Exclusive: Scripting Started For Star Trek Sequel | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive: Scripting Started For Star Trek Sequel October 12, 2010

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

This week the progress on the Star Trek sequel, due in theaters June 29, 2012, has taken a big step. TrekMovie has confirmed that scripting for the film has started. More details below, plus we look at the milestones for the film – past and future.


FADE IN – on the Star Trek sequel script

The sequel to the 2009 Star Trek movie is due in theaters June 29th, 2012 – or in just over twenty months. Early this summer writer/producers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman confirmed with TrekMovie that they had a story for the sequel and were working, alongside fellow producer Damon Lindelof, on breaking it down and making sure it held together. This finishing work on the Star Trek sequel story was being done while Orci and Kurtzman were in production on Cowboys and Aliens, which they wrote and are producing. Production on that film, directed by Jon Favreu, has just wrapped up and over the weekend Orci tweeted a "to do list" which included "start writing Star Trek" as one of the items.

Today TrekMovie confirmed with Roberto Orci that he has crossed that Trek item off his list and that he and co-writer Alex Kurtzman are now at work on the Trek sequel. Orci tells TrekMovie "fingers have been put to keyboard". This means that the long process to develop a story is done and many key questions now have answers, like: Khan or no Khan. The next key event in the life of the Star Trek sequel will be when the script is handed in for the official green light (films generally aren’t given an official green light until there is a budget and a script). Orci could not confirm when they plan to finish, but delivery would likely have to be by early 2011 so that pre-production can start. Around that time it is also expected word will come out as to whether or not JJ Abrams will be directing or just produce the film. Production on the sequel is expected to start in early summer 2011.

Here are a list of key dates in the development phase of the Star Trek sequel (some of which started before the release of the Star Trek movie in May 2009):

Date Sequel event
March 30, 2009 Paramount signs ‘supreme court’ (Abrams/Burk/Kurtzman Lindelof/Orci) for Star Trek sequel *
January 11, 2010 Paramount sets June 29th, 2012 as release date
Spring 2010 Story development started
October, 2010 Scripting started

*It is worth noting that the main Star Trek cast all signed on to options for two sequels when they were originally cast in 2007.

Questions on the Star Trek sequel

Regarding details on what the story is for the Star Trek sequel, the filmmakers have talked about how the sequel will be "bigger" in terms of scale and go "deeper" into the characters, but there are no specific plot details. It has been confirmed that the USS Enterprise crew cast will be back (Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, and Anton Yelchin). But there are many big questions remaining to be answered, here are just a few:

And of course…will there be more or less lens flares?

Poll: What are your expectations?

We are really just at the beginning of this long process towards the release of the next big Star Trek movie. Over the next 20 months we will find out the answers to those above questions and more. But for now, what is your level of anticipation?

Expect Star Trek 2012 sequel to be...

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


So what are you most looking forward or hoping to see (or not see) in the Star Trek sequel? Sound off in the comments section below…maybe Bob Orci will take a break from scripting and drop by to say hi.



1. What is it with you? - October 12, 2010

Bob! Great news! Good luck with the writing- I know it is always an exciting and daunting time.

P.s. When you get stuck, just cut and paste that beautiful little scene of the Kirk hologram that was cut from Trek 2009. That should fill a few minutes, and would make this Shatner fan very happy.

2. Mattyb.uk - October 12, 2010

Thank goodness things are starting to make a move. 1st i think maybe. Good luck SC

3. nimoys evil twin sister - October 12, 2010

cool. now bring it on, bob!

4. zwelf - October 12, 2010

I hope there are Andorians in it!!!!

5. Dave - October 12, 2010

As long as there is no Bloddy Enterprise A, B, C, D or E.

6. Jason - October 12, 2010

I hope Khan is NOT in it!! And let the Klingons be the bad guys!

7. Jilly - October 12, 2010

Please. No Khan and no Shatner.

8. Ted - October 12, 2010

No Khan, yes Shatner.

9. Jeff O'Connor - October 12, 2010

No Khan. No Shatner. Yes to Klingons, but they don’t have to be the main villains. Everything else I’m far less opinionated on, but it would be nice to avoid time travel this time, all things considered.

10. Damian - October 12, 2010

We know the story is done. One thing we know is whenever a Star Trek movie is in development, very little about the story will come out. I suspect we will probably hear lots of rumors, some true, some not. I will try to be patient and wait till the movie comes out. I will, of course, keep up on rumor news, but I will withhold judgment until it is released.

A few things I hope to see:
A story that looks forward, not back. Khan, no matter what the spin, will be looking back. No matter how they do it, a Khan film will inevitably be compared to Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan. I for one would like to see a new story with new twists.

For me, Star Trek has to be in the title. I liked the idea with Star Trek: Subtitle. I know that is similar to the Next Generation movies, but so what. Everyone who does not live in a cave knows this is not a TNG movie. Star Trek is not Batman. I don’t think a Dark Knight type name is appropriate here. Star Trek is integral to the name. Not having Star Trek in the title almost seems like it’s being hidden that this is a Star Trek movie. Star Trek (2009) did extremely well at the box office, so the name Star Trek is not at all a detriment, but is in fact, a selling point. KEEP STAR TREK IN THE TITLE.

11. MJ - October 12, 2010

Bob, good luck with this. Remember, no Shat and no Khan…take us in a new direction that incorporates sf as well as action/adventure…and no, I don’t need a political moral story on torture…8 seasons of 24 did the job for me, thank you. :-)

12. I'm Dead Jim - October 12, 2010

Bob! You have time to read books?!

13. Damian - October 12, 2010

4–I would not mind seeing some familiar aliens from the original series (Andorians, Tellarites, etc). I would avoid aliens established in the later series (TNG, DS9 or Voy) because some of them may not have been encountered yet. I suppose you could include some from Enterprise, but most of the frequent alien guests were the same from the original series.

Klingons do not excite me much here. I would not rule out a good movie with them, but we would have to see what they do with them. The only thing here is I just ask the writers to respect canon about smooth vs ridged forheads. I’m fine with ridged in the movie, but just don’t contradict the Enterprise episodes about how they ended up with smooth forheads.

14. Moonbase Alpha - October 12, 2010

Harry Mudd… tangled up with a deal gone wrong with the Andorians.

15. Losira - October 12, 2010

Like the Original series keep the formula of a quality character driven solid storyline. I was happy to hear you are going deeper in the character developement. Exccellant. It would be great to bring on Nurse chapel. Sickbay is empty without her. Now christine did sign on later then the main. Key characters. So this would work. A brush with those Fuzz Faced goons (klingons) great! How about a Tholien threat? And a little more cultural info. On our web weavers. Little is revealed about them. But all in all I’m thrilled the shows realy on the road now best of luck and smooth sailing. Keep it family friendly. Will be awaiting 2012. And some great trek!

16. MJ - October 12, 2010

Bob, don’t forget to gently prod AJ to get rid of the Budweiser plant engine room — that has to go!

17. Damian - October 12, 2010

I know I’ve noted this before,

Another poster a while back noted it would be cool to have a teaser sequence featuring some scene or battle from one of the episodes (they noted The Doomsday Machine). I want the movie to look forward, but a brief teaser (like the James Bond teasers) hearkening to an episode of the original series would be welcome for me before moving on.

18. MJ - October 12, 2010


19. MJ - October 12, 2010

17 — Agree with Omen 2 — a teaser like that that would be cool!

20. Sybok's Secret Brother - October 12, 2010


Now, I just hope Paramount stays out of the way – I would have loved to have seen the original intended opening of Trek’09.

21. NTH - October 12, 2010

Best wishes Bob to you and your collegue for every success in your scripting.I am looking forward to the fruits of your labours appearing on the big screen in 2012.Now that the storyline has been developed I guess that the dye has been cast with regards everyones hopes and expectations regarding the new movie however I have no doubt that you will do a wonderful job.I also hope that Star Trek appears in the title.

22. Green-Blooded-Bastard - October 12, 2010

I’ve seen the coming-together of the crew of the new Enterprise, and how they handle being thrown into an emergency, and how they all learned real fast to work together to accomplish a goal. Now I would like to see what happens once the emergency is over and they are sent on their 5-year mission…How they learn to interact with their respective personalities, handle not-so-urgent problems and mundane stuff. Intervene in others issues…things that went on a lot in the original Trek. I still want to see a major baddie of course, but that’s not all there is to Trek. I like the subtle nuances that give the show/films personality. I hope these guys do too.

23. Xai - October 12, 2010

Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

24. MJ - October 12, 2010

20 — I’m not sure I would want any change anything regarding the first part of 09 — as is, it is the best beginning to a major franchise movie since The Empire Strikes back in 1980. And in seeing the deleted Klingon scenes, I can see why they were cut.

25. Kyle Cawley - October 12, 2010

Khan no, Klingons totally totally totally! That would be so rad to have Kirk battling some Klingons!!

26. Captain_Z - October 12, 2010

Star Trek: $#*! The Captain Says!!!!!

27. TJ Trek - October 12, 2010

no kahn please. I just want something fresh. something different. I would like a mystery adventure instead of a villain this time, something happens, and the crew of the enterprise has to figure it out. The best example of this (although it did have a villian) was Star Trek VI. This was mystery adventure at its best. I wouldn’t mind seeing Spock play detective again.

28. Christopher Mulrooney - October 12, 2010

OK Bob, Get me in before I deploy early summer (Was supposed to be in Star Trek 2009 but someone lost my casting forms in wardrobe or something, went in for fitting November 2007 and was called once fo a scene then they canceled due to weather and then wasn’t called :( Now I am pending a deployment right before the production date for the new one :( DRATS NO Luck!

29. ZEITGEIST - October 12, 2010

LESS LENS FLARES PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

30. Chris M - October 12, 2010

Good luck Bob, great to hear writing of the script has begun! :-)

Now in answer to those questions:
– Yes to 3D as a novelty as long as long as we still have the option of seeing the movie in 2D.
– Klingons as the Villain.
– Star Trek in the title is a must!!
– Yes to the Hologram scene with William Shatner, it was a beautifully written scene and all us Trekkies would love to see it on the big screen!

I have a feeling that Star Trek (2012) will be just as good if not better then Star Trek (2009) which will be awesome!

There is always a danger with sequels of course, we had The Dark Knight which far and away exceeded Batman Begins (One wonders how the next Batman film can live up to this now) and then we had Iron Man 2 which while a very enjoyable film didn’t quite capture the magic of the first one.

31. Dave - October 12, 2010

My take would be to set it in the time frame somewhere prior to the first half of the first season. At that point, they were still building a set of 12 constitution class starships, which had a higher level of capability than the existing fleet. Somewhere before that, the Enterprise was given the five year mission for deeper space exploration, new life, new civilizations.

I’d like to see how and why that mission and charter – for this ship and crew – came to be. The sensibilities of 4th season Star Trek:Enterprise are what I’d like to see reflected. These movies should embody the “finding our way on uncertain ground” feeling the early first season had.

Perhaps it is needing to outrace the Klingons in establishing a soft power hegemony in making first contact, maybe the re-emergent Romulans, maybe both.

32. Pat - October 12, 2010

Trek 09 was a huge success. I loved it. Just do your best and I am sure it will be fine.

33. cugel the clever - October 12, 2010

No Khan.
No time travel.

I would prefer not to have the Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians, or Borg as the main villains. Cameos and lesser roles perhaps, but please not the main villains. They were all fully explored and overexposed in the 5 TV series and 11 movies.

Let’s give more exposure to some of the lesser-known species in the Federation such as the Andorians Same with the villains – pick one of the villains from a previous series which was formidable, but underused, such as the Breen, Gorn, or Tholians – all of these were portrayed as very powerful and dangerous, but none were fully explored.

34. jas_montreal - October 12, 2010

I just hope it doesn’t turn out like Iron Man 2. Which wasn’t as good as the original Iron Man.

All our hope and trust goes into boborci and alex and damon.

35. CaptainTrekkie - October 12, 2010

I am so glad they got started on the script, i cannot wait until it comes out!

36. MJ - October 12, 2010

#30 – “Yes to the Hologram scene with William Shatner, it was a beautifully written scene and all us Trekkies would love to see it on the big screen!”

There is a major difference of opinion from us Trekkies on seeing Shat in the sequel. Many of us DO NOT want to see Shat the in the sequel.

37. Chad - October 12, 2010

Abrams or maybe even Nick Meyer direct
Have Star Trek in the title
Same budget or more
Leave the Khan idea alone…. either Klingons or some natural disaster
Introduce a new Trek character
Greenwood was fantastic as Pike, definitely bring him back!

Make the Enterprise look a little more like the TMP version, make it the original size, and make the engineering decks and shuttle bays more like 23rd century

Spock Prime’s knowledge

38. Hugh Hoyland - October 12, 2010

Well good luck to the guys on the script! Im sure its going to be good. :]

39. jas_montreal - October 12, 2010

@ 36.

If shat being in the film works for the story and services it very well, then why not? I don’t want Shat being included just for the sake of having him in it. Otherwise it would be Star Trek Generations all over again. I love that film A LOT, but one thing that hurt it was the fact that Shatner’s role felt soo “tacked on”.

If they gotta have Shatner in the film, then i presume boborci and co. have found a very very very awesome reason.

40. ZEITGEIST - October 12, 2010

maybe they could explore the ORION SYNDICATE

41. Ceti Alpha 5 - October 12, 2010

It’s about damn time.

There’s only 3 things I want out of the new movie.

– Less lens flares.
– No “Bourne Ultimatum”-like shaky cam during fights. I kinda like being able to SEE what’s going on during a fight.
– Gorn….maybe Klingons if Kor is the villain. But preferably the Gorn, with an original Gorn antagonist. Or maybe BOTH (If done well).

42. DMarshall - October 12, 2010

NO 3-D and I can’t emphasize that enough!

43. mdbchud - October 12, 2010

Absolutely agree with Damian #17…..

A teaser beginning echoing an original episode…..and have it drive into main story. Something BIG and explosive that would work for the fans and newbies alike….say the end of Balance of Terror or Doomsday Machine…..some element of that could leapfrog us into the newest adventure.

NO Khan.

44. ster julie - October 12, 2010

Let’s start with the Doomsday Machine “eating” the Botany Bay, that giant amoeba from “The Immunity Syndrome,” the Probe from ST4 AND V’Ger, and then imploding with indigestion.

Then move on from there.

(Did I miss any?)

45. Denny. - October 12, 2010

i want some Twilight Zone/Outer Limits/early TOS style uncanniness/eeriness

unexplained wonder/unknown – questions and mcguffins that are not answered and are left to the imagination (with just the odd hint) which is far more powerful than any explanation the film maker can give – e.g. the ark angels in Raiders, the ‘interdimentional beings’ and the portal to the other dimention in Crystal Skull, the space jocky/derelict in Alien, 2001s monolith,

-more references to the prime timeline/alternate future – ok I know the new timeline is supposed to be a fresh start but itd be fun for the odd nod

-various TOS stuff cameoing/referenced/easter egging (but not centre stage, e.g. Doomsday machine, gorns, cloud killers, corbomite, talos IV, tholians, wild west, Mitchell, rand, No 1)

46. Denny. - October 12, 2010

more redshirt deaths – im talking ‘Obsession’ levels

47. Capt. Quinn - October 12, 2010

A character driven story that goes where no Star Trek has gone before…plus I would love to see the engine room looking more high tech and futuristic. And I agree with ZEITGEIST… less lens flares!

