chose his exile, what happened to his planet was no one’s fault; to a Romulan, a simple miner, however, the Federation and Vulcan promised to save his people, and didn’t. . .and got rid of an enemy. Sounds like a pretty good motivation to me.

I also don’t understand what more amplification you need for the alternate timeline. . . the actors basically break the fourth wall and wink when they explained it. I assume you understood that when McCoy saves Edith Keeler in “City on the Edge of Forever” that creates an alternate timeline? And that when Kirk and Spock use the Guardian of Forever to go back before Edith’s death to ensure her demise, they return to their rightful timeline. . . the way the movie uses “time travel” there is still an alternate timeline where Edith survives, the Nazis win WWII and there is no Federation, we just don’t get to see that timeline because our heroes inhabit another. . .

~FS

359. moauvian waoul - June 21, 2010

358. About Nero… What you say is true but… Nero’s reasoning or lack of wasn’t throughly explained in the movie. That’s the promblem. Not everyone read the comic book. Nor should they have to.

360. Cygnus-X1 - June 21, 2010

358. FarStrider

–Nero’s motivation: I’m really not certain what more you want said about it.–

What you just said about it was what I wanted said about it—if that is, in fact, what the writers meant for Nero’s motivation.

All that’s said of it in the film is that Nero decides to take revenge upon the person who was trying to save his home world but failed in his task, which is pretty weak motivation for genocide and planet-destruction. Simply adding a bit of context from the Romulan/Vulcan/Human back-story, along with the bit about Nero believing that Spock willfully, purposefully and intentionally allowed Romulus to be destroyed, or that Spock gave Romulus lesser priority to be saved than the other worlds—or whatever the writers meant to portray—would have made all the difference.

As it stands in the film, Nero decides to destroy an entire planet because one of the indigenous race of that planet tried to save Nero’s home, which doesn’t really make that much sense.

As for the alternate time-line, the whole concept might’ve been more compelling with some indication that it was, in fact, an alternate universe whose events were causally separated from those in the Star Trek universe familiar to the audience.

I don’t question or doubt the ability of Trekkies to figure it out, especially if they’d been reading Orci’s detailed synopsis of the MWT hitherto the release of the film, but regarding the film, itself, it might’ve benefited from a couple more lines about it.

361. FarStrider - June 21, 2010

@359, 360: Tell me, how would you have added that information into a 2 hour movie that was already cut as lean as it could possibly be for the whole thing to hang together? How could you do it without turning off the majority of movies goers who were not Trekkers and didn’t want to have a Trek history crammed down their throats; who were sold a movie that explicitly said they *didn’t* have to know anything about Star Trek? I have actually never read the comic books, and at the time I saw the movie didn’t know they existed. *I* was able to figure out Nero’s motivation because I know something about Trek history. But to tell you the truth, most people in the audience didn’t really need more than was on screen because most movies don’t even give their villains that much motivation. . . look at “Wrath of Khan,” for instance: What is Khan’s motivation? His wife died, and Kirk has been out galivanting around the quadrant with ever thinking of Khan again; it’s not Kirk’s fault though, but audiences accept his motivation and that it is a good movie, why? Because Khan quotes “Moby Dick”? or is played by Ricardo Montalban and his pecs of awesomeness?

There seems to be this double standard and I’m not sure where it comes from. If the writers treat you like you have a brain and can figure things out, then it’s bad writing, but if they have no faith in the audience and spell everything out for them, it is still bad writing. . .personally, I’d rather people have faith in my intelligence, than to think I’m too dumb to connect the dots. . .

As for the alternate reality: Uhura and Spock say it’s an alternate reality on the bridge. . . older Spock tells Kirk that his father lived long enough to see him become captain of the Enterprise. . . what else did you need for it to be an alternate reality to you?

~FS

362. Cygnus-X1 - June 21, 2010

361. FarStrider

–what else did you need for it to be an alternate reality to you?–

Nothing. I knew that it was an alternate reality. And the characters told us so, as you mention. But, there are various ways in which reality might be altered; and some elaboration as to the NATURE of the “reality” in the film and how it was an “alternate” of the one with which the audience are familiar would have made the whole “alternate reality” concept more compelling.

–Tell me, how would you have added that information into a 2 hour movie that was already cut as lean as it could possibly be for the whole thing to hang together?…There seems to be this double standard and I’m not sure where it comes from. If the writers treat you like you have a brain and can figure things out, then it’s bad writing, but if they have no faith in the audience and spell everything out for them, it is still bad writing. . .personally, I’d rather people have faith in my intelligence, than to think I’m too dumb to connect the dots. . .–

If you’re asking me to play editor, I obviously can’t without actually watching the entire film and make notes where I’d cut and splice. But, even if I couldn’t find anything to cut—and I doubt that I couldn’t—I don’t think that 2 more minutes of meaningful dialogue would have had a deleterious effect upon the film.

As for a double standard, I don’t believe that there is one. I would love for all writers to treat their audiences as intelligent people. But, asking the audience to connect the dots, when there are no dots, doesn’t do anything for me. If you were able to figure out the subtleties of Nero’s motivation without any clues given as to his reasoning—whatever his reasoning was actually supposed to be—then you’ve a talent that I am lacking. But in the movie that I saw, Nero seeks revenge upon the planet and race of a person who did his best to save Nero’s home. And that motivation left me wanting.