48. Quatlo - October 12, 2010

Boldly go where no Trek has gone before.

49. Daoud - October 12, 2010

Bob, are we there yet?

50. JimmyMac - October 12, 2010

To Bob Orci:

Remember that the Enterprise is a character. Treat her as such. Remember.

51. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 12, 2010

The story is done. Stop making story suggestions. At this point, the best you can do is suggest bits of dialogue.

52. Roobydoo - October 12, 2010

I think Bruce Willis would make a great Matt Decker. Trek needs a new jingoistic catchphrase.

Or Monica Bellucci in any role, as long as she’s in a Theissian costume.

53. MUCOPHILE - October 12, 2010

How can it not be good? It’s an even-numbered movie, both in terms of the new series and overall! It can’t lose!

54. AM - October 12, 2010

Perfect timing for concurrent development of the new unannounced Trek game from EA, if the post at http://www.startrek-games.com plays out.

55. Spock Of Ages - October 12, 2010


Keep Star Trek in the title, and if we can get the Shatner scene, please please please by all means lets have it….

Oh and thanks for the first movie, BTW

56. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

Finally. Now I hope it’s not an update of Arena with Kirk defeating the Gorn Captain using Mentos and Diet Coke.

57. Tom Blake - October 12, 2010

Hi Guys,
If you need an industrial ‘Alien’ sort of location, the MaltEudop malting barley plant just North of Great Falls, MT is a remarkable location. Give it a look.

58. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2010

Well, I don’t really care what they do as long as it is entertaining and true to the spirit of “Star Trek: The Original Series”.

But I do NOT want to see as many lens flares this time. I’d like to see a real engine room. And more McCoy, as part of the quintessential triamvurate with Kirk and Spock.

I’d wish you good luck Bob! But something (your immense talent and love of Star Trek) tells me you won’t need it!

59. EM - October 12, 2010


60. "Check the Circuit!" - October 12, 2010

I would love an alien environment as fully realized as Pandora.

I would love a reference or two, maybe even the set up teaser mentioned above, to a familiar TOS episode.

I would love to see the deeper characterizations that separate Trek from other sci-fi franchises.

I would love lots of easter eggs.

I would love to continue to see the heart and soul of Star Trek delivered in a way that has mainstream appeal.

I would love to see a sequel that follows the pattern of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

I would love to see a “guest star” that is absolutely a-list who will help deliver international appeal.

61. GarySeven - October 12, 2010

NO KHAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

62. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

Some of the best TOS episodes didn’t have a villian, such as Immunity Syndrome, Doomsday Machine, etc.

Keep repeating this statement over and over as you’re typing.

63. trekprincess - October 12, 2010

Great news :-)

64. buddykarl - October 12, 2010

Bob, give a peek to your uncle and cousin so your uncle can try to explain it to me in a long drawn out way the way he tried to explain the 2009 Star Trek…lol

Good luck with the writing!

65. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2010


I think you meant “villain” not “villian”, Harry! I’ve done that myself, and if I had a penny for everytime I see someone mispelling villain, I’d be a billionaire right now!

Also, a lot of people have used the word “defiantly” instead of definitely…..

66. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2010

should read

“Also, a lot of people on prior threads have used the word defiantly instead of definitely…..”

67. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010


…..and I was the spelling champ in my grade school! I shouldn’t drink when I post!

Ryan, you are the villain of the piece in this particular case!

68. Vultan - October 12, 2010


DS9 was defiantly my favorite series. ;)

69. Third Remata'Klan - October 12, 2010

Great news! Have fun, guys! (I know we will when we see the movie.)

Oh, and J.J. …

PLEASE keep that craptastic 3-D away from Star Trek!

Thank you!


70. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2010


Its always more fun being the villain! MMMMMWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!


Good one!

71. MJ - October 12, 2010

Agree on no 3D and less lens flares.

72. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

I am DEFIANT that my favorite ship was, to be DEFINITE, the DEFIANT!

73. Allan Rose - October 12, 2010

Will we have klingons from the original series or the ones from the first movie?

74. Basement Blogger - October 12, 2010

I hope the next Star Trek is great science fiction. Drop the “Star Wars” influence. Commercial success does not mean a film must have “GI Joe” pacing. “Inception”, and “Dark Knight” were intelligent and huge box office successes. Let the audience think and allow the film to breathe. Do not fear dialogue. The first “Iron Man” had twenty five minutes of exposition before Stark broke out of the terrorist camp. And no one complained that film was boring.

Whether we like it or not, there’s a new universe. Things can be developed. Vulcan is gone. So obviously that has an effect on the Federation. Re-emphasize the trinity. Kirk-Spock-McCoy. That means more time for McCoy. He may not win all the arguments but McCoy’s heart is always in the right place. He also gets the punch lines. See “Amok Time” and “Journey to Babel.”

Star Trek is Gene Roddenberry’s vision. Follow it. Leonard Nimoy always says Star Trek works on multiple levels. I distill them into three categories. 1. Heart. 2. Adventure. 3. Intelligence.

75. Red Dead Ryan - October 12, 2010

Once “Star Trek: Voyager” hired Jeri Ryan, it soon became “Star Trek: Voyeur”!

And “Deep Space Nine” was always at its best when Sisko stood Defiant against the Dominion!

76. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

62: “Some of the best TOS episodes didn’t have a villian, such as Immunity Syndrome, Doomsday Machine, etc.”

Monsters are even better than villains.

77. Vultan - October 12, 2010


‘“Deep Space Nine” was always at its best when Sisko stood Defiant against the Dominion!’

Man, you got that right. I can still remember the surprise and thrill of first seeing those ‘pulse’ phasers blasting away at the Jem Hadar. Good times.

78. Stan Winstone - October 12, 2010

Scotty: “I made some personal modifications to the engine room Cap’n. Hope ya like it. The old one looked like a brewery!”

79. Basement Blogger - October 12, 2010

Forgot one more thing from my post, #74. Make that three more things. 1. Less use of the hand held camera. I can’t watch the last two “Bourne” movies because I get naseus. 2. Less use of lens flares. Okay to use it in outer space scenes and exterior scenes. Skip it in interior shots.

And if Paramount wants the extra two bucks for 3-D, then film the movie in 3-D. DO NOT CONVERT IT FROM 2-D to 3-D. I was unfortunate to watch “Last Airbender’ in 3-D. It was too dark and the special effects were not all that special in 3-D after the conversion. Star Trek deserves the same quality as Avatar in the 3-D area.

80. Chadwick - October 12, 2010

I think it will absolutely be better than Star Trek 2009 possibly the best Star Trek movie ever. I love TWOK, VI, and First Contact but I think the new movie was my favorite. Yes the TOS and TNG characters are familiar which is why we have a place in our hearts for them, but I would be bias if I went with what was familiar over what I really though was better. I have a feeling 2012 will blow everything away.

I say no Khan, lots of Klingons and epic space battles.

81. Simon - October 12, 2010


Khan is fine.

82. Janson Tycho - October 12, 2010

no Khan, yes Klingons, iffy about theShat… i would like to see Chapel and Rand though :P

83. Will_H - October 12, 2010

I can only hope that they decide to do another original villain and not Khan or Mudd or something dumb like that. I’d be cool with Klingons since we havent seen them for a while and Kirk needs to start pissing them off or else his reputation may be at risk.

84. Will_H - October 12, 2010


Exactly, I pray to god that they redo the entire engineering set. The old TOS engineering looked more like it could power a star ship than the brewery.

85. Phil - October 12, 2010

Not all us Trekkies want WS, or Kahn.

86. boborci - October 12, 2010

A script is a living, breathing organism capable of learning and growth.

87. Martman - October 12, 2010

To do list,,

get groceries,
do laundry,
stay logged onto this site for the next 20 months !

And so it begins,, god this will be a long wait…

I hope to see,, Trek villains that dont die,, but get away to fight another day. (Neros not dead, just lost in time and space,,,for now,,)

Long tense ship battles !

The red shirt guy calling someone a “cup cake”

Time travel !!

Q ! hes bound to be interested in all the changes to the timeline.

Gary Seven and his cat !

Kirk slapping more crew members,Spock, McCoy etc on the back more,

What I dont want to see,,

Over use of the Klingons,, keep them at a distance,, keep them in the dark for as long as you can,,with the helmets on,, maybe they should never take them off to a human etc,, Like Jaws,,its what you dont see,,that scares you the most.

Easter eggs that are impossable to see,
( R2D2 was a google search for me)

Action on screen that moves way to fast,

This is going to be a looooooong 20 months,
Oh by the way,, Im one of the very very few Trek fans that saw the new Trek movie “Spolier Free” !!!!

It almost killed me,, but it was worth it.

God Im not looking forward to,,”not reading the spolier pages” again,,,*sigh


88. Carlo A. Flores - October 12, 2010

So um, if Bob is prowling around. Do they need a Motion Designer/Graphic Designer? I’ll do your titles! And even better than Andrew Kramer! Seriously everyone needs a graphic designer, even JJ. Tell him to phone me up, and I’ve won a local Emmy, and that’s gotta count for something!

89. Trekprincess - October 12, 2010

Hey Bob great to hear that things are progressing :)LLAP now blow us all away with a great sequel

90. moauvian waoul - October 12, 2010

Scare us

91. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

86: “A script is a living, breathing organism capable of learning and growth.”

You mean like The Thing?

92. boborci - October 12, 2010

91. Did the Thing learn anything?

93. Captain Dan - October 12, 2010

Good luck with it all Bob, Alex, Damon and co. You did a great job with Star Trek and I can’t wait to see where you take us in the next adventure. I’d love more starship eye-candy, something that would get a similar (or better) reaction to the Enterprise coming out of Titan’s atmosphere in the next film. That’s my only request. Storywise, I look forward to whatever you come up with.

94. boborci - October 12, 2010

93. Noted, Cap’n.

95. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010


Now, you see, that’s The Thing! :>)

96. He's dead, Jim - October 12, 2010

I’d like to see a story that considers the consequences of the alternate universe now created. Since time travel is possible, deal with the dilemma of whether or not to go back and try to set things right, particularly concerning the destruction of Vulcan. Unfortunately, it would be derivative because it’s been done in so many sci-fi stories including ST. How to make something like that fresh and original would be a challenge, if it could be done well at all.

97. The REAL Jim Kirk - October 12, 2010

This Pine looks nothing like me! I suggest enlarging the cod region on his uniform…

98. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

86. “A script is a living, breathing organism capable of learning and growth”

Ah, Bob is hinting that the crew is up against an entity, like in “The Immunity Syndrome”.


99. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

92: “Did the Thing learn anything?”

I dunno. The ending always has me guessing!

100. David C. Roberson - October 12, 2010

I’m sick of the Klingons. I know people get angry when it’s mentioned, but HARRY MUDD PLAYED BY PAUL GIAMATTI!!! Space pirates. That is happening. Bob, maybe it’s been asked before, but were the Klingon helmets in the deleted Trek 09 scenes a way to get around the “will they have ridges” question? Inquiring Daves want to know.

101. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

I want to see Kirk fight a Mugatu!

102. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

I used to think Giamatti for Mudd. But watching Joel McHale on Community got me thinking how much that guy actually resembles — or would resemble — a young, and more physically fit, Roger C. Carmel/Mudd. Seriously. Look at them together. I can see it.

103. Daniel - October 12, 2010

If a Klingon ship appears in the film, I’m hoping for a beauty shot that makes the vessel look enormous. TMP provided the best shots we have so far, and I’m sure it can be done on a much bigger & better scale.

104. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010


105. Daniel - October 12, 2010

Regarding Scotty and the brewery, it would be cool if Scotty first appears in the brewery, and then he gets called to “main engineering” and he enters a set which is much more familiar to us.

106. moauvian waoul - October 12, 2010

105. Like the idea. I second it.

107. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

Would like to see new ship sets. Briefing room. Stellar Cartography. Jefferies tube. We have to have the Jefferies tube. Even if it’s just where Scotty goes to eat his lunch in peace.

108. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

Except, in this reality, it might be called the Abrams tube!


109. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

No, it would have to be the Chambliss Tube. Good thing the production designer wasn’t named George Fallopian.

110. Harry Ballz - October 12, 2010

Or Boob.

111. Anthony Thompson - October 12, 2010

Things I want to see:

1. More lens flares. Please!
2. Bring back an 81 year old Shatner for sentimental reasons.
3. An expanded role for Cupcake.
4. In the alternate universe, Nurse Chapel is male (and still has a crush on Mr. Spock). Hey, you did it with Kono!
5. A tumultuous love triangle is now set up for Uhura, Spock and the male Chapel.
6. Have the inertial dampener malfunction a milisecond before going to warp.
7. My non-negotiable request: cast Harry Ballz as Harry Mudd.

112. Phobos - October 12, 2010

So many great ideas in these posts.
I hope Shatner has a role. “Hang on!!!”

113. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

The next film should have more poetry. I don’t necessarily mean the written kind, but the visual kind. More visual expressions like the birth of James Kirk, like the spectacular fall of Routh’s Superman, like Roy Batty’s speech and death in Blade Runner, or like the ending of Runaway Train. I’ve never thought there was a good reason that Star Trek couldn’t appeal to fans while being a work of cinematic art as well.

114. Phobos - October 12, 2010

By the way guys, remember the TNG Ron Jones CD boxset some of us pre-ordered months ago? I got an email mine shipped yesterday. So they are starting to roll out to us.

115. dmduncan - October 12, 2010

I guess the thing I’m asking for out of whatever story you’ve got, is beauty.

116. cd - October 12, 2010

86 – Well, the last script was kind of stunted by the strike; it was not allowed to learn and grow. Hopefully, that won’t be an issue this time.
Good Luck!

117. Buzz Cagney - October 12, 2010

Its going to be better. The fellas hands were a little tied by having to fit in the whole ‘introductions’ and ‘coming together’ bit.They did a fine job of that but it did mean the story was a bit lacking (with all due respect, Bob).
Next time will be different. I have very high hopes indeed, as I’m sure the team does. Good luck guys.

118. Areli - October 12, 2010

All I ask is that Mr. Shatner gets a cameo. It can be the smallest thing. Like Jim is walking past some planet’s native and the man turns a bit and BAM its Shatner for two sec which turns heads in audience and that is all we see of the Shat.

And no Khan. And yes to Chapel. No to S/U sex…maybe. And yes to McSpirk friendship of epicness. And yes to a beautiful and meaningful plot and aesthetically pleasing shots that catch the eye and tell a story without speaking.

I have other wishes but I’m too excited to hear about them working!

119. DJT - October 12, 2010

And the anticipation begins…

120. Buzz Cagney - October 12, 2010

#119 that began the moment I walked out of the cinema having watched Trek 09, DJT. :-D

121. Jim Nightshade - October 12, 2010

Dear Mr Bob Orci Prime—What a long strange trip its been up 2 now–You n Alex n Jj et al have managed to do the impossible–You guys picked up the holy grail of trek,dressed it up 2 make it shiny n new for so many-n sped it up for more universal appeal,with humor n pacing n obvious great love for the original source material, n took us on a new bold adventure proving against all odds that treks human adventure is just beginning, again–this was an awesome responsibility n u guys nailed it! Who better to bring us the next chapter than you guys–? Cant wait for the first new trailer to give us fans an idea of what is our next new star trek–We trust ya n luv ya guys–just make shure your script is sooo good that jj will wanna direct again–nuff said(whos nuff anyway?)

122. MJ - October 12, 2010

118 — well I guess I could handle a 2 second cameo of Shat. He would only charge about half a mil for 2 seconds.

123. David C. Roberson - October 13, 2010

This is what I want from a the Trek (nu)II:

2.) Scott Bakula as Admiral Archer
3.) NO KHAN.
4.) Even MORE so, NO SHATNER. (Time to let the baby birds fly)
5.) An over-arching story that reaches into (nu)III
6.) Classic Science Fiction intelligence
7.) Re-design of The Enterprise (at least make the bussard collectors the right color)
8.) Please no Klingons… Haven’t we seen enough of them?

124. Will I am - October 13, 2010

Even if I love STII, please no Kahn!
And about the lense flares, I liked them! They really supported that optimistic idea behind Star Trek, so leave them as the were in ST09!

Thanks and good luck to all the writing members of the supreme court ;-)

125. yeti - October 13, 2010

Pike injured in battle attack on outpost colony (Mars perhaps).. Kirk/Enterprise dispatched when he realises his Brother Sam is a colonist. Brother saved at the expense of Pike, blood over heart!!! Kirk takes the guilt and is some way motivated and forced to perhaps grow up even further with the burden. Oh and this all happens in the first 30mins or so. The threat is malevolent.

Oh and they pulled the warp naecelles apart a little made them a bit smaller :)

Oh and dont forget the mini Keenser christmas special Bob remember? ;)

126. Phobos - October 13, 2010

I hope Spock does not develop his relationship with Uhura. What makes the character unique and universally recognized is his cold logic & brilliant scientific mind.

The sex belongs to Kirk.

127. Phobos - October 13, 2010

hmm I wonder what is meant by saying “Deeper character development”.
Anyone know?

128. dc - October 13, 2010

More shots of the ship inside and outside. Don’t forget the shuttle crafts.

129. Phobos - October 13, 2010

2 things have been said by boborci
– “Let the games begin” (I wonder what episode that could be a reference to)
– “deeper character development” (I wonder what the means in real life, how does that translate on film?)

Think people, think! The clues are there.

130. Phobos - October 13, 2010

Let the games begin………….
Q? …
Isnt there an episode where Q screams aloud “Let the games begin!!”
That would be SO cool if Q made a surprise appearance in the next Star Trek
Shatner could get his cameo that way.

either that or maybe its a reference to the TOS episode with an analogy to roman times and the games.

131. Phobos - October 13, 2010

Here is one possibility: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Epy_ZJJakI
TNG “Hide and Q”
Around 4 min in Q says “Games? Did someone say game!?”

132. Cheve - October 13, 2010

Boborci, Only one question to know you are in the good road.

Did you write “Scene #: Exterior-Space” already?

133. Dom - October 13, 2010

Do something new. Let it stand alone. Let it be great!

134. MJ - October 13, 2010

125 — I like the idea of bringing Sam Kirk into the mix.

135. keachick - October 13, 2010

Hello, Bob Orci –
So great to read that the actual scriptwriting has begun. Isn’t it a bit late to be saying what we would like to see in the new film, since the story is already been done? Now, it is a matter of giving everyone lines to say…

Anyway, here’s my shopping list (for better or worse):

* 2D, please
* No Khan, No Borg and definitely NO CAROL MARCUS
* Yes to a few Klingons and/or Andorians
* OK to continuing Spock/Uhura romance – (a little info for you – young Spock has found that he can reproduce with human and vulcan women and Vulcans must repopulate…)
* OK to monster animals so long as they are more anatomically correct than the monster in Trek 09 – please no (ugly) creatures with 250 eyes all over their body
* Chris Pine said he would like to bring out the more comic side of Kirk, and Kirk did have a sense of humour. Now that Kirk is captain, what might he have in mind for Cupcake? Some mischievous fun is what is needed here…
* Kirk starts a romance with Jasmia he meets on Earth, but who originally came from a beautiful new world which the Enterprise finds/discovers on its mission of exploration. It turns out that Jasmia’s life depends on finding her homeworld…(btw, she does not die or betray Kirk in any way, none of the old crappola). They become soul-mates, lovers…

78 wrote: “Scotty: “I made some personal modifications to the engine room Cap’n. Hope ya like it. The old one looked like a brewery!”
Hmm.. If this Scotty is anything like prime Scotty, it will be Kirk who orders certain modifications to be made after he keeps finding Scotty’s stashes of Budweisers and neat Scotch Whiskey hidden around the brewery like engineering section…

So many movies are dark in theme and appearance, violent and crude. Star Trek stood for optimism and a better future. Whether or not that can be achieved in reality is unknown, but with the advances made in how and what movies can show, surely it is possible to show great beauty and majesty, reflecting something of what could be out there in space beyond. Sure, there is probably evil and darkness, but there must also the opposite. Let this movie show some true beauty, light and goodness as well. Allow the Enterprise crew at least to be able to experience some of this, especially “my captain”, who had such bad luck when it came to matters of the heart, and then his son is murdered. In this alternate universe, some things can be different…

136. Cygnus-X1 - October 13, 2010

There should be a fight scene in the new film where Kirk tries to use the classic TOS moves, like the karate chop to the back and the drop-kick, but becomes dismayed when the moves have little effect on the person he’s fighting.

137. Kirk, James T. - October 13, 2010

Star Trek (2009) is the Star Trek I’ve always wanted to see. I’ve loved Trek since 1994 but always felt that it deserved better treatment in terms of scope. I think your DVD term to identify the differences with your Trek and old Trek and it was that old Trek (1966 – 2005) was classical music and your’s was a bit more rock and roll.

So if the sequel should be anything it’s more rock and roll than the first and also inspired by such uber popular films like The Dark Knight, Empire Strikes Back and Jurassic Park (I love JP) and if JJ Abrams doesn’t direct (which I hope isn’t the case) then perhaps Matt Reeves (Cloverfield, Let Me In) should do it.


138. Nomad - October 13, 2010

Wish list for ST2:

-EXPLORE a stange new world or two. Preferably one that actually looks really alien and not just lke Earth but with slightly different architecture and fashions.

-SEEK OUT new life and new civilizations, preferably ones that aren’t just a thinly-veiled rehash of some old Earth culture, oe even humanoid at all. THe old TV series’ technical and budget limits are no longer an issue. Take advantage of that. Let’s have some real aliens that look alien and THINK alien.

-BOLDLY GO WHERE NO MAN/ONE HAS GONE BEFORE. Doesn’t it bother anyone else that they NEVER live up to that promise?

And finally NO KHAN! That would be the ultimate copout. I always thought Trek was about so much more than just fighting some overly-theatrical, silent-movie-type villain. Doing it with the same villain twice would really be scraping the creative barrel.

-No time travel. Done to death.

139. LOFC_Ed - October 13, 2010

It’s got to be Klingons. Considering they have not featured at all (apart from in the extras cut scenes on the DVD, they should be the main antagonists.

Be quite ammusing to see the Borg in there!

140. Digginjim - October 13, 2010

re: 139. I agree. Its pretty much got to be the klingons. Partially because they’ve already done the R&D on them (seen in the deleted scenes from ST09) and partly because they are recognisable villains to a wider audience. Apart from the fact Khan has been done brilliantly already in STII a general audience probably wouldn’t have a clue who he was.

141. Harry Ballz - October 13, 2010

111. Anthony Thompson

“7. My non-negotiable request: cast Harry Ballz as Harry Mudd”

“Well, fiddle-dee-dee!! I do declare!”
(blushes, fanning himself)
“I’m ready for my close-up, Mr. Abrams!”

(yes, I AM willing to gain weight for the role and, Anthony, your cheque is in the mail)

“I feel pretty, oh, so pretty!”

142. Vulcan Soul - October 13, 2010

Where is the poll option “Just as bad as Star Trek 2009″? ;)

143. John - October 13, 2010

it doesn’t exist because ST 2009 was a good movie. derp

144. LOFC_Ed - October 13, 2010

re: 140. Totally right. They are indeed very well known, and of course, JJ has always said that he wants to attract the ‘non-Trekkies too. I have not met a person yet who has not heard of a Klingon, although it usually does not come up in casual conversation!

I just hope that they remove them helmets they had and put the ridges on their head.

145. keachick - October 13, 2010

How do you THINK alien? Until we find alien life out in space, if there is any, we only have variations on what we know about human and other life forms from Earth to draw on for inspiration.

“-BOLDLY GO WHERE NO MAN/ONE HAS GONE BEFORE. Doesn’t it bother anyone else that they NEVER live up to that promise?”

It is a promise that no one on earth at the moment can live up to, for the reasons I stated above. However, having a knowledge of overall earth history, anthropology, archeology, ethnology, cultures, languages and religions, botanical and zoological sciences, geology etc (or access to people with some expertise in these various areas) could help the writers come up with interesting “alien” creatures, people and worlds. However, they will still only be variations on what we know is or was already.

Still, an interesting, creative and I would think, exhausting task to bring it all together in a way that is believable and comprehensible to the vast majority of film goers.

Oh dear, Mr Orci, I see they’ve got you doing lines…What have you done? You can tell us, juicy bits n all. We’re the nice trekkies/trekkers. We won’t tell..:)).

Good luck, sincerely, with the next phase of bringing the next Star Trek sequel to us.

BTW – what’s this about voting?

146. Grover Sald - October 13, 2010

The subtitle should be “Twelve.”

It’s the 12th movie, coming out in 2012. But the name “Twelve” could tie into the plot as well. For example…

It seems that all the “good” 2nd films put the main characters into some kind of challenging, harrowing, life-altering conflict (Superman 2, Khan, Empire, etc). There were complaints about Kirk going from cadet to captain in one go. Why not use awareness of that to the next film’s advantage?

Establish that some other Starfleet types, maybe some higher-ups, also think Kirk got promoted too fast. They’re grateful he saved the day and all, but think he doesn’t belong in the captain’s chair just yet.

So far it’s pretty early in the 5-year mission. This is the 12th major assignment and it’s a doozie. And/or maybe there are 12 key people on the mission. 12 is some important lucky/scary number for the inhabitants of the challenging planet they visit, where things go badly wrong for Kirk, at least for a long while. Kirk falls on his face a little (no more choking or hanging off things, though). It’s looking bad. Kirk starts to think maybe “they” were right and he doesn’t belong in that chair yet. Gotta talk to Bones and get some comfort.

Anyway, something like that. TIe it together with 12’s and call it “Twelve.”

coming soon:
Star Trek:

147. Bugs Nixon - October 13, 2010

Now’s a good time to start procrastinating.

Go to the store, do some house chores…

Watch the miners being rescued…

Send some emails…

Check Reddit, Digg…

Think about writing…

Oooh Farmville…

148. Jai - October 13, 2010

“So many movies are dark in theme and appearance, violent and crude. Star Trek stood for optimism and a better future. Whether or not that can be achieved in reality is unknown, but with the advances made in how and what movies can show, surely it is possible to show great beauty and majesty, reflecting something of what could be out there in space beyond. Sure, there is probably evil and darkness, but there must also the opposite. Let this movie show some true beauty, light and goodness as well. Allow the Enterprise crew at least to be able to experience some of this, especially “my captain”, who had such bad luck when it came to matters of the heart, and then his son is murdered. In this alternate universe, some things can be different…”

Beautifully said by Keachick in #135. I was going to add some thoughts of my own for Bob Orci, but this eloquent extract above pretty much sums everything up.

Mr Orci, I think the key word for the next Trek film is “grandeur” – with everything that implies.

149. Jai - October 13, 2010

As for the Klingons….well, if they’re going to make an appearance in the next movie, I do hope the writers familiarise themselves with the later seasons of DS9, which did a brilliant job of showing a far more nuanced and intelligent depiction of the Klingons’ personalities & culture than the one-dimensional “aggressive barbaric thugs” stereotype. Especially when it came to the portrayal of General (later Chancellor) Martok, as superbly acted by JG Hertzler; he frequently had some fantastic lines too, especially in the episode “You are Cordially Invited”.

“The Way of the Warrior”, “Sons of Mogh”, “Apocalypse Rising”, “Soldiers of the Empire”, “Sons and Daughters”, “You are Cordially Invited”, and “Once More Unto the Breach” were particularly good DS9 episodes focusing on different facets of the Klingons, so Mr Orci & co may wish to check these episodes out if they haven’t done so already.

Also, the episode “Blood Oath” featured Kor, Kang and Koloth may be of interest too in terms of gaining further background information, as it focused on 3 major Klingon characters from TOS, all played by the original actors.

150. Hat Rick - October 13, 2010

I have returned from Future Universe 47A, where the weather is always precisely 47 degrees on the Trekigrade scale, and here are the answers (for Universe 47A only):

* Who will direct (if Abrams decides not to do it, then who?)


* What will it be called (and will it have “Star Trek” in the title)?

“Star Trek 2.”

* Budget (bigger than 2009 film, smaller? the same?)


* 3-D or not 3-D


* Who/what is the villain (Khan, Klingons, both, others?)


* Will we see new familiar Trek characters (Nurse Chapel, Harry Mudd, others?)

Several new familiar characters will appear.

* Will William Shatner be in it?


* Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?)


* Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?)

No big star — none necessary. Look for cameos.

* Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props)

For continuity’s sake, there will be few changes. However, there will be some.

* Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film (Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.)

Yes, yes, no.

And of course…will there be more or less lens flares?

Yes and no.

This has been a Universe 47A prediction.

151. Yankee Baseball - October 13, 2010

I think they should deal with the consequences of what they started in the first movie–namely the issue of whether the prime universe is really gone. And I don’t mean something that glosses over it. They can talk about all the modern scientific THEORY all they want, but the bottom line is that in Star Trek, if you time travel, you change history. The only exception would be if they flat out establish that this is a different universe. They did not do that.

But they totally can do that in this movie and some sort of threat that threatens both universes would be a way to bring in Kirk Prime AND address the issue of whether the prime universe is still around.

Obviously, I’m in big favor of Shatner returning, but again, if they aren’t going to do that, please stop playing games and just say so early. It’s the right thing to do.