363. Cygnus-X1 - June 21, 2010

P.S. And I don’t see it as likely that a viewer possessing little or no knowledge of the Vulcan/Romulan/Human back-story could possibly have figured out what you propose to have been the nuances of Nero’s motivation in the film, nor would I then draw the conclusion that such viewers are not intelligent; they’re simply not psychics.

364. Yammer - June 21, 2010

363

It’s interesting that fans of ST (who bother to read, and then POST on this Trek site) profess not to understand a straightforward aspect of Trek09, in your case the alternate reality, mentioned at least twice in dialogue.

In understand that regarding what is arguably the best Trek movie made, and invaluable to regenerating cultural relevancy for this dying franchise, a few ingrates must show that they are Trekkier-than-thou by quibbling over these things. Why not quibble over something that is actually contentious, like why there are 800 people on a starship, or how it is that the Enterprise arrived at the Laurentian system but had time to double back and save earth, despite Kirk having argued that the ship could either go to the Laurentian system OR save Earth.

365. Basement Blogger - June 21, 2010

@ 361

There’s nothing wrong with a writer explaining things. Choosing to explain or not to explain both have merit. However, the choice not to explain is more hazardous. For example, “Lost” season six chose to explain very little. You had miraculous cures for paralysis, a person tuning into a flying smoke monster, humans surviving a nuclear explosion etc. All of those mysteries were forced into a contrived saccharine ending. In “2001, A Space Odyssey” there was no explanation of what happened at the end. The big difference is that Kubrick gave you enough clues to figure it out. The Monolith at the begining evolved mankind. The Monolith at the end evolved mankind into a star child. The film was a success. By the way, if you read the 2001 novel, Arthrur C. Clarke explained the end. Both versions are valid artistic expressions.

Perhaps, one of the best examples of a writer successfully explaining a mystery comes from Star Trek. In Star Trek (TOS) “Shore Leave” the away team lands on a planet where mysterious things happen. Giant rabbits, WWII airplanes, knights and old girlfriends appear out of nowhere. Science fiction wrtier and author of the teleplay, Theodore Sturgeon, uses an added character to step out and explain that the planet is an amusement park. Nothing wrong with this approach. In fact, I consider “Shore Leave” one of the classic episodes.

There’s no need to cram a movie into less than two hours. There’s no rule for that. Look at the “Lord of the Rings” films. All three were longer than two hours yet, they were financial and artistic successes.

The one thing that we can all agree on is that the next Star Trek film will not need to tell Kirk or Spocks’ backstory since it has already been done. That will leave time for the writers to expand dialogue and scenes. Regardless, adding dialogue does not make the audience dumber. Thinking about what characters have said is a good thing. Pounding an audience with loud, over the top action is a the thing that can make a movie dumb. (See “G.I. Joe, the Rise of Cobra”) There’s nothing wrong with explaining and expanding a concept. Let the audience breathe and think. Star Trek, the television series, had great dialogue and action.

366. StarFuryG7 - June 21, 2010

364. Yammer
“In understand that regarding what is arguably the best Trek movie made, and invaluable to regenerating cultural relevancy for this dying franchise, a few ingrates must show that they are Trekkier-than-thou by quibbling over these things.”

Whoa –Why is it that you refuse to acknowledge the merit of Cygnus X-1′s two chiefly expressed complaints about the movie and what the script conveys versus what it doesn’t convey? And why do you feel the need to brand people who would express such an opinion as “ingrates” for feeling the way they do? Is it that you honestly fail to see the logic as to why Nero, as a villain, targeting the home world of the individual who actually tried to avert disaster and save Romulus seems specious on the surface, with nothing else for the viewer to actually judge by that stands to support anything else? I sat there in the theater watching the movie thinking the same thing. And I didn’t buy the Comic Book series “Star Trek: Countdown” until months after seeing the movie once it hit theaters; aside from which, that Graphic Novel isn’t officially canon material anyway (nor does it do an especially greater job of expanding on Nero’s singling out Spock for vengeance by destroying Vulcan either).

As for the alternate reality matter at issue here (yet again I might add, without my having been a party to it either by the way), it appears you feel it necessary to label people who dare to express such a view “ingrates” for that as well, meanwhile, the film simply does not convey to the viewer that what’s happening in the movie isn’t the original timeline having been undone and being completely rewritten by the events occurring in the movie. As I’ve pointed out elsewhere on this site fairly recently, there is still disagreement about this in various corners of the fandom even over a year after the film was released. The majority of fans are apparently content to take one of the writers at his word about what is happening in the movie, even though the answer he provides is that both interpretations of the film: the past having been undone and getting rewritten, versus the events taking place in a different, alternate universe from the prime universe fans are already familiar with, are in fact both equally valid. So if both of those interpretations of the film are equally valid, then why is it that the people who are challenging the idea of the original timeline having been erased and rewritten are automatically somehow ‘wrong’, when clearly they aren’t, and that they’re “ingrates” for daring to point out the obvious?

Or could it be that these two issues are actually weaknesses with respect to how the film was written and [deliberately] crafted, and people on your side of the aisle simply can’t stand hearing it for that very reason?