152. G - October 13, 2010

Klingons would seem to be a good choice, but ONLY if they take them to the next level.. more savage and barbaric/”Planet of the Apes”-like, more alien and mysterious,etc (‘Planet of the Apes’ meets ‘300’?) LOL. We’ve gotten too use to them over the years.

153. G - October 13, 2010

@ 151. Yankee Baseball – October 13, 2010

I think they should deal with the consequences of what they started in the first movie–namely the issue of whether the prime universe is really gone.
I thought about that, too. But, honestly, I don’t know if that would be the way to go anymore. To them, this ‘universe’ is the only one they know (it’s perfectly normal to them). They never directly experienced the prime universe, so they don’t know what they’re missing. I don’t see why they would be compelled to ‘restore’ anything in that timeline (since they were never there)

154. Pensive's Wetness - October 13, 2010

how could Khan be in it? we have Old-Spock spilling the beans on sme major possibly-to-occur events for the feddy’s: The DDM, Finding (and either destroying or imprisoning) the Bounty Bay crew, V’ger, The whale probe, Praxis (which might happen earlier because the ridge-heads would likely freak from the Narada attack)… heck, even the borg are likely known (if little understood) enities… the question for the feddy’s is this: If you know they are coming, how do you deal with them?

i think that’s a question for the writers to chew on… certainly, the book writers, too…

155. David B - October 13, 2010


Listen to what Old Spock said at the very end of ST 2009 before the end credits and do that.

A way to get Shatner in…

Make him the Guardian of Forever, changes his image to Old Kirk for a familiar face, think God ST5. This is what you will become if you live long enough!

The problem with timelines is things HAD to happen in earth history for things to be as they are in ST09. All the time travel the Star Trek crews have done to Earth in the past before Nero turned up still happen so all future Next Generation, DS9 and Voyager crews still have to become as they are for them to do whatever they did.

156. jas_montreal - October 13, 2010

Shatner will be Jabba in the next Star Trek movie.

Nimoy can be Bib Fortuna. His second in command.

157. Anthony L. - October 13, 2010

I have only two requests and I don’t think either of them are particularly asking too much.

1. Don’t bring back Shatner. If need be just have Grungberg play Shatner playing Kirk. This is a win.

2. Toss out whatever story you have come up with and just do a $150 Million Dollar shot-for-shot remake of Spock’s Brain.*

*If this is already what you’ve laid out story wise then there is no need to throw the story out the window.

158. jas_montreal - October 13, 2010

The only request i have is that I want the Trek sequel to give me the same experience that all the great sequels have given me (aka. Wrath of Khan, Empire Strikes back, Dark Knight, Bourne Supremacy, etc.).

Is that too much to ask for ?

159. Scooter - October 13, 2010

Glad they’ve started on the script. No lens flares, no KKKKKKAAAAAHHHHHNNNNN, and no SH#@, NO SHAT! Something original, something new. Maybe even a little darker. Great opportunity to go where no Trek movie has gone before.

160. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Having Shatner in it wouldnt bother me in the least. Oddly enough I didnt include him in the FB script Im doing though, hmmmm. Now that I think of it I dont know how you could include him without it being a major piece of the plot, But Im certain it could be done in some fashion.

As far as the lens flares and stuff like that, I think those are more of the directors touches and set design than in the actual script.

161. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Having Shatner in it wouldnt bother me in the least. Oddly enough I didnt include him in the FB script Im doing though, hmmmm. Now that I think of it I dont know how you could include him without it being a major piece of the plot, But Im certain it could be done in some fashion.

As far as the lens flares and stuff like that, I think those are more of the directors touches and set design than in the actual script.

162. ChristopherPike - October 13, 2010


As the Vulcans closest relatives, they should hog the spotlight and make up for all those original movies in which they got sidelined in favour of picture after story featuring the Klingons.

163. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Im so sorry, Im not sure why my posts are double.

164. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Im so sorry, Im not sure why my posts are double.

165. Yankee Baseball - October 13, 2010

153–true to an extent. But billions of people died and billions of people will not be born thanks to the events of this movie. The way to make the stakes high would be to have Spock Prime come to his senses and actually act in character to preserve the timeline. OR, they could have their cake and eat it too by creating a threat powerful enough to threaten both universes–one that not one, but TWO Kirks need to deal with.

Of course, Kirk and crew–both versions, are likely meant to be the same heroic characters. Their experiences may be different, but I’m guessing that their values will be the same. If that’s the case, then Pine Kirk and crew WOULD fix a broken timeline.

Oh, and please drop the Spock/Uhura romance. It was both out of character and forced.

166. CarlG - October 13, 2010

No, walk the dogs first or they’ll never leave you alone while you’re trying to write! :)

167. scifijunky - October 13, 2010

I want the Klingons – TOS Klingons. Not those LotR Orc rip-offs that can be seen in the deleted scenes of Star Trek ’09.

168. Oz - October 13, 2010

My suggestion that I have noted a couple of times over the last few months was to use what I called a “jazzed up” finale of an original series episode as a teaser/opening to the film, like the Doomsday machine. Thanks to Damian #17 for keeping that particular flame alive!

Couple of other points:

-Would be great to see Spock and Kirk playing chess as a nice homage to TOS. Of course, they could be exchanging plot advancing dialogue at the same time.

-Remember McCoy is not ALWAYS cranky, would be nice to see Karl showing us a little of Bones’ compassionate side.

-I’ll send you a bright shiny new quarter Bob, if you can get a new Engineering set for the Enterprise into the film.

I know you guys are going to do great things, I have no worries. Best of luck.

169. beerwriter - October 13, 2010

112 — “So many great ideas in these posts.” None of which Bob’s lawyers will let him touch.

170. JT - October 13, 2010

2 main issues to deal with from the last movie.

1) Kirk promoted before having enough real world experience with the position of Captain. Should be some kind of consequences to that decision.

2) Destruction of Vulcan. Loss of Vulcan should have severe consequences for the Federation which need to be explored.

171. spaceteach - October 13, 2010


172. Damian - October 13, 2010

#168–I was trying to remember who’s idea that was. I kept thinking that I did not want them to retread old stories, but that idea was cool. I hope they consider it (The Doomsday Machine was one of my favorites).

#151–While it was not said on screen, Orci has said it was their intent that this is a new, alternate universe. Since he wrote it, I accept what he says, even if it was not expressed on screen. I think now they want to leave the prime universe be for 2 reasons (1) they want to move in a new direction without worrying all the time about violating canon, (2) they don’t want to violate canon anyway.

#167–I think their appearance in those scenes was because they could not decide on ridge vs no ridges. I wouldn’t rule Klingons out, but they have been in a majority of the movies already and I just don’t know that I can get all that excited about seeing them yet again.

I am not a fan of lens flares. However, that is JJ’s thing and if he directs, I fully expect a plethora of them. For me, I found they made it hard to appreciate the special effects. To me, flares make a movie look sloppy. While I am only in my 30’s, I guess I am old fashioned when it comes to movies. I like clean, crisp, steady camera work. I am not into reality TV, documentary filming like we are watching the evening news in a battlefield camera work that is popular today.

173. Daoud - October 13, 2010

Alex, are we there yet?

174. tjagoda - October 13, 2010

Please, no 3D. =(

175. pock speared - October 13, 2010

okay b’orci, will you please admit that the working title is: “star trek: bob and silent alex strike back”?

176. denny cranium - October 13, 2010

Great to see you Bob as always

people story is WRITTEN

The script writing will now “grow that story up”

Please remember its “show BUSINESS” they have to get bums to sit in the theatre seats.

Looking forward to it.

177. Kirk, James T. - October 13, 2010

*Who will direct (if Abrams decides not to do it, then who?)

I’d prefer Abrams because he’s successfully done the first movie and whilst another director could come in such as Matt Reeves (Cloverfield), Abrams like Nolan’s Batman universe has already made his mark with this vision of Star Trek and whilst different directors might not hurt, perhaps even boost the next movie, they will obviously have their own ideas that might not work as well and plus there wouldn’t be any more lens flair which I thought gave Star Trek a unique quality.

*What will it be called (and will it have “Star Trek” in the title)?

Unlike Batman, Star Trek doesn’t really have any other words that have not been used before that would be instantly recognisable as a Star Trek movie by the majority and you can’t really call a movie “To Boldly Go” because it just sounds stupid.

The Final Frontier would be great had it not already been used or perhaps Enterprise had that not been used either so maybe it needs to be in a similar vein to the original Star Wars movies or maybe…

“Live Long and Prosper”?

*Budget (bigger than 2009 film, smaller? the same?)

Like all these major motion picture sequels, the budget should be as big as it needs to be – if it’s bigger then so be it. What I would suggest is that Paramount spend more and do an even better job advertising it especially overseas.

*3-D or not 3-D

This is tricky… Star Trek would be cool in 3D especially the space battles but If it is used, It shouldn’t hinder the story. 3D is still a gimmick to me and I think when it is used (besides Toy Story 3), the story usually suffers such as seen with Avatar.

*Who/what is the villain (Khan, Klingons, both, others?)

The Klingons would be great and if they do as good a job as Christopher Nolan and Heath Ledger did reinventing the Joker then sure why not bring Khan back, there’s a whole generation that haven’t seen or known about Space Seed or Star Trek II.

*Will we see new familiar Trek characters (Nurse Chapel, Harry Mudd, others?)

In Star Trek, I dunno if anyone heard McCoy just when he saw Kirks hands but he shouted “Nurse Chapel I need…” So she is alive in this universe and would be cool to see. As for Harry Mudd, if the story required him to be there then sure, I would expect that a 21st century version of him would be slightly perverse and someone you’d really hate, In my head he’d be a really vile pimp.

*Will William Shatner be in it?

NO WAY – these new guys need to go it alone now, the prime timeline and it’s characters are better left well alone enjoyed by anyone who wants to seek them out on TV reruns or DVD and BluRay.

*Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?)

I hope we see at least Pike

*Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?)

I would definitely like big named A listers appearing in this movie, It’s something that was lacking in the first. Cast in roles that were obviously secondary to the main Enterprise cast but as important to Kirk and co as Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Heath Ledger, Liam Neesen have been to Bruce Wayne.

The boost in Zoe Saldana’s and Chris Pine’s profile has probably helped and can only continue to help the films they are in but most definitely more A-listers and internationally recognised stars are needed.

*Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props)

I would expect new sets to be build but I wouldn’t want the ship to change drastically especially not externally. I also don’t think they should destroy It unless they intend to have our heroes scattered about the place in a possible 3rd instalment.

*Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film (Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.)

i would hope that the first film is linked with the 2nd film and that the basis for the 2nd story is from something done in the first movie. I really hope that Abrams does a trilogy and then perhaps either moving on to do something else OR launching a Star Trek TV series produced by the “Supreme Court”, from the makers of FRINGE and LOST comes…

178. Bridgekid - October 13, 2010

I think the idea of a “teaser” in the beginning and then moving on to something totally new is a great idea – Star Trek has always been about looking forward (even in the time travel episodes). That said, the idea of taking one of the stories from the original series in a completely new direction is very appealing, perhaps Khan not as a villain but a hero?

I am not a fan of 3D and would rather not see Shatner forced into the storyline just to satisfy certain demands.

179. Aurore - October 13, 2010

151+165-Apparently, we agree on many things;Shatner in the sequel,and now as I can see, what became of the prime universe, Spock/Uhura…I love this site! It’s exciting!

180. Aurore - October 13, 2010

Good luck to Roberto Orci and his colleagues with the scripting of the sequel.Just make it very good.

181. Danpaine - October 13, 2010


Respect what came before, like you did before, and it will be great (again).

One more vote for Shatner, here, for what it’s worth.

Best of luck.

182. Thorny - October 13, 2010

Klingons are okay with me, as long as some thought and motivation is put into their characters. I’m really tired of the conquest-loving, honor-above-all, scenery-chewing “we must die a glorious death!” Klingons that we got from TNG onwards. Really, the only two well-developed Klingon characters in the last 25 years were Worf and General Martok, all the others were comic book characters running around with Bat’Leths and snarling. Enough already. And no silly motivations like “Spock didn’t single-handedly save my planet, so I’m going to blow up his” to which no one else in the crew says “hey, I think the Cap’n’s gone nuts, maybe we should lock him up.” Something a little more, ahem, logical please.

183. Flint - October 13, 2010

There are over 70 episodes to get ideas from, we already have a movie and an episode about Khan. Instead of 1 villain and his cronies floating through the space time continuum , can’t we come up with something a little more creative? Something maybe a little more intellectual then action packed violence with the plot being kill me or I’ll kill you.

184. Sotirios Moshonas - October 13, 2010

Great. Whoopee. Ray. More garbage from Star Trek 90210. No 3-D please. Nuff said. Looks like JJ, Orca and the rest of the garbage writers is putting ST down to the abyss. I guess Parentmount is killing Gene and Majel’s baby.

I guess Paramount Canada or Paramount Australia or Paramount International (minus the Parents in Hollywood, Calif.) can only save Star Trek.

Here is a message for those “P’taqs” in Parentmount Pictures: BRING BACK STAR TREK: ENTERPRISE!

Thank you for your time and I apologise to anyone if I insulted anyone.

Did anyone see “Macbeth” on PBS? Sir Patrick Stewart did a great job. So did everyone else in their parts. I just wish David Tennant made an appearance.

But you might be right. Just because they were great together in “Hamlet” and it works, that does not mean it could work again in “Macbeth”. It is a 50-50 risk taking.

185. Horatio - October 13, 2010

Agree with #50. Enterprise is not an appliance. It is (like your the script, apparently) a living breathing organism. Treat her as an equal character with the rest of the cast. Remember, she is really Kirk’s one true love.

Oh and also – don’t screw the pooch.

186. P Technobabble - October 13, 2010

Here’s what I think should be in the next Star Trek film:

1 – Kirk knitting sweaters for the crew. All 1100 of them. His crew always comes first.
2 – Spock visiting Earth, doing a bit of surfing and hanging with some bikini-clad babes. He gives them a brief lecture on proper balancing techniques. His passion is information.
3 – McCoy learning to play the fiddle and getting aggravated to the point he flings the instrument, hitting a patient in the head. He can’t believe what he’s just done to his fiddle.
4 – Scotty riding a bicycle around the ship, waving and saying ‘hi’ to everyone. He’s really just a happy-go-lucky guy.
5- Sulu jumping up and down on a trampoline, unable to perform any actual acrobatics.
6 – Chekov taking piano lessons from the ship’s computer. He’s all thumbs and tin ear, with little evidence he will ever improve.
7 – Uhura trying to unzip a broken zipper on her uniform, assuming advanced yoga positions in the process. She absolutely HATES when something goes wrong.
8 – Throughout the film, Kirk Prime is trying to get anyone to play Fizzbin. All of his requests are shunned. No one wants to play with the poor guy from an alternate universe.
I feel these subplots could add great dimension to the characters’ development.

187. Aurore - October 13, 2010

I approve of this list.

188. Excelsior - October 13, 2010

I know you guys are not cinematographers, but please ignore the lens flair whiners. My suggestion would be to ask the director of photography to please keep the lens flairs. Don’t necessarily add more or anything, but the same amount is fine. It gives the movie a high level of sheen and polish, and helps to keep the average viewer engaged during the techno-babble sequences. Yes the purist will whine, but one of the reasons the film succeeded amongst the non-Trekkies was due to the sweeping cinematography that helped keep asses in seats while the plot was unfolding. The film was expertly made in every regard, so one would assume the whole “lens flair” aspect was placed in the film strategically. Anyways, I wish you success on the new script!

189. Excelsior - October 13, 2010

Lens Flare – spell checkkkkkk!!!!

190. Tom - October 13, 2010

Definitely should do the Shatner scene. Could also put him in some kind of mind meld flashback as well. And if anyone could get Nimoy out of retirement even briefly it would be this team with a well written scene. It just enriches the story without taking away from the great new crew.

191. Gorn Fishin' - October 13, 2010

Maybe the Lens Flares should be the enemy in this one…

192. ensign joe - October 13, 2010

Hey boborci.. question for you..

Do you ever write to music? If so.. what music do you write Star Trek to?


193. Jeff - October 13, 2010

Wanna see the command crew in some sort of intense Starfleet sailing regatta competition (think Americas Cup type boats) off the California coast against other crews… a Starfleet tradition of sorts, hearkening back to the Naval Academy origins…every cadet learns to sail. Think it could be an awesome set piece to reintroduce us to the crew, see them working together, playing… their boat would be the Enterprise of course!

194. Gorn Fishin' - October 13, 2010

192 – i have boborci pegged as a polka-metal man…

195. Cheve - October 13, 2010

>151. Yankee Baseball – October 13, 2010
>I think they should deal with the consequences of what they started in the
>first movie–namely the issue of whether the prime universe is really gone.

It isn’t. Divergent timelines coexist (And even meet from time to time) as shown by the precedent of the mirror universe.

But I honestly hope there is a LOT of time before we are able to watch the frst Prime vs New universe crossover.

196. Trekprincess - October 13, 2010

What do you mean by let the baby birds fly:)

197. Captain Ucklak - October 13, 2010

I want to see:

A progression of the Starfleet uniforms, with more nods to Star Trek: TMP as was done at the end of ST 2009 with Pike’s admiral uniform.

More character interplay, especially among Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Remember, they are the “Big Three.”

Chapel and Rand, if only briefly. Even one line of dialogue from a known minor character would be a nice “Easter Egg.” For example, Kevin Riley, Lt. Kyle, Kelowitz, Desalle, DePaul, and of course Mr. Leslie.

Shatner, but only if integral to the script. Don’t “shoehorn” him.

More musical “stings” and sounde effects from the Original Series.

198. Anthony Thompson - October 13, 2010

141. Harry

You are willing to gain weight for the role instead of just using padding? I forsee a great method acting career in the making! : D

199. Thorny - October 13, 2010

Is the Shatner seen even possible anymore? I thought Nimoy has said he is officially and permanently retired.

200. cw - October 13, 2010

Can someone answer this? If Spock Prime and Kirk mind melded so Kirk could get the low down on the current situation, doesn’t that mean he knows EVERYTHING Spock knows? ‘Our minds are one…..” and all that? So, given that fact: Would Kirk not just pull up on the Botany Bay and KNOW not to revive Khan and Co? Would he just KNOW that the Planet Killer can be blown up from the inside out?? Would he not just KNOW all of the stuff that the Time incursion had know effect on and be able to handle it the ‘right way’ this time??
I don’t buy into the selective sharing crap either, your minds are one, or their not if you ask me.

201. Kit - October 13, 2010

Because I know that this is one of the few places that writers actually read, appreciate, and consider the opinions of their viewers, I would like to offer my two cents worth:

– Please, no Khan. I would prefer a new bad guy, since Trek 2009 takes place 10 years before (2258) the TOS episodes (2268) did. Not necessarily a new race (or an alien at all, for that matter…could be human), just a new individual we haven’t met yet. That being said, I would like to see Kang, Koloth, and/or Kor make an appearance in this movie or the next, just not as the main baddie(s). Over all, who the main villain is, is not as important as him/her being well written. Considering how well Nero was done, I really don’t expect this to be an issue.

– I would like to see Scotty as less Jar Jar-like, and more professional. I realise he was meant to be the comic relief, but it’s quite possible to give him humorous lines/scenes/situations, without having him act like a kid on a sugar rush. Indeed, we see hints of this already towards the end of the first movie, so I’m hoping that this was a clue that he will settle down a bit.

– Would love to see more of Pike.

– As for Shatner, I kinda feel like that ship has already sailed. I really liked the hologram scene that was written, and I wish it would have worked out, but I think that trying to put him in at this point would feel forced. Let the new cast go forth on their own.

Also, a couple of points that aren’t so much about writing, but more about production in general:

– Please, no brewery. I saw the movie before I read that parts were filmed in a Budweiser plant, and I immediately said, “Why did they make it look like a brewery?” It really took me out of the movie, and to this day I can’t figure out why the communications center Uhura was initially posted at was surrounded by vats.

– Please, Please…kill the lens flares. I know JJ likes them, but I find them distracting and a bit annoying.

* The above are merely my opinions, and are in no way meant to convey “This is how it must be!” Tank you for reading, and Live Long And Prosper.

202. VOODOO - October 13, 2010

– Both Shatner and Nimoy in the movie
– J.J. Abrams directs
– At the very least an explanation of what Spock prime is doing
– Don’t care one way or the other about 3-D
– More lens flares
– Big name star to attract bigger foreign audience
– New release date so the film doesn’t get lost in the huge summer blockbuster release date that the film currently has.
– If someone like Scott Bakula from the less popular version of ST is in this film and Shatner isn’t I am going to be angry : )
– Better explanation of alt universe
– Better ending for Spock Prime. Kind of just left him stranded.
– Better ending for Kirk Prime.
– No Khan
– Interaction between prime universe and alt universe.
– Patrick Stewart cameo

203. Anthony Thompson - October 13, 2010

Hey Bob,

Why is it that in your Twitter pic you look like Hollywood Bob, the evil twin to the cuddly Bob we all know and love?

204. rogue_alice - October 13, 2010

boldy go where no one has gone before. and, bring back the wonder and awe of the first series. make me feel like a kid again that saw the birth of this great franchise.

put me on the edge of my seat with my affection for and wishes of safety for my beloved crew.

show me the ship. she is a love of mine. show that they care for her (and in turn she “cares” for them. The E HAS a soul; she is an entity. She is a star as well.

That’s all for now.

205. Boborci - October 13, 2010

203. Because it is Fidel Castro.

206. John from Cincinnati - October 13, 2010

Hey BobOrci-

How about a small morsel of info on the new story, just for loyal trekmovie.com readers?

207. David S - October 13, 2010

* Who will direct (if Abrams decides not to do it, then who?) Nobody but Abrams
* What will it be called (and will it have “Star Trek” in the title)? Yes, it will.
* Budget (bigger than 2009 film, smaller? the same?) Same
* 3-D or not 3-D NO!!
* Who/what is the villain (Khan, Klingons, both, others?) No Khan
* Will we see new familiar Trek characters (Nurse Chapel, Harry Mudd, others?) Hopefully
* Will William Shatner be in it? NO!
* Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?) Greenwood, PLEASE!
* Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?) No big name stars please … they do just fine on their own. This includes Shatner
* Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props) Maybe engineering
* Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film (Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.) Maybe some, but shouldn’t distract from new story

My 2 cents :)

208. Oz - October 13, 2010

Bob has to be careful what he says. Even now, the rumors suggesting Fidel Castro is the antagonist in the next film have probably started.

209. Damian - October 13, 2010

188–I suppose that we have a difference of opinion but the excessive flares and the epileptic camera operators made me want to get out of my seat to take an Excedrin. I mean we had scenes in space that look like they were shot by a guy running through raging rapids.

186–Loved the list;)

202–Bakula would actually be easier for 2 reasons (1) most importantly, he said he would do a cameo. (2) His presence would not require any exposition and would be a simple sending off. Shatner’s Kirk died, so it stands to reason, it would require a good deal of screen time to explain why he is there. I already noted my feelings about Shatner and will not beat a dead horse. Suffice it to say that Shatner being in it will distract viewers from the new cast, who deserve to move forward now. Ironically, it is the very fact that Shatner would be instantly recognizable by fans and non-fans alike that I’d rather not see it. Bakula would be an easter egg for the hardcore Trekkie and would just be an aged admiral sending them on their way to others. Basically, Bakula would not be a distracting influence.

210. Daoud - October 13, 2010

Bob, who’s driving the car first? Do you and Alex flip a coin?

211. Anthony Thompson - October 13, 2010


What a relief! ; ) His beard looks better than usual here. Dyed and trimmed? But I don’t want to diss him too much because I actually kind of like the guy. Really.

212. Anthony Thompson - October 13, 2010


Speaking of politics, you are an enigma. I thought I had read here a while back that you pooh-poohed climate change and are politically on the right. But then I read the Five-0 debate and thought you sounded like a progressive. Maybe you just can’t be pigeon-holed (a good thing)!

213. Daoud - October 13, 2010

Responding to Anthony’s list seems an interesting idea:

•Who will direct? — Probably not Alan Smithee, he’s retired I hear.

•What will it be called? — Yes. (And probably not “The Wrath of Comic Con” or “Aliens: We Got Yer Aliens” either.)

•Budget? — They’re hoarding gold and Euros I hear.

•3-D or not 3-D? — Well, if the 3-D glasses were made to look somewhat like Geordi’s VISOR, and you got to buy them as a souvenir….

•Who/what is the villain? — They don’t need no steenkin’ villain!

•Will we see new familiar Trek characters? — Hopefully we’ll see Kirk, Spock, McCoy at least.

•Will William Shatner be in it? — Only in small print.

•Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?) — Well, here’s hoping Pine, Quinto, Urban, and that other important guy, Chris Doohan will be back!

•Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?) — Vijay Ameritrade, Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Javier Bardem, and Sanjay Gupta all are likely to appear. (Gupta would make a great Chief of Starfleet Medical, no?)

•Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props)? — Yes.

•Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film (Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.)
— Spock Prime unfortunately inherited Bendii syndrome, so he’s very confused. The Vulcans have set up the New Vulcan shop and listening post on nearby P’Jem, at Epsilon Eridani. Uhura is pregnant and expecting. It’s the Saavik story at last!

214. Jorg Sacul - October 13, 2010

@ BobOrci: How about filming 2 and 3 back to back, so you can get the most out of your actors and sets… and get on to making Star Trek IV! :)

215. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - October 13, 2010

Hey Bob Orci. What is your Faverite Tos Episode and why. Also. You have us all on Pins and needles on the next Trek Movie. But no matter what please get us a real Engeneering set. Please.

216. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - October 13, 2010

Oh. Bring in Scott Bakula and the Shat. At least for a small scene. Also would love to see Nurse Chapel and or Number 1.

217. Andrew - October 13, 2010

Any chance we could get a countdown clock widget going on the website?

218. Damian - October 13, 2010

216–Maybe Shatner and Bakula can arm wrestle on the bridge;)

219. Nomad - October 13, 2010

145: Of course we can only draw on our experience of life on earth but we have imaginations as well. We can do better than make our aliens thinly-veiled variations on human cultures. I’m sure drawing more inspiration from other earthbound life-forms would lead to some very alien-seeming aliens.
As for the strange new worlds themselves, Chesley Bonestell did very nicely with his knowledge of geology – how hard can it be for an artist, or team of artists, with some knowledge of biology as well to design a populated world that looks nothing like Earth?

220. Dee - October 13, 2010

…get groceries, do laundry, START WRITING STAR TREK,…..They want me CRAZY!!!….that’s it!!! LOL!!!

221. Captain Hackett - October 13, 2010

No Khan

No Shat

No lens flare

No little engineer’s assistant

No time travel

No 3D (a few Trekkie friends of mine are prone to motion sickness.)

No new aliens

Yes to Klingons

Yes to steamy love scenes between Spock and Uhura ;)

Yes to pulled tear on Kirk’s uniform

Yes to aliens during TOS era.

222. Jarok - October 13, 2010

My requests would be:
1) No Shatner

2) No Khan

3) Less Lens flares (how about no lens flares?)

4) Use the Tholians and/or the Gorn (Klingons in limited quanity)
Other female characters like Nurse Chapel and Yeomen Janice Rand.

5) Big monster sized animals are OK if done well. (Why was that creature in Trek 09 hairless running around on an ice planet?)

6) Let’s get past the Spock/Uhura thing. Spock is a Vulcan, let’s remember what that means.

223. Dee - October 13, 2010

I want to see Klingons!!!

224. Dlope - October 13, 2010

My wish list:

I’d like to slow the pace down just a little (more character exploration)

I’d like to really see Kirk/Spock/McCoy relationship fleshed out (not just Kirk/Spock)

I’d like a clearer feel for the sets they create, a better sense of place.

Doug L.

225. John from Cincinnati - October 13, 2010

I want to see Edith Keeler and the Guardian of Forever!

I want to see Talos IV!

I want the Gorns and the battle for Cestus III!

226. Dlope - October 13, 2010

…re 223…

and Klingons.

227. Anthony Thompson - October 13, 2010


You’ve already seen Edith Keeler and the Guardian of Forever.

You’ve already seen Talos IV.

You’ve already seen Gorns…

228. Felipe - October 13, 2010

Sorry, but the most important thing is what we still don’t know but we should know because we are in october 2010…

229. Jai - October 13, 2010

Re: #170

“2) Destruction of Vulcan. Loss of Vulcan should have severe consequences for the Federation which need to be explored.”

I’ve made the same point on this website on previous occasions. To draw an analogy with 9/11, what happened to Vulcan wasn’t the equivalent of the destruction of the World Trade Centre; it was the equivalent of the whole of New York being wiped out by a nuclear attack.

So, realistically-speaking, it would have an even more severe impact on the Federation — internal culture, military & political strategy and policies, etc. Not to mention the effect on the other major powers in the Alpha Quadrant, some of whom would see the Federation’s perceived vulnerability as an “opportunity”, and others who would become very paranoid about the theoretical risk to themselves. In all cases, the fact that a small group suddenly turned up from the future (allegedly from an “alternate timeline”) and managed to successfully destroy one of the Federation’s most important core worlds would not go unnoticed or without further consequences.

And the Federation itself wouldn’t carry on as though nothing had happened — not after something on that scale. As we know from our own relatively recent history, these things have a wide-ranging psychological and political impact on societies.

At the very least, Section 31 (which we know already exists in this era) would consider taking some “officially unauthorised” action to safeguard the Federation. They’d probably want to get their hands on Spock Prime too, given all that strategically vital knowledge in his head.