In fact, let me take things even a step further by pointing out another “stupid question” as someone put it to me yesterday elsewhere: why is it that once Spock saw Romulus had already blown up as a result of the star going supernova, and that he wasn’t able to follow through on his plan in time to actually save that planet, that he didn’t simply hightail it out of there and change plans by going back in time via the slingshot effect around the sun until just before the star exploded so he could shoot the red matter into the star then instead? Why does he proceed to shoot the red matter into the star once it’s already too late anyway? Where was the “logic” in that course of action?

Or am I an “ingrate” for daring to ask what amounts to yet another reasonable and fairly obvious question about the film and how it was written?

367. StarFuryG7 - June 21, 2010

365. Basement Blogger
“There’s nothing wrong with a writer explaining things. Choosing to explain or not to explain both have merit. However, the choice not to explain is more hazardous. For example, “Lost” season six chose to explain very little. You had miraculous cures for paralysis, a person tuning into a flying smoke monster, humans surviving a nuclear explosion etc. All of those mysteries were forced into a contrived saccharine ending. In “2001, A Space Odyssey” there was no explanation of what happened at the end. The big difference is that Kubrick gave you enough clues to figure it out. The Monolith at the begining evolved mankind. The Monolith at the end evolved mankind into a star child. The film was a success. By the way, if you read the 2001 novel, Arthrur C. Clarke explained the end. Both versions are valid artistic expressions.”

I like both of your examples here, even though they’re a little awkward in the sense that you’re comparing a TV series that ran for six seasons to a theatrical film, but the manner in which you contrast them in order to make your point is very valid nevertheless.

And I loved the novel to “2001: A Space Odyssey” by the way.

368. braxus - June 21, 2010

2001 was a great movie. So great that todays young folk just don’t get it and are missing out on some real art. Kubrick was a real talent.

369. Cygnus-X1 - June 22, 2010

364. Yammer – June 21, 2010

363

—-It’s interesting that fans of ST (who bother to read, and then POST on this Trek site) profess not to understand a straightforward aspect of Trek09, in your case the alternate reality, mentioned at least twice in dialogue.—-

I professed no such thing. I understood the alternate reality premise perfectly well. I was rejoining a post that discussed ways that the film might have been improved. I greatly enjoyed ST09, but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t have been a better film.

370. Cygnus-X1 - June 22, 2010

—-365. Basement Blogger —-

2001: A Space Odyssey is an interesting example, in that important plot points—those relating to what the obelisk is actually doing—are explained with pictures, symbolism and absolutely no dialogue.

A parallel approach to the “alternate reality” concept of ST09 would have been interesting, but probably too time consuming for the stated purpose of the film.

371. Disinvited - June 22, 2010

People throw this word “franchise” around a lot but I think there’s a lot of confusing and misinformed things associated with it and what it means with regards to STAR TREK.

Referring to STAR TREK as “the franchise” was a purely old Paramount (now renamed CBS) invention that came out of that film unit sometime after the twin successes of TWoK at the box office and the videotape sales of TMP caused Eisner and company to realize that along with the prior successes in television syndication and merchandising it was transforming into a regular reliable revenue stream.

But it should be noted that ST existed many years prior to it becoming a “franchise”. While it is an important development, being “the franchise” is not the be all or end all of what ST was and is. Nor could it have ever been. Despite Disney and many other companies successes in extending them since their invention, copyrights are limited, i.e. they eventually end and take “the franchise” with it.

STAR TREK: THE PHENOMENON was alive and kicking before STAR TREK: THE FRANCHISE, and will continue long after said franchise’s demise.

Perhaps, as some surmise, the vast majority of the fans are now in it for THE FRANCHISE but ST got there built on a foundation of loving fans who supported it , and continue to do so, because of what it was before it became that thing. Having been with that group from when the original series first aired through the odyssey of getting it transformed into a motion picture, I cannot and will not subscribe to this notion that if yet another corporation (This new Paramount if you will or even the old Paramount, CBS.) walks away from it because they fail to find a way to make it work for them, that that will kill STAR TREK.

I mean for God’s sake, the original series is still in television syndication. And even though it’s been mucked around with, so was it in the 70s with each station finding “creative” ways to trim scenes for more commercials. I have to believe that what ever magic it wove back then in spite of how the episodes were being treated is still in effect, even with today’s “creativity”. Granted, I doubt the numbers of new fans attracted will be quite has large without THE FRANCHISE, but I don’t see how the effect could dwindle below that of the 1970s which apparently was exactly the numbers needed to sustain it for at least a decade and very likely more beyond that.

Film franchise death does not equate to STAR TREK fan phenomenon death.

372. Steven Erikson - June 22, 2010

My thanks to all who participated in making this film. Though I write fantasy novels, I’m a huge SF fan and longtime Trekker — cannot wait for the next one.

373. StarFuryG7 - June 22, 2010

369. Cygnus-X1
“I greatly enjoyed ST09, but that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t have been a better film.”

That is something that people intent on loving everything about it fail to grasp apparently.

374. Harry Ballz - June 23, 2010

I think a lot of us are just happy that they got as much right as they did!

375. Borne - June 23, 2010

there are other, less iconic, but equally interesting elements from trek that can be brought in. I firmly believe that while JJ and co can have their fun with Trek, when it comes to the three films being done, i’d like to see them leaving trek as they found it.