230. Jai - October 13, 2010

^^ “(which we know already exists in this era)”

As in the TOS era ;)

231. Chris Dawson - October 13, 2010

Go for new stuff.

But somehow, the Ratpack needs to be involved: Sinatra, Martin, and Davis.

232. trekpower.org - October 13, 2010


233. Trekprincess - October 13, 2010

I hungry for little details on the sequel :)

234. Hwk - October 13, 2010

How about this scene:

Kirk: “Hey, did you hear about the Yorktown? Apparently it found a ship full of those Eugenic nutcases back from a couple hundred years ago…”

Spock: “Really? Anyone of historical interest?”

Kirk: “Um…Kahn? James Kahn? No, that wasn’t it…”

Spock: “Did they revive them?”

Kirk: “Are you kidding? Who’d be dumb enough to do that? They towed the ship to Starbase 42…let them deal with ’em”

235. Rusty0918 - October 13, 2010

Well, I hope this isn’t going to be another “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”

If they use Khan, they have to do this from a completely different angle than what was done in TWOK.

Here are some things that should be addressed:

1. Kirk’s character development. Frankly in the last film, I can’t see much maturity besides the willingness to help Nero which came almost out of nowhere. He better not be the cocky devil-may-care person we saw in the last film or else that’s going to really hurt his reputation.

2. Engineering – Yes, I’m also another one against the whole brewery prospect. I can get the direction the folks WERE trying to go with this, but it was horribly out of place. Does it need a big glowing warp core? No. But redressing a brewery is a schlock idea.

3. Another female on the Enterprise’s senior staff: perhaps the chief of security. Have her be a lieutenant commander (or higher), and have her wear trousers (no miniskirt for her–you can keep Uhura in that revealing outfit). How about a Chinese woman? Or Ali Larter, or Anna Torv? Come on, take chances here Orci and Kurtzman! And someone who doesn’t trust Kirk, there’s GOT to be some friction between Kirk and some of Starfleet for that rapid promotion.

Do these, and that will work. You can keep the lens flares (maybe not so many of them), the shaky cam (I didn’t really have a problem with it), the close ups, etc.

236. Shatner_Fan_Prime - October 13, 2010

You know what I want most outta Star Trek XII? For there to be a San Diego Comic-Con panel next summer! I’ll be there. Fingers crossed. :-)

237. P Technobabble - October 13, 2010

You can’t use Keeler or the Guardian anymore…
Talos IV is just an illusion…
Gorns are the best bet. They are very excited about global warming…

238. saavik001 - October 13, 2010

My Star Trek 2012 wishlist:
Spock Prime trying for Reunification/Vulcan refugee camp on Romulus
Carol Marcus getting preggers
Klingon arms race (Studying Narada for 25 years)
Nods to TOS episodes
More McCoy!!
Fixing the Orions (Enterprise had better Orion women makeup)
Khan or Klingons
Just a badass and fun movie.

A remake of City on the Edge of forever would be awesome, btw.

239. Desstruxion - October 13, 2010

Three words: HOT, GREEN CHICKS!!!

240. B - October 13, 2010

I cant wait for the new movie. I hope they dont use Khan, and go for something new. If they have to use an orginal series bad guy, it would be cool if they used the dooms day machine.

241. Felipe - October 13, 2010

I expect next movie (because ST 2009 hasn’t it)
1-Respect chain of command. (no more, ‘from cadet to captain in ten minutes’ , and no more buddy slang. A captain is a captain, and a cadet is a cadet, ok? It’s not the same thing.
2-Adult movie with good dialogues and ethics.
3-Respect science.
4-No more megadestructions of planets, races, species.
5-Respect characters. Scotty is a good engineer, not a clown.
6- Respect ST roots and spirit.
7-Original script, not reboots of trek episodes.
Most important, please, ST is not SW , ST is not GI JOE . We want a intelligent show.

242. The Cheese from a Double Quarter Pounder With Cheese - October 13, 2010

Hey Mr. Orci, Just curious whats your feelings on Zack Synder taking on Superman?

243. Damian - October 13, 2010

#240–Agree. Some of what was done in Star Trek (2009) was done out of necessity to advance the story.

After all in the original timeline, when Kirk took command, Gary Mitchell and Lee Kelso were at the helm/navigation, Sulu was a physicist, Dr Mark Piper was CMO, Chekov and Uhura were not on the bridge, and Pike had been in command for at least a decade. While Trekkies like myself would love to have seen a true origin story, it would have been hard to sell a movie without all the major characters from the series.

That reminds me, it would be nice to see the character of Gary Mitchell. He was Kirk’s best friend before Spock in the original timeline, and it would be interesting to see him again.

244. Capri - October 13, 2010

@ 221. Captain Hackett

“Yes to steamy love scenes between Spock and Uhura ;)”

Heck yeah! I second this motion! :) Seriously – they should keep the relationship intact. Give them their moments. I can’t tell you how many old and new female ST fans (both family & friends), I know who went to see the film multiple times because of them. Dropping this particular storyline will be a big mistake in my opinion.

What I would like to see:

Kirk/Spock/Bones/Uhura/Chekov/Sula/Scotty doing their awesome thing “together”. Some keep calling for the recreation of the old magic between Kirk/Spock/McCoy – but these actors have different chemistry, and that needs to be taken into account so relationships will not seemed “forced”.

No resurrection of old storylines and characters. I want an adventure on a strange new world for real where everyone gets frazzled and dazzled before they figure things out. An away mission gone wrong on the ground, and taken into space would be great. I would love to see an entity or race we’ve never seen. Some entity or race that is totally strange and unpredictably formidable would be awesome.

Recreate the slap with Uhura from “Space Seed”, only have her knock that hell out of that dude back. I’ve always wanted to see her give a full reciprocation on that! :)

More spectacular maneuvers with the Enterprise.

245. Harry Ballz - October 13, 2010

198. “You are willing to gain weight for the role”

Anthony, if it’s good enough for Deniro, it’s good enough for me!

“Are you talkin’ to me??”

246. Mr Phil - October 13, 2010

Here’s my selection for the questions listed:-

“•Who will direct?” JJ. He can certainly get the bums on seats, think he has a TWOK type classic up his sleeves.
“•What will it be called?” Star Trek: Discovered
“•Budget:” A government level quantitative easing amount. Shoot in space.
“•3-D or not 3-D:” Glorious 2-D, shot on FILM please!
“•Who/what is the villain?” Shat Kirk. Or a character hinted at but not seen till film 3…?
“•Will we see new familiar Trek characters?” Chapel, Carol Marcus.
“•Will William Shatner be in it?” Yeah, what the hell. Crack out the slimming software.
“•Who else will be returning from 2009 movie?” Greenwood. Get rid of Scotty’s comedy side kick.
“•Who will be cast for key new roles?” Tim Honks. Sorry, Tom Hanks.
“•Will there be any changes to the look?” Budgineering destroyed by stray photon torpedo, and my hammer. Single warp core please, ease up on those nacelles. USB port on Chekov’s console for him to connect his iPod to iTunes.
“•Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film?” Not needed, pt1 was self contained story, but a few nods here and there wouldn’t go amiss.

247. Lt. Bailey - October 13, 2010

As long as the lens flares are gone…. and lock the camera down while you are at it. The hand held camera effect has been over used by now. It no longer holds the same feeling of reality (if thats what they are trying to get) as it once did.

248. LWR - October 13, 2010

I think it would be cool if we find out the trekverse Prime was really the FRINGE universe!!

249. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Re: Star Trek title.

Numbering the movies is redundant and unnecessary. Do we number Star Trek episodes? Or do we reference them by episode title? And look at how we speak of the movies in here, usually by the acronym of their subtitles: TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, TUC.

That’s all you need. Just call it Star Trek, and give it a subtitle to distinguish it from the others. Numerals are not needed.

250. Red Dead Ryan - October 13, 2010


I DO NOT want Tom Cruise involved in ANY Star Trek production whatsoever! There were rumors that he’d be in “Star Trek” 09 and thank Q it never happened! He’s a bad actor whose movies have had diminishing returns in recent years. Plus he’s a distraction!

Javier Bardem or Tom Hanks would be good though. But I don’t think its necessary for a “big name” to appear. We got a great cast already!

251. Putthetrekbackontrack - October 13, 2010

Whew what a long long read, I say add in some familiar elements, like start the movie fast paced, such as the encounter with the doomsday machine, then go into the new plot with having to re-fit the ship, namely that boiler room like engineering section….

252. Ralph Pinheiro - Brazil - October 13, 2010

Mr. Bob, I wish you and you friends good luck in this new story and that will bring us a villain who has respect, fear and admiration, as Khan or Kor. I do not say they are, but who has those qualities.

253. CmdrR - October 13, 2010

250 posts. Gee, I wonder if people are interested in Star Trek as Star Trek, as opposed to all the hang-on stuff.

Bob, if you really have time to read, shop some Iain Banks “Culture” books. It’ll serve you well.

254. Damian - October 13, 2010

248–I like the subtitle idea too. After all giving it a number would be confusing. There is already a Star Trek II. And calling it Star Trek XII would seem to indicate you need to see the other 11 which is what they don’t what. I think Star Trek in the title is a must, so that leaves the Star Trek: Title. Something simple that sums up the story would be fine.

255. Damian - October 13, 2010

#250–this is nothing, give it a few days.

256. Vultan - October 13, 2010


“And calling it Star Trek XII would seem to indicate you need to see the other 11 which is what they don’t what.”

I’m pretty sure the folks in Paramount’s DVD department would disagree with you.

257. Trekprincess - October 13, 2010

I don’t want the next Star Trek film to be just for adults have humour maybe for the young fans if children are at least interested in Star Trek

258. ML31 - October 13, 2010

The hope is the story will be strong. That they “go forward, not back”. That is there is a TOS story element that it is a prelude to a larger, main story.

Would be VERY nice to see known ST aliens like Andorians and Tellerites. If not as needed characters for the story then for background extras. I see no need to come up with new goofy looking aliens when trek fans will get a kick out of seeing an Andorian walking in the background or sitting at a bar. And non Trek fans who see it won’t know the difference.

And the last, and probably largest hope, is I want to see more of the “Big Three”. Needs to be a Krik, Spock AND McCoy story. “Bones” was often referred to as Star Trek’s soul. He was tremendously underused in ST:09.

259. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

If there’s money to do it, that artist’s conception of engineering would be awesome. That would be in addition to the brewery; no need to replace that.

However, would ask that you know exactly where each new set goes within the hypothetical hull of the ship, so we don’t get sets that do not fit, i.e., hallways that would impossibly extend out into space.

260. AJ - October 13, 2010

I love the references to the old series (all of them), and I hope the boys keep it up. Whether it’s Spock’s past done right, or that Starfleet insignia (perfect TNG replica) on the wall, I trust the story will go *click!* and write itself (fingers crossed).

261. Charley W - October 13, 2010

Since we’re being asked, I’d like to see in the next movie:

* If we’re going to stay in the 2009 continuity, some differences from the TOS, such as results from the destruction of Vulcan, people killed that were alive in TOS, etc.
* At least one return of secondary cast (Pike, Sarek- gee, those are the only two left, aren’t they?), and one new TOS character (Chapel, Mudd, Gary Mitchell, Carol Marcus, Ruth, Flanningan, etc.)

I don’t want to see EVER AGAIN:
* Kirk hanging from a cliff (or some other height)
* Brain-Boring Bugs From Another Planet

Can the writers come up with a different motive than ‘Revenge for My Dead Wife (TM)’?

The major reason that I hated ST 2009, is this kind of stuff- which gives me the feeling that the creative staff are missing the point of Star Trek; the feeling of a interconnected universe, and NOT just some gimmicks and our ‘Prime Crew’, never-changing, out against the Entire Universe, INCLUDING THEIR OWN PEOPLE!!!! Let’s return to Roddenberry’s idea of exploration and adventures in the Unknown, and not which villian wants revenge for a dead wife THIS movie? (If you HAVE to have a villian, how about a female for ONCE in a movie?)

Oh, and how about NOT blowing up EVERY other ship (except Excelsior- but that had one of OUR Prime Crew, didn’t it?) and killing EVERY other Captain/ StarFleet officer that appears for once??

262. Charley W - October 13, 2010

One more thing- before you write a single word, go and read about the military chain of command and procedure, eh?

263. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

The minority of moviegoers who are inclined to see more Trek but not smart enough to figure out how many Star Trek films and episodes there are without needing everything numbered, bring chump change to the franchise. If those bonehead execs think fans are that stupid, let Bob and the others push back and say “no, they are not.”

264. CJS - October 13, 2010

Yes to Khan, yes to Shatner, but only if Shatner plays Khan.

265. Vultan - October 13, 2010

I know it’s fun to speculate (and tell Hollywood types what to do), but you guys have to know that the great majority of these suggestions are hitting a brick wall. Despite Orci calling a script a ‘living thing,’ he and the other half-dozen or so creatives on this ‘court’ have most likely already nailed down the basic elements of the story and are now ironing out the different storylines and scribbling in the filler material—the romantic subplot, the action scenes, the one-liners, the references to TOS and other series—ie. the mortar between the bricks.

Besides, I doubt anyone who uses Fidel Castro as a profile photo is very open to suggestions. (Just a guess…)

266. Damian - October 13, 2010

255–I meant the writers of the film did not want people to be turned off by thinking they had to see the prior films before seeing this one.

267. NuFan - October 13, 2010

No Klingons!

268. Thorny - October 13, 2010

260… Uhura’s Orion roommate (that is her in the crowd at Kirk’s promotion, isn’t it?) and Scotty’s assistant are still with us.

269. Damian - October 13, 2010

264–I think there is a hope that certain serious elements that most fans agree on would be considered, such as Shatner being or not being in it, Khan or Klingons, and perhaps characters popular from the previous film that we would like to see back. Example, if enough people here say they would like to see Greenwood back as Pike, that they will try to find a way to get him back. Also, if enough people say they hated the character of Keenser (Scotty’s little sidekick), maybe he won’t be back.

That being said, I think many people making suggestions about what they’d like to see realize most ideas will not be seen on screen. It’s just wishful thinking, or maybe just people having fun.

270. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Phaser special effects.

They were cool in ST.09, but they didn’t look fast enough. Not even as fast as tracer rounds @ 3000 rds/minute.

Be cool to figure out how many frames gives best dramatic effect without looking too slow or unsatisfyingly fast. 1 fps? 2…3 fps? Experiment.

271. Thorny - October 13, 2010

I’d like the next movie to be about exploration, where Kirk & Company have to solve a problem with their brains, not by launching Photon Torepedoes. I don’t mind torpedos and phasers to liven things up, but that shouldn’t be how they resolve the crisis. I’d like to see such a movie called “Where No Man Has Gone Before”, which was also the title of the second tale in the original TOS timeline.

272. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Yes, there is always hope in every fanboy’s heart for a multi-billion dollar company to listen to him, but if Paramount sold enough Keenser plush toys or action figures, the fan outcry may fall on deaf ears. Remember, this is a product we’re talking about here.

273. Damian - October 13, 2010

271–I was just using Keenser as an example, since some have noted a dislike for him. That could have been anything or anyone.What I meant by my post is that if enough people here said the same thing, maybe they would listen. After all, we are some of the buyers. (i.e. if 90 percent of the posts were anti-Keenser, that may be enough for them to say, you know what, maybe he should go, and the reverse would apply also).

But individually, I agree. A few people saying something is not going to change any minds. Just as a whole, if there were agreement about a subject, it may be noticed by the people making the film.

274. Allenburch - October 13, 2010

I have so much confidence in the ST-2012 team that I’ve barely even stayed current on the story concept and project development news. I do think that more hype needs to keep brewing and so I’m starting my own talk-it-up campaigne with friends and family for the next film.

I believe that whatever story and script the team finalizes on will be fantastic.

I guess I am hoping for a few things:
*** …Klingons….not just any Klingons…the kind of Klingon that PUNCHES YOUR TEETH OUT AND SMASHES YOUR FACE IN without blinking an eye kind, (less talk more action type.) Maybe even a new named Klingon who had previously captured Nero and who can turn into a major nemesis for Kirk and crew.
*** At least one additional mean and scary new enemy. (I would not count an intense threat from a natural phenomenon in this wish unless it is on a 3rd front—that would really be awesome.)
*** Continued clever humor.
*** More of Chris Pine running for his life. (The girls went gaga over it.)
*** In spite of all the debate…(I know Nimoy says he is done/retired blah-blah-blah), you have a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY for part of the story to be about——-nimoyandshatner——-yes NIMOY AND SHATNER. Bring PRIME SPOCK AND PRIME KIRK TOGETHER ONE MORE TIME.

Do it! Do it! Do it!

275. Captain Hackett - October 13, 2010

Capri no. 241

I think Zoe Saldana mentioned that she would love to do it a while ago. Please correct me if I am wrong.

276. Larry - October 13, 2010

I would like to see a continuation from the first film. Like why was the Primary Fleet deployed in the Lorencian System? (I hope I got the spelling right.) Is it a new adversary or is it the Klingons? Have Enterprise go to help out the fleet. Good luck Robert and Alex. Make another good one.

277. El Kapitan - October 13, 2010

Hey Bob,

Thanks so much for watching these boards & posting here. So glad you’re one of us. (One of us… One of us… One of us…)

Can you get us some more classic Trek Aliens in this one? It’s nice to see the creature guys get creative, but there are way more than just Vulcans, Klingons, Orions, & Romulans out there. Even if it’s just in passing, I’d like to see some Gorn, Nausicaans, Cardassians, Tellerites, & especially Andorians who are my favorites. There were an awful lot of humans making up Starfleet in the last one, & the ratio should be more diverse. IDIC after all.

Can’t wait to see what you give us this time. Thanks Bob.

Oh, & Grunberg needs to cameo as Mudd please

– Kirk out –

278. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Well, sometimes it’s good to consider the fans and sometimes it’s not. I seem to recall that Nemesis and These Are the Voyages were made as valentines to the fans. :(

And as for annoying characters/designs, sometimes they’ll listen to the outcry—the Gap’s recent logo controversy—and sometimes they won’t—Jar-Jar Binks!

279. Sarah - October 13, 2010

I’m still holding a candle with hopes we’ll see Bill Murray with a role in the next film. No, really; I truly believe he’d be great in a Captain’s chair.

280. Charley W - October 13, 2010

#278- how about Bill Murray as the new Harry Mudd?

281. Peter - October 13, 2010

Make it in such a way, that people won’t be bored watching it more than once. Make it visual interesting, intelligent dialogue, make the characters less infantile, and upgrade that Bronx warehouse they called an engine room.

282. GaraV - October 13, 2010

Totally agree with the people wanting more Kirk/Spock/McCoy (and I still think the Kirk/Spock friendship has barely begun, it should be fun to see that develop!) and I have faith that the writers will have a chance to really take this movie forwards.

Re: Spock/Uhura
“I can’t tell you how many old and new female ST fans (both family & friends), I know who went to see the film multiple times because of them. Dropping this particular storyline will be a big mistake in my opinion.”
That’s funny, I could say the exact same thing, except totally opposite, of every fan I know (male and female). Wow, I’m so tired of women being dumbed down to this level of “unless there’s romance in it I won’t see the movie” because it’s just not true. I’m not saying I don’t want to see it, of course, I don’t mind romance at all, it’s just that this particular pairing strikes me as completely illogical.
I can understand where boborci and co were coming from and inspite of this glitch I loved the movie… but guys, come on, if Spock’s no longer emotionally compromised then he’s back to being Vulcan, right? I thought nuSpock was supposed to be even more conflicted about his emotions? In TOS Spock told Leila that they could never be together because of his responsibility to the ship, does this mean he no longer cares? Or has he just embraced his Humanity completely? If so, a mention of that might be nice… and I think I’ll just stop now before I get into all the favouritism stuff… yup.

Wow, that came out very negative, sorry. But I’m still super excited about the next movie (20 months is so far awaaaaaaay)!

283. WhatDoesItMean - October 13, 2010

“Oh, and please drop the Spock/Uhura romance. It was both out of character and forced.”
Totally agreed. Movie was great and I loved it, but for me that’s one of the elements that stopped it from being brilliant.

Spock’s characterisation was a bit shaky at times and I get that having him with EMOTIONAL OUTBURSTS made for good drama (seriously, I liked it) but now we need to go back to the more subtle and equally awesome version of Spock we all know and love. I trust that you guys can do it!

Kirk, on the other hand, had a believable (if slightly rushed, but there’s only so much you can do with so little time) arc. He still needs to mature into his Captain’s role, of course, but it will be interesting to see him grow and learn.

284. TonyD - October 13, 2010

Bob and Alex, best of luck on bringing a new Star Trek story into the world. It’s going to be a long wait until summer 2012 but I’m sure it’ll be worth it.

Eagerly looking forward to that opening shot of the Enterprise primary hull being mated with a new star-drive section. :)

285. John in Chico, CA - October 13, 2010

I’d like to see some of the tos episodes, reenacted with the newer cast.
I’d like to see them come up against some Romulans (not crazy troubled ones, like the prevoius movie), Klingons, Captain Garth, and/or Finnegan and Gary. I would also like to see them face their twins (which would, maybe, require the newer cast to play two parts).

286. Commander Keen - October 13, 2010

Everyone is so worried about a Shatner appearance. The most important question is where will R2D2 show up? Will 3PO make it?

Just kidding….

Best wishes to Bob and Alex. I have faith in you!

287. Tarrax - October 13, 2010

Shields! Please, beg J.J. if you have to Bob, but shields that work would be awesome. ;)

288. James - October 13, 2010

Best wishes Bob, Alex and JJ – Just remember TOM HANKS AS COMMODORE MATT DECKER!!!! :-))

289. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Would like to see some American Indians cast. Extras, small parts. Whatever. ALWAYS so underrepresented in movies. Irene Bedard’s beautiful face would fit the franchise well.

290. Aurore - October 13, 2010

163,164- I noticed your “double posts” in the “Will Shatner be in it” thread the other day.Tonight ,when I saw them, I could not stop thinking of the Twilight Zone theme.Scary.

291. Vultan - October 13, 2010



Wes Studi, Tantoo Cardinal, and Adam Beach are always good as well.

292. NuFan - October 13, 2010

It’s funny how the fans don’t agree with each other on anything at all. Imagine if you had to try to incorporate all these ideas into one movie. What a mess!

293. Felipe - October 13, 2010

Er, sorry again.

1-STAR TREK and related marks are trademarks are trademarks of CBS STUDIOS. Not Paramount. Paramount can make a trek film CBS permiting.

2-I think JJ won’t direct ST 2012.

294. Hammer - October 13, 2010

The return of Kang the Kilngon! He and Kirk seemed to have a history in the series. Could be a good villian!

295. John from Cincinnati - October 13, 2010


In that case, we’ve all already seen the Klingons, Kirk, Spock & McCoy too have we not?

296. Trekker Chick - October 13, 2010

Bill Shatner as the Sha-kah-reh (sp?) “God” being.

Just saying…

(Just joking! Put down the weapons!)

297. Chingatchgook - October 13, 2010

I would love to see Shatner in it, if it works with the script. When I read the proposed Shatner lines for the last movie, I was blown away. No question, Shat’s presence would be a big plus. I sure hope that he’s there for the next one.

298. buddykarl - October 13, 2010

As far as a title goes, perhaps Star Trek: The Shat of Khan. That way you have both The Shat & Khan in it, and we can get on with an original storyline….;)

299. Pan Always Bored Me - October 13, 2010

NO SHATNER! I love the guy and his Kirk is my all time hero but it’s time to move on.

300. John - October 13, 2010

BTW the PRIME TIMELINE EXISTS. It’s ridiculous to assume otherwise. Parallels, anyone? STO, anyone?

301. Trekprincess - October 13, 2010

Oh why do people have so many issues with the last film is this discussing the sequel at all just wondering

302. Brett L. - October 13, 2010

Only three simple requests from me: character, character, character. Good luck Bob and Alex. You’ve proven we’re in good hands.

303. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

292: “Imagine if you had to try to incorporate all these ideas into one movie. What a mess!”

True. But that would not happen. Bob is a smart filter.

304. Capri - October 13, 2010

@ 275. Captain Hackett

“I think Zoe Saldana mentioned that she would love to do it a while ago. Please correct me if I am wrong.”

I’ve never read that myself – but I wouldn’t be surprised if she did indeed make statments in regards to her intimacy with the Spock character. I know Zoe and Zachary is hoping for the romance to continue – so, will see.

305. Ted - October 13, 2010

195–while multiple universes do exist, nothing in the last movie did anything to show that this is an alternate universe. Rather, the only explanation for Spock Prime and Nero to be where they were was time travel. Time travel alone does not create a new universe in Star Trek.

And as for Bakula, if people cared about Enterprise, people would have watched it. The character has no reason to be there. Plus, according to the Enterprise finale itself, Archer is dead–having died the day before the Enterprise (the traditional one) launched.

While Nero may have done a lot of things, extending Archer’s life–probably not one of them.

306. Dave - October 13, 2010

I said it before a long time ago after ST09 came out: This movie should, in addition to whatever the story is, highlight the actual ship herself. It’s called Enterprise for a reason, and the ship is herself a major character! One of my favorite scenes to read, and see in past movies, is when the captain is taken in a shuttle up to the newly rebuilt/remodified Enterprise and we see her in all her glory and feel the captain’s passion for his ship. That is one of the reasons I think the opening sequence to ST09 is one of the greatest opening sequences EVER to be put on film! Sitting in that IMAX theater, and suddenly I’m racing past the hull of the the U.S.S.Kelvin, hearing interspersed the comm chatter… we come to care about that ship quite quickly and her shipmates, including the captain and Kirk’s father, in only a matter of what, 10 to 15 minutes? And then we see her destroyed to save the crew. That was an incredible sequence that made my jaw drop in awe, my butt sit on the edge of the seat, my hand cover my gaping mouth at times, and then my eyes tear up and cry when Kirk father dies to save his wife and son. I say, you guys will have to make an opening sequence that rivals that or exceeds that! You’ve set the bar very high!

I would also note that I don’t care who the villain is as long as he’s fleshed out, and not simply a caricature of some baddy from TOS, or conjured up for the hell of it so you have a villain. I didn’t care much for Nero until I read the backstory in the comics which helped to flesh him out. I know you can’t do a lot in a movie, but hopefully you can try. So it goes without saying it shouldn’t be Khan.

As far as Shatner goes, He should NOT be in the movie, period, unless for this exception: The hologram scene that was taken out of the script for ST09, the heart-renching scene – that is the only way I believe Shatner should even be considered for a part in the sequel. It has to be serious. Shatner is too comical, too whimsical now. Putting him in just to please Shatner and Shatner-fans is only going to make people say, “Oh, come on!” in a not-so-pleasant tone.

And lastly – it should NOT be in 3D unless you can shoot 3D as well as James Cameron did for Avatar. Otherwise, it simply takes away from the enjoyment of the movie. But DEFINITELY shoot the film with the anticipation of movie-goers seeing it in IMAX! That means lots of close-ups of the mighty Enterprise, and spectacular battles and action, and breath-taking scenery and vistas! Maybe even the Enterprise diving into a wormhole?! That would be awesome to see on the IMAX screen.

Now I’ll lose all credibility: Ya know what would be awesome!? Cast someone that looks like a much younger version of DeLancie, and have a younger version of Q as the villain! Lots of fun!

307. Gary Neumann - October 13, 2010

To Boborci, why the Fidel Castro pic?

308. Marc McKenzie - October 13, 2010

To Bob and Alex,

Well, the rubber’s hit the road–good luck guys! Granted, all of us here have our own ideas and wishes, but…at the end of it all, it’ll be you guys who have to go into the trenches to suck up them bullets. None of us will ever have to deal with that, I guess…

Best of luck, and here’s hoping to a fantastic Trek film in 2012

309. Allen Williams - October 13, 2010

Just as long as you don’t have 3D, lens flares, and budwiser engineering it should be good.

310. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

I wonder how much it would cost to build the Enterprise to scale, including completed interiors, as a tourist attraction in Riverside Iowa.

311. Chris Doohan - October 13, 2010


If you read all of the above comments, you won’t have time to read that new book.

Good luck on the script!!


PS Hawaii five-0 is the best!

312. Shaun - October 13, 2010

perhaps khan, if done well. i am not against the idea of having khan in the new film. but please, no shatner. i feel it is time to move on.

313. FarStrider - October 13, 2010

I kinda like “The Next Frontier” as a title. . .

As for the story, all I want is for Bob, Alex and Damon to tell a story with that has the courage of its convictions. . .actions have to have consequences, which was something sorely missing from ALL of Star Trek. . . no retelling of TOS: you’ve made a new universe, let’s go play in it. . . and most of these complaining people will go see the movie anyway, even if Shat or Khan are not in it. . .or the Romulans and Klingons show up. . . so, remember, you are not just writing for the people on sites like this. . . (as much as some try to deny it). . so just write the best damned script that you can. . .


314. boborci - October 13, 2010

307. A few reasons. Fascinating figure. I’m half Cuban. My grandmother went to college with him. My grandfather, if he’d had a beard, would’ve been his twin, so I may resemble him when I’m old. Irony. etc.

315. Daoud - October 13, 2010

Interesting parallels between Fidel, and Apollo in “Who Mourns for Adonais”. Fidel continues to live, and outlives the Soviet Union, East Germany, African Marxists, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Nixon and the anti-Communists, and all the other unneeded old ‘gods’.

Bob, do you ever read Granma where Fidel posts his thoughts?