Sybok was a greatly underused concept, and I can imagine an exiled vulcan, full of passion and emotion wanting to redeem himself in the eyes of his people, trying to find a way to restore his world and his race, and stopping at nothing to do it. The conflict of two brothers with galactic consequences would be immense.

Ideally, when this trek trilogy is finished, as a fan, i’d want to be able to fire up the Motion Picture and have it continue the story from where JJ and co. leave off.

Imagine Sybok destroys Earth to force the Enterprise crew to help him reset the timeline. This could be what Voyager missed out on with ‘The year of Hell’… the dark science fiction blockbuster that audiences demand, with the strong moral dilemmas and character relationships that the fans demand.

376. StarFuryG7 - June 23, 2010

#374
Uh, that depends upon who you ask actually, Harry, as I know longtime Trek fans who feel this last movie wasn’t at all faithful to TOS in how it was depicted, and while I don’t despise it like some of the people who come to mind, it was kind of a mixed bag for me also because of the change in tone and approach. I realize that by today’s filmmaking standards it wasn’t at all practical or realistic for them to have tried to make a prequel that would have been truly ‘faithful’ to TOS …that would have had to have occurred by the mid-70s while Roddenberry was still alive in order for it to have been done right, nor was that even precisely the goal of Abrams and the studio to start with when they set out to undertake this last project, but there are reasons as to why longtime Trek fans would have had problems with it, because it totally changes what it is they’re already accustomed to when it comes to “Star Trek”, and/or TOS especially.

377. Desstruxion - June 23, 2010

The Sybok idea sounds interesting. The struggle between brothers in the aftermath of Vulcan’s demise with the Enterprise in the middle might make a great story. Not sure about re-setting the timeline though. I think it should flow on it’s new course.

378. moauvian waoul - June 23, 2010

376. Was it old TOS fans who have most of the issues with the movie, or is it the TNG fans? Now my impression is the latter. But maybe I’m mistaken. I often read about the movie being sexy or violent or lacking in moral messages. And though TOS could be preachy a times, this seems more like a TNG trait, along with the more asexual crew.

379. FarStrider - June 23, 2010

@378 You know, I think you just made a really good point. . . from my perusal of various boards, the most vocal detractors of ST09 are those who became fans during the TNG era. . . or are not really big fans of TOS, but the later movies. . .

~FS

380. moauvian waoul - June 23, 2010

At least I know it’s not just me.

381. StarFuryG7 - June 23, 2010

@378
“Was it old TOS fans who have most of the issues with the movie, or is it the TNG fans?”

I would say the TOS fans, those who are true, _hardcore fans_ of the original, are those who had the most problem with the last movie, because it was so different from original Trek, and departed in so many ways from what the original laid down as its foundation. I mean, we’re talking about people who have copies of “The Making of Star Trek” and are familiar with backgrounds about the characters that didn’t even make it into the TV show, so when they see the Enterprise being built in Iowa on the ground rather than parts of it being assembled in the San Francisco shipyards and launched into space for final assembly in orbit; or that the film did end-runs around what was considered by Roddenberry as background for the characters (how many people are even aware that Kirk had a command prior to his being made Captain of the Enterprise for instance?) it simply makes these people apoplectic quite frankly, and they don’t view what Abrams and his two writers did as being at all faithful to the spirit of the original series.

I’m a TOS fan first and foremost and always have been. The people I was referring to in my last post are also TOS fans for the most part. We’re the oldest group of Trek fans around, barring those people who were adults when the original series was airing in prime time first-run on NBC. Then the youngins like me came along in the early to mid-70s after TOS started airing in syndication and developed a huge following. I hated TNG when it first appeared on the scene –in fact, really couldn’t stand it for more than two and a half seasons, when that show finally came into its own, so to speak, and started producing better stories. Even the hardcore original Trek fans would acknowledge “Yesterday’s Enterprise” and “The Best of Both Worlds” as being among the best TNG had to offer however, and as worthy Trek stories in their own right. From there, Trek just continues to decline however with the shows that followed, but it’s not as though we weren’t able to adapt as fans eventually once TNG appeared on the scene despite how different it was as a series compared to the original. But putting the best science fiction episodes that that series actually had to its credit aside, TNG was more of a soap opera compared to the original series, so in a sense Abrams’ movie was good in that it was a step away from that style of storytelling at least. I started watching TNG reruns periodically late nights this past year for the first time since it went off the air in 1994, and what it’s confirmed for me is that my assessment of TNG as a soap opera is in fact accurate. In fact, in a lot of ways the show was probably more of a soap opera than anything, including science fiction. And that’s *not* to its credit if you ask me.

But I have my peeves about ST09 too, and you know what one of the biggest is in fact: the extent to which the line was intentionally blurred as to whether what happens in the movie either erases the original timeline, versus it all taking place in a parallel alternate universe instead. I know longtime Trek fans–fans of the original series especially–who simply refuse to look at what happens in the movie as occurring in an alternate universe; to them it’s the prime timeline having been intentionally wiped out, callously, whereas there are others who are determined to look at what happens in the movie as taking place in an alternate universe even though they’ll come right out and tell you that there’s nothing definitively in the movie that actually attests to that being the case –it’s just that they hate the last movie so much, they’ll be damned if they’ll acknowledge the original timeline having been wiped out in favor of it no matter what.