316. Damian - October 13, 2010

278–I agree to an extent. Some of the posts here are just made in jest and not meant to be taken seriously (at least I hope). But I’m sure Bob, JJ, Alex and everyone involved guages overall opinions here and elsewhere. If they decided, screw the fans, we’re doing what we want, they may alienate the fans. Obviously they do not want to do that. Reading Bob Orci’s posts here, it’s obvious he reads the posts. Now I suspect if there is a general consensus on a particular subject they will take that to heart. Anyway, we are a fickle lot, and if there is something a majority of us agree on, it’s probably worth paying attention to.

I agree with you on These are the Voyages. That was a disappointment. However, I doubt Rick Berman read viewer comments to guage what would make a good Enterprise finale.

I liked Nemesis. I never understood all the hate there.

305–Enterprise was starting to come into it’s own by the 4th season. It obviously was not on par with Star Trek or Star Trek: The Next Generation, but I thought Manny Coto had gotten it on tract. However, I do remember hearing that Archer had died when the Enterprise was launched in the prime universe which would be 2245. Now that may have been changed in the new timeline because Nero came back in 2233 (if my memory is correct). Thinking back to Scott’s comment in the movie about Archer’s beagle, it seems to indicate he is still alive then, but I admit it cannot be established 100 %. Anyway, a Bakula cameo would barely be a diversion and a simple nod to the Trekkies. If non-Trekkies happen to recognize him, I don’t think they are going to riot because he’s there.

I really don’t know why non-Enterprise fans would be so agitated anyway. You simply substitute some anonymous admiral with Archer. He wishes them luck and sends them on their way, Simple as that. Bakula’s a nice guy who has great respect for the Star Trek universe. Give the guy a little slack.

317. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, you have the story and are now headed towards scripting it, yet you said its a living breathing entity, does that mean its not written in stone? In other words beyond the obvious re-writing that happens, could you change major parts of the story as you move forward?

318. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, you have the story and are now headed towards scripting it, yet you said its a living breathing entity, does that mean its not written in stone? In other words beyond the obvious re-writing that happens, could you change major parts of the story as you move forward?

319. boborci - October 13, 2010

317. Hugh Hoyland – October 13, 2010

Always a possibility.

320. dmduncan - October 13, 2010


321. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, cool deal. If I can ask one more thing with writting a screenplay in your opinion is it best to start with a story (I assume you wrote a complete treatment) then from that move on to the screenplay? I didnt do that, I just used index cards lol, but Im in act 3 right now, I write as I imagine the scenes, so it hasnt been a problem yet.

322. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, cool deal. If I can ask one more thing with writting a screenplay in your opinion is it best to start with a story (I assume you wrote a complete treatment) then from that move on to the screenplay? I didnt do that, I just used index cards lol, but Im in act 3 right now, I write as I imagine the scenes, so it hasnt been a problem yet.

323. Areli - October 13, 2010

Well, we trust you Bob. You are the one writing and we are going to watch whatever becomes of it.

And I’m sure after 300+ comments you know what we definitely don’t want to see and I’m sure some of that was already things you guys didn’t plan on having anyways.

324. Stephan Seifert - October 13, 2010

Hello Bob,

two years ago I told you about how I have been educated by Star Trek and how it always had a place in my life. And I told you how I hoped for Star Trek 2009 to continue this tradition. You answered that you hoped not to dissappoint me. Now I want to tell you that you really didn’t disappoint me. The opposite is the fact. The new Star Trek is different but it fits to my life which changed as well. One example is that I have a girlfriend now which is against the Trek clichee. ;-) And she made a pillow with a Star Trek logo for me without having seen anything of it. Ok, there is still some work for me. And for you…
Just make an even better Star Trek 2012 which will be better accepted in Germany as well. Perhaps an a-lister actor could help. But I have trust in your and your team’s skills.
I wish you the best

Greetings from Germany,


325. Damian - October 13, 2010

Just to clarify (after looking at my comments, they may have been a bit snippy). I am not a big fan of cameos. Archer is the only one that could be brief with little or no exposition. Most assume he is still alive based on the last film. Therefore no explanation is needed how he is there. My big thing with the next film is moving forward. Archer’s presence would be a slight, almost nonexistent stop on the journey.

An appearance by someone like Shatner would be a showstopper. It would require an explanation and some extraordinary means to get him in it and interact with the crew. That would eat up a chunk of the movie and even alter the course of the movie, which is what I want to avoid.

Plus, what I said before. Seeing interviews with Bakula and everyone that worked with him, I’ve never heard a bad thing said about him. He seems like an easy going good guy. His show was short circuited just when it got going. It would be nice to give the guy a chance to say adios and erase the bad taste of TATV. Picard, Sisko and Janeway all got a full send off. Archer’s was a holodeck simulation.

326. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 13, 2010


How dare you get a girlfriend! You are not a true fan!

327. Tanner waterbury - October 13, 2010

Here’s something random i would love to hear in the movie: In some episodes of TOS, the end always had this wacky tune that would play when the cast would laugh at the end of an episode, here is what it sounds like: Starts at the :23 mark and ends at the :34 mark:

328. RAMA - October 13, 2010

I would like a story that has to deal with the origins of a lost alien race and their effect on the current timeline…something that may involve a quest style storyline along the lines of LOTR. I think the Preservers from TOS might be a good starting point…they effected the evolution of countless races in Star Trek’s universe. With a concept this big, there’s definitely room for making it a “message” plot the writers said they are looking for as well as an epic adventure.

329. Thomas - October 13, 2010

I’m on the fence about Shatner’s potential involvement in the sequel. While the scene they wrote for him in ST09 is nice, his absence by no means took anything away from the film, at least for me. In fact, my first thought upon walking out of the theater was, “wow, Shatner wasn’t in that, was he? Huh.” I guess it just comes down to my enjoyment of ST09 (and my anticipation of ST2012) not hanging on Shatner’s participation.

330. moauvian waoul - October 13, 2010

Bob, capture the mood of those first ten minutes again. The sounds, the mystery, the vastness and emptiness and loneliness. Simply brilliant!

331. RAMA - October 13, 2010

The question of Khan, Bussard collectors, Klingons…seem small minded to me…definitely minor concerns, they need a fresh concept for a ST movie to use as a framework for the rest of the story. While it doesn’t have to be MY idea from the last post, something similar would make a spectacular movie that would have a different tone to the other movies.

332. Doodle - October 13, 2010

Yes on adventure – Reboot Khaaaaaannnnnn!, maybe we’ll see some Shatnerian mannerisms in this Kirk. Hilarious. :D

I hope there isn’t going to be more Spock/Uhura. I just didn’t like the way they portrayed it in XI, and more of it in XII would detract from the epic friendship/trust/t’hy’la thing he should have with another someone. *cough*

333. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

321 & 322: “is it best to start with a story… then from that move on to the screenplay? I didnt do that, I just used index cards lol, but Im in act 3 right now, I write as I imagine the scenes, so it hasnt been a problem yet.”

Bob, I believe the question the two Hugh Hoyland’s are asking is: Are you legally or personally obliged to NOT consider another fan’s Star Trek story?

334. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

Along with my earlier comment, I really just want this movie to be original when compared to other star trek films or any film in general. I don’t want to say oh this is like transformers or this is like the dark knight. I mean I have no problem with this next movie being darker and I hope it is. Star Trek was all shiny but we know that even the star trek universe had dark sides. Star Trek 2009 was not like any other past star trek film nor was it like iron man or transformers. When Alex, Bob, or Damon – I don’t remember who – said its going to be bigger, thats enough for me, 2009 was bigger than past trek, so I trust their work with trek.

335. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Then… wouldn’t it be better to use a picture of your grandfather than say… a dictator?


I agree with the parallel… except there are still quite a few anti-Communists left in the world! Just take a stroll through Miami.

336. Andy Patterson - October 13, 2010

I’ll repeat an earlier post in another thread that I don’t think was taken seriously….but make Dr. Sevrin and his space hippies the villains. They could be updated and it could make what most think is an irrelevant episode….relevant. And have some cool music. Sure wouldn’t be what everyone is expecting. That episode talked about overly sterile, false environments we make for ourselves and the diseases created by that. Some of that prophesy has come true. Make them bio terrorist or something. Also bring back Charles Napier for a cameo.

337. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

I agree to keep Star Trek in the title. As #11 said, this is not Batman, this is STAR TREK. You would NEVER see a Star Wars without those iconic words in the title. Keep Star Trek in the title, do it for its legacy.

338. somethoughts - October 13, 2010

Bob, can we get a scene where there is no gravity and the crew has to perform their job functions floating and at the same time the enterprise dodging torpedos and phasers, crashes on some alien planet? Maybe crashing on the Klingon Homeworld or something, it’ll be like the space jump scene but on steroids. It would be similair to sfs, generations and twok rolled into one insane scene lol

There could be a anti gravity fist fight in the corridor of the Enterprise hallway, Kirk and antagonist, while reimagined birds of prey is pwning the Enterprise and Scotty/Spock trying to command the bridge floating, the camera tilted to the right as the Enterprise plummets into x planet :)

339. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

333 dmduncan

Well he has a story already, Im just looking for a tips from a PRO Hollywood writter. Not everyday you get a chance to ask questions of one and Bob very often answers which is cool. I’m writting a script for fun, learning, and also because I want a challange, can I actually write something that people in general will like. And trust me, it has a long way to go before that lol.

And I have no clue as to why Im double posting, it just started the last couple of days.

340. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

333 dmduncan

Well he has a story already, Im just looking for a tips from a PRO Hollywood writter. Not everyday you get a chance to ask questions of one and Bob very often answers which is cool. I’m writting a script for fun, learning, and also because I want a challange, can I actually write something that people in general will like. And trust me, it has a long way to go before that lol.

And I have no clue as to why Im double posting, it just started the last couple of days.

341. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

@ 4. Moonbase Alpha – October 12, 2010
Harry Mudd… tangled up with a deal gone wrong with the Andorians.

Ugh, kinda childish and layman for the epicness of these movies. Harry Mudd – basically a space clown – should never be in the movies.

342. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - October 13, 2010

Hey Bob. Good luck with the script! Love the Castro as a member of ZZ Top pic, and your reminder note-to-self to “vote”. You worry me with that combo!

Some of the youngsters here may not know just what my screen namesake did for Trek, so it might be time for a reminder.

Gene L. Coon only created the Klingons, the Gorns, the Prime Directive, and Khan Noonien Singh. He wrote Arena, Space Seed, The Devil in the Dark, Errand of Mercy, Metamorphosis, A Piece of the Action, Bread and Circuses, Spock’s Brain (possibly the best Star Trek parody), Spectre of the Gun, Wink of an Eye, and Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.

He was a Marine in the South Pacific in WWII, was renowned as a fast screenwriter (Bob…), and had the trademark dry humor of a true Marine.

Died in 1973 at the too young age of 49 from lung cancer. (Stop smoking, all you kids out there) Now go get’em bobbo!

343. Daoud - October 13, 2010

@341 A better throwaway reference would be “Paging Harcourt Mudd, please contact Information at any communications kiosk.” A true no-see-‘im. (No-see-’ems are annoying New England flies.)

But Andorians can’t hurt. Shran (and Jeff Combs, an excellent character actor) would be a great drop-in, as would Archer (state he was polluted with Surak’s katra, and other things) or T’Pol.


@340 David Gerrold’s advice was to write. Just write. Don’t ponder weak and weary about your writing being weak and weary, just write. And then revise, and then edit. After all, don’t you remember the TOS episode, “A Fuzzy Thing Happened To Me”? Of course not. You know the much revised “The Trouble with Tribbles” with a touch of Klingon thrown in to make the story taste best. Do the same, write that screenplay, finish it. Then revise. Edit. But write it once you have it plotted.

344. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

20. Sybok’s Secret Brother – October 12, 2010

Now, I just hope Paramount stays out of the way – I would have loved to have seen the original intended opening of Trek’09.

I agree, the opening with all those Klingon ships would have been great, even keeping in the Klingon prison and the argument with Kirk and his uncle were just a few minutes each and would have explained so much. I say you make some improvements in the editing room.

345. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

The things just keep coming.

NO lens flares.

I also agree with #33. cugel the clever – October 12, 2010

“No Khan.”
“No time travel.”

And include lesser known alien races like Andorians, Breen, Gorn, or Tholians.

346. moauvian waoul - October 13, 2010

338. zero gravity could add some serious drama to an already tense situation. We’ve only seen it once and seems like an all too real possibility out there.

347. Chadwick - October 13, 2010

36. MJ – October 12, 2010 “Many of us DO NOT want to see Shat the in the sequel.” I agree.

42. DMarshall “NO 3-D and I can’t emphasize that enough!”

I agree, I bought a blu-ray player back in 2007, now I have a ps3. I love HD picture and sound and am quite happy with it, I am not buying into the home 3D market for a long time. I like 3D movies but not every movie needs to be 3D. I saw Avatar in 3D, Resident Evil Afterlife, and CANT WAIT FOR TRON, and now I hear all the star wars movies are going to be back in theaters again in 3D. If you make it 3D fine, as long as there is an option to see it in 2D because I will not see it in 3D.

348. RAMA - October 13, 2010

345…also agree: no Kahn, no time travel, no Klingons

349. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Wow, I had no idea Gene Coon was responsible for THAT much of Trek. Thanks for the info.

I guess greatness really is in Star Trek’s “Genes.”


350. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

@340 David Gerrold’s advice was to write. Just write. Don’t ponder weak and weary about your writing being weak and weary, just write. And then revise, and then edit. After all, don’t you remember the TOS episode, “A Fuzzy Thing Happened To Me”? Of course not. You know the much revised “The Trouble with Tribbles” with a touch of Klingon thrown in to make the story taste best. Do the same, write that screenplay, finish it. Then revise. Edit. But write it once you have it plotted.

# 343 That sounds like pretty good advice to me, thanks!

351. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

@340 David Gerrold’s advice was to write. Just write. Don’t ponder weak and weary about your writing being weak and weary, just write. And then revise, and then edit. After all, don’t you remember the TOS episode, “A Fuzzy Thing Happened To Me”? Of course not. You know the much revised “The Trouble with Tribbles” with a touch of Klingon thrown in to make the story taste best. Do the same, write that screenplay, finish it. Then revise. Edit. But write it once you have it plotted.

# 343 That sounds like pretty good advice to me, thanks!

352. Balok - October 13, 2010

Still a long way out, no lack of opinions here…just have to wait it out as Mr. Orci khan’t say much…

353. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - October 13, 2010

…and Gene L. Coon helped polish Gerrold’s Tribbles script, too.

Roddenberry gave birth to Trek, but Coon raised the kid.

354. Desstruxion - October 13, 2010

Huge space battle. Lot’s of new Starfleet ships (wanna see a Daedalus). USS Excelsior with Admiral Pike in command of shakedown cruise. Work that into the story and make it big. No Khan unless they find his carcass half eaten by tribbles on a derelict Botany Bay. Klingons maybe. Make em meaner and scarier. Shatners holo image scene. Better toys this time. Sure would like to have a nice replica (not a model, no patience) of the Kelvin. A crossover