So there you have it basically –accept it for what it’s worth, or don’t. The choice is yours of course. But that’s what I’ve witnessed since the movie’s release last year –hope it gives you some insight at least, since that’s apparently what you asked about and were hoping for apparently.

382. StarFuryG7 - June 23, 2010

#379. FarStrider
“@378 You know, I think you just made a really good point. . . from my perusal of various boards, the most vocal detractors of ST09 are those who became fans during the TNG era. . . or are not really big fans of TOS, but the later movies. . .”

Hmmm …not exactly my personal experience obviously. But as I said in my last post, TNG was too focused on being a darn soap opera, and at least the last film veered away from that, despite having to stick in things like Spock having a relationship with Uhura even though there was absolutely no precedent for it in anything that had been produced previously.

383. moauvian waoul - June 23, 2010

StarFurygG7 – I mean, we’re talking about people who have copies of “The Making of Star Trek”

I’m embarrased. That’s me. It’s in bad shape now but I still got it. Along with “the making of the trouble with tribbles.

Like you I became a fan in the 70′s, early 70′s. And sure there were things in this movie I did not appriciate. Some of which you mentioned. Mostly things that were changed for what seemed like no good reason. And I am aware of your problem with the alternate timeline. But I think they got the spirit right, or at least close. It’s been a while since Trek was fun, in my opinion, and I think that’s important. Like you I didn’t like TNG and still don’t really, though the episodes you mentioned are some of the best Trek ever made. I have no reason to doubt you, and your points are all good, it’s just that many complaints, not all, are about the differences between the two series, not within the TOS period. Now I have a lists of things I wish were different, which I have listed before but I didn’t mind some changes, like more Uhura. Other changes were necessary or somewhat expected.

384. StarFuryG7 - June 23, 2010

383.
“I’m embarrased. That’s me.”

Don’t feel embarrassed –that’s me too. :) In fact, my copy happens to be right next to my desk at the moment, within hands reach.

I have some mixed feeling about ST09, but it was a very action-oriented adrenaline rush of a movie, and while some longtime fans may have serious gripes about the film–that for a Trek movie was a good thing.

385. Basement Blogger - June 23, 2010

@375. Um, you want to bring back Sybok from Star Trek V? Really? The one where Kirk, Spock and McCoy sing “Row, row your boat?” The one where Scotty knocks himself out and Uhura does a fan dance? Except for Jerry Goldsmith’s majestic score, it’s the stinker of the series. Getting Sybok for number 10 would remind us all of that one. Although, I never thought “Space Seed” was all that great and it did give us Wrath of Khan.

386. StarFuryG7 - June 23, 2010

#385
“Space Seed” is awesome dude –it’s been a favorite of mine since well before Nicholas Meyer sat down to review the original series and decided to make a sequel to that episode.

“The Wrath of Khan” however is not without its problems, even though it’s a fan favorite. I mean, Chippendales dancers for Khan’s crew? Really?? I guess that explains why they were all so much younger than the crew of the Botany Bay actually seen in “Space Seed”.

387. Basement Blogger - June 24, 2010

@381 StarFuryG7, @378 moauvian waoul. First, on this website there’s a story about writer Bob Orci’s expanation of the alternate timeline. The original or “prime” timeline still exists with Trek 09′s alternate timeline.. Here’s the link.

http://trekmovie.com/2008/12/11/bob-orci-explains-how-the-new-star-trek-movie-fits-with-trek-canon-and-real-science/

Trek 09 seems to be different from the view of time travel in “City on the Edge of Forever.” Let’s just hope that Damon Lindelof doesn’t suggest the alternate universe become a sideways world where the crew meets in a church, and Kirk’s father tells Jim he’s dead. . :)

Second, I like Trek 09. I have the DVD. But next time, I want a smarter Star Trek. I remember Leonard Nimoy saying about Star Trek that it worked both as adventure and was also thought provoking. I hope the filmmakers believe that both can exist and be profitable. This is not a recommendation that the next one go darker but “Dark Knight” had thought provoking ideas. Vigilantism, the war on terror, etc. It was a gigantic hit.

I was a kid when the TOS came out. I also liked TNG. So, I look to the ideas that Gene Roddenberry put in the original series as defining the vision of Star Trek. I don’t care if the movie writers built the Enterprise in Iowa. But I do care if they destroy Vulcan and kill Spock’s mother. That’s not needed to reboot the franchise. More importantly I want the writers to honor Roddenberry’s vision. It’s great that they did dedicate the movie to Gene and Majel.

The original series was full of sex. and violence. So I can’t see why people would complain about sex and violence in Trek 09. The original series was “preachy.” There were themes like anti-Viet Nam war, arms control (Doomsday Machine), racism, war and peace, environment (ST: IV especially) etc. I mean Kirk gave a speech every week. And that’s not bad. I happen to agree with the views espoused by the show and enjoyed the science fiction.

As for the Trek movies, I liked “The Voyage Home (IV)”, “Wrath of Khan” and “First Contact” better than Trek 09. It’s my hope the next one be as great as those three or a great episode of any of the series. (“City on the Edge of Forever, Doomsday Machine, The Best of Both Worlds, etc.”)

388. moauvian waoul - June 24, 2010

Yep. But I still think there is a different approach between the two series, a different feel, and I think some, maybe more, of the issues people have with the new movie are rooted there. Now I’m not talking about the “holes.”. There too I have problems. ( though I think it’s great that Bob explains his ideas and motivations). For every preachy TOS episode (I like them as well) there were several that simply delt with a story about the crew. I like my Trek deep. I want it to be smart. I just think there may be a difference between what TOS fans want and what the latter day fans think is Trek. Technobabble and inside jokes and a singing android with a cat and a sensitive Klingon don’t make it smart, in my opinion. By the way, I loved DS9, though it took me two or three seasons to realize it.
I realize Roddenberry vision was the driving force behind both, but NBC’s input helped to shape the original series, and without it there would not be a TNG.

389. Harry Ballz - June 24, 2010

Sybok?

Hey, when Vulcan blew up, I thought, great, at least that gets rid of the Sybok angle! Good riddance!

390. Conrad - June 24, 2010

How about this: Bring back the Borg. Have a scenario where there is an audience connection to a character that knows the main characters. Then assimilate him. Have part of the story be about two great friends going against each other, a backdrop of the greater conflict of the Borg against the Federation. Creating a character that the audience knows, and feels a connection to will help evoke a greater audience interest in his or her fate, especially if they wind up assimilated. Another great theme that could result from this, would be the themes of Freedom and individuality versus tyranny and complete collectivization. If a darker theme is wanted, then you can bring the federation to its knees against this nearly invincible threat. Have the Borg assimilate a planet. Then, when all hope is nearly lost, Bring in the Romulans and Klingons, historically (during Kirk’s time period anyway) implacable foes of the Federation, and make them part of the greater fight against the Borg, necessary to save the Federation (and the alpha quadrant in the end) from the greatest threat Trek has ever made. The themes of maintaining one’s unique individuality and freedom are universal themes that many audiences can recognize. Also, The Borg made for a great box office for First Contact, it could do it again for Star Trek II.

391. Yammer - June 24, 2010

366: of course Nero’s revenge is hollow since it is anticipatory. Grief has made him blind to logic. All he can think of is punishing Spock specifically and the Federation generally. This is not a writing error, it is a character point.

If you don’t like the word “ingrate” how about “pedant”?

374: exactly, it is a feast of Easter Eggs and callbacks to TOS icons. The art direction. The relationships between the crew.

381: I am one of the fans with the Making of Trek too (Whitfield 1968). So what? Trek09 hangs together as a movie. It doesn’t really bother me whether it syncs up exactly with what we have seen or heard before, since Roddenberry himself muddled up canon by declaring TAS and TFF to be non canon. How many fans are aware that Arex and M’Ress and Robert April are not canon? That Roddenberry resented the militarization of Starfleet as reimagined by Nick Meyer?

Of course over a 40+ year run, there are inconsistencies. Why couldn’t Uhura speak Klingon in TUC? What about those forehead ridges?

None of that should affect your enjoyment of those shows.

382: Soap opera trappings in TNG were all to its benefit in my opinion. I hate it when shows purport to bring major traumas to the characters which are never acknowledged again. TNG started very slowly (due to Roddenberry’s bizarre and horrifying conceit that 24th century humans have no prejudice or interpersonal conflict — notwithstanding his creation of the Ferengi, a ludicrous composite of antisemitic slurs!), but we all agree it hit its stride with The Best of Both Worlds. Picard’s mind-rape was acknowledged in Family, a soapy episode that is one of the best.
The issue is more than soapiness, it has to do with the strengths of television (continuing character development) vs. cinema (momentum and production value).

390: Canon violation! Canon violation!
Also…really, the Borg? There’s nothing scary or interesting about them anymore, we know all about them now and how to turn them off. No rehashes!

392. DDeese - June 24, 2010

The only things that really turned me off about this Star Trek movie and the first one was actually something that kinda started with Nemesis.
1. Can we please have ST visual and sound effects. I love Star Wars but it is a different Sci-Fi adventure altogether and the turbo laser blasters really need to stay there.

2. Phasers that cock themselves? WTF?

3. The bridge set looks like its from the future. Sickbay looks like a high budget 21st century hospital and engineering looks like the engine room from a 1980′s nuclear powered naval carrier can we get some consistency please. (lose the water cooling thing)

4. Romulans that look like they may have genetic relations to the Vulcans. If it weren’t stated in the movie dialogue I would have had no idea that Nero was Romulan. The face, hair, clothes, make up, and technology totally non-recognizable. The tattoos don’t even look bad ass on bikers today.

5. Romulan warbirds. Klingon battle cruisers. When did the San Francisco fleet yard get moved out into the middle of the sticks?

I apologize for the rant but it becomes difficult to watch something when there are so many distractions just from the little things.

393. DDeese - June 24, 2010

FYI:

Kirk’s father dying in the past isn’t likely to spur a massive drive to explore 1/2 a galaxy in a hurry. Cardassia and the whole Bajoran system totally not on the Starfleet maps at the time. I know Uhura ordered a Cardassian sunrise(not a likely drink) but totally not known about at this point in time.

394. StarFuryG7 - June 24, 2010

#387. Basement Blogger
“@381 StarFuryG7, @378 moauvian waoul. First, on this website there’s a story about writer Bob Orci’s expanation of the alternate timeline. The original or “prime” timeline still exists with Trek 09’s alternate timeline.. Here’s the link.”

Thank you for providing that Link –I would not have read that article prior to seeing the movie in the theater last year as I made it a point to avoid Spoilers as much as possible. However, I do believe I might have run across that particular piece after seeing it at some point, and while I didn’t read the entire article just now, I jumped to the bottom for the summary as per the author’s recommendation and was already aware of the answers to the questions presented. My gripe about the film however is the extent to which none of those things were actually made clear in the movie itself, and deliberately so, and hence, why the film would therefore raise questions as a result. I think it was also especially important that certain answers be provided in the film that weren’t given the actual history of time travel over the course of four plus decades of “Star Trek”.

“Second, I like Trek 09. I have the DVD.”

I actually have you and probably most people beat here in that respect, as I have the Two-Disc DVD release as well as the Blu-ray release. I like and enjoyed the movie too, but I also have qualms about it as well.

And I can certainly understand that outlook and the distinction you draw between those three plot points, and why the first one doesn’t amount to an issue of real concern for you as opposed to the other two by comparison.

395. StarFuryG7 - June 24, 2010

391. Yammer
“366: of course Nero’s revenge is hollow since it is anticipatory. Grief has made him blind to logic. All he can think of is punishing Spock specifically and the Federation generally.”

Actually he singles out Vulcan in order to get at Spock specifically –the one guy who put his own butt on the line to try and help the people of Romulus, with Spock’s only sin being that he wasn’t able to accomplish his mission in time. It seems like a stretch for Nero to target Spock for his offering to help therefore, especially since the Romulans themselves showed no apparent interest in getting off their own rear-ends to actually address the matter, nor does the movie even go into some of the details that the Graphic Novel prequels touches upon concerning what motivated Nero.

“This is not a writing error, it is a character point.”

That as a character he’s completely illogical concerning what motivates him?

Nero spends twenty-five years sulking and plotting revenge against someone he knows won’t show up for a quarter of a century rather than using that time to try and figure how to actually go back and save his planet.

“If you don’t like the word ‘ingrate’ how about ‘pedant’?”

Both are rude and insulting obviously. People are entitled to voice their opinions about this last Trek film just as they have been for the previous ten Trek films. You seem to think that only your view is valid though apparently.

396. StarFuryG7 - June 24, 2010

392. DDeese
“Romulans that look like they may have genetic relations to the Vulcans. If it weren’t stated in the movie dialogue I would have had no idea that Nero was Romulan. The face, hair, clothes, make up, and technology totally non-recognizable.”

The Vulcans and Romulans looked exactly alike in the original series though, and the Romulan Ambassador in ST VI doesn’t suffer the same prosthetic forehead affliction that the TNG producers were so utterly obsessed with, which personally, I considered to be a good thing when that movie came out.

397. StarFuryG7 - June 24, 2010

Correction to post #394
— for some reason, your quote didn’t show up in my message, Basement Blogger . . .

“I don’t care if the movie writers built the Enterprise in Iowa. But I do care if they destroy Vulcan and kill Spock’s mother. That’s not needed to reboot the franchise.”

And I can certainly understand that outlook and the distinction you draw between those three plot points, and why the first one doesn’t amount to an issue of real concern for you as opposed to the other two by comparison.

398. StarFuryG7 - June 24, 2010

Follow-up . . .
#391. Yammer
“Soap opera trappings in TNG were all to its benefit in my opinion. I hate it when shows purport to bring major traumas to the characters which are never acknowledged again.”

Granted that TOS was more episodic in nature than TNG when it came to addressing events and background issues about the main characters, but believe it or not I actually preferred it that way. There were times when the original series shined a light on the past experiences about the characters and what drove them, however, such as with “The Naked Time” as a good example. We see there the human weaknesses of these characters and the things that they otherwise would keep to themselves, and it’s not as though the show didn’t also touch on some of these things later on. Take for example when Spock is in the throes of the disease in that episode and his lamenting how he could never tell his mother that he loved her, and how then went back to that with “Journey to Babel.” So I would say that TOS did a pretty fair job of dealing with character issues. It’s just that the more episodic structure of the show meant that they wouldn’t get too bogged down by what occurred in prior episodes, whereas TNG maintained more of a running arc style with respect to such matters. And a lot of it was downright silly and at times even annoying. The ongoing story arcs with Troi and her mother for instance sure didn’t help the show IMO, and served only to drag it down to a level of silliness that I didn’t care to be bothered having to deal with, and yet, there they were, like it or not, whenever her mother decided to pay a visit.

You know how you have to stick your fingers down your throat in order to make yourself vomit?

That pretty much sums up Deanna Troi and her mother if you ask me.

399. Yammer - June 25, 2010

398 On this we agree. Deanna Troi is a terribly conceived character. Closing one’s eyes and saying “I sense anxiety” is not useful in any respect.
Luxwana was a gift from the producer to his wife, but I did think she had some good episodes written around her — she was one of the very few characters in all of TNG to show spark, feistiness, sexuality. The calm, reasonable bridge crew was as bland as the dentists’ office of a bridge.

I disagree about arcs as storytelling tools but of course they do weaken the appeal of the show in syndication. If you’re not watching from the start then you can’t really enter it — Lost, 24, Heroes etc.

400. moauvian waoul - June 25, 2010

Guys I gotta jump in here. Deanna “I feel they are not being completely truthful” Troi, while the Enterprise is facing down the double photon tubes of a fully armed warbird.
“No sh–!! Tell us something we don’t know Deanna!”
“But I feel their pain captain.”
“Oh you’re going to feel pain all right!”
A character so bad the bartender did her job and was better at it. Should have been tossed out nearest airlock.
As for the bridge: did you ever notice there were no sharp edges. Mmm I like earth-tones. It was like a @&$/)$ womb…with bucket seats.
Sorry but it’s been building for a long time. As you were.

401. StarFuryG7 - June 26, 2010

Where the hell did my last post go?

402. moauvian waoul - June 26, 2010

And shag carpeting. The bridge had wall to wall carpeting.

403. StarFuryG7 - June 26, 2010

I’m annoyed –I saw it here, but when I came back hours later it had simply vanished, and I’m not going through the bother of rewriting what I wrote.

404. Harry Ballz - June 26, 2010

403

Well, thanks for sharing!

405. StarFuryG7 - June 26, 2010

The thing is –where the hell did the post go? I swaer I saw it here right after posting before leaving.

406. moauvian waoul - June 27, 2010

Happens from time to time. Curious though. Must have been a long post.

407. StarFuryG7 - June 27, 2010

406

No, not that long –just a few paragraphs, but I was satisfied with the way I wrote it and expressed my thoughts. To recap what I said now would mean wording it differently, so I’m disappointed and don’t care to be bothered therefore.

408. Harry Ballz - June 27, 2010

407

Was there a word used in your post that might have been caught by the censor/filter, which would then erase the whole thing? I’ve seen my posts appear and then disappear because of that.

409. moauvian waoul - June 27, 2010

Strange technology you speak of. Didn’t know it possible. Guess I’m partial to the 20th century.

410. StarFuryG7 - June 27, 2010

#408
No, not at all –it was strictly PG.

I have to wonder if there’s a hacker who has the ability to remove the last post that appears.

411. Harry Ballz - June 28, 2010

Funny, all of your posts commenting on your missing post are appearing!

412. Yammer - June 28, 2010

yes, now we are compelled to know

413. StarFuryG7 - June 28, 2010

#411

I would assume because they took no time to write by comparison and required very little to no thought at all, whereas the post that was here but then vanished was an essay that compared a certain aspect of TNG to TOS, asserting why TOS was better because of it.

And perhaps there’s a roaming TNG fan here who didn’t like it for that very reason.

414. Harry Ballz - June 28, 2010

C’mon, guys, why don’t we move this discussion over to the newer Orci thread?

415. StarFuryG7 - June 28, 2010

Suits me fine, but I’ve only given the latest article a quick cursory glance so far. I’ll try and check it out later tonight though.

416. Harry Ballz - June 28, 2010

Fair enough! You guys should also join us in “live chat”…it’s a fun group!

417. Conrad - June 30, 2010

390: Well, given that the entire timeline of trek has been changed with Nero’s traveling back through time, not only the people, but the technology of their ships, it doesn’t seem like canon really applies here. We know how to turn them off? In what way? There is something unstoppable about the Borg that makes for a great villian. If the writers don’t wish to revisit it because they’ve already been in a big screen movie, that’s fine, but I’ve always wondered how Kirk and the gang would handle the Borg. Picard and Janeway (and archer for one episode) were the only ones to tussle with the Borg. Also, the Borg Idea was just an idea for the darker tone. My favorite trek films were Generations and Insurrection (followed by First Contact) because they had something meaningful to them, in a way that I think Gene Rodenberry would’ve appreciated. Generations was about two individuals trying to make a difference in their worlds, and I think that’s a good thing for all of us to try to do. Insurrection touched on Right and Wrong with the relocation of the Ba’ku, (I rather think a reference to our own, disturbing history of relocation of the Native Americans) I personally think the best films were the ones that made you think, but alas, the box office disagrees with me.
As far as the Khan Idea goes, it could go either one of two ways. It could be very good, as “The Wrath Of Khan”, or they could have a really poor acting performance, or a character that just doesn’t play the part. That’s a big problem with having other actors take roles that have been already done superbly by individuals such as Ricardo Montalban. I would be wary of bringing back a certain character that’s already been done. If the writers and crew get a good actor to play the part, they could have a great success, but they could end up making another Shinzon, and we all know how badly Nemesis flopped at the box office…

418. Yammer - June 30, 2010

417: Insurrection didn’t make me think, it told me what to think. It told me that resettlement is bad, and it did this primarily by making the antagonists insensitive, physically ugly, and with a secondary motivation of personal revenge. If Insurrection really wanted to make us think, it would have had a fairer choice for the crew. Because, if you THINK about it, a literal Fountain of Youth energy has incredibly vast medical and social advantages that the Federation would be irresponsible NOT to try to exploit.

As for the Borg not being scary, they just aren’t, they are synonymous with Trek villians these days, have been seen so often that they have no mystery, and in BOBW we were shown how their networking makes them vulnerable to computer viruses (a concept which Ron Moore might have borrowed in showing how the Colonial fleet was eradicated in his Battlestar reimagining).

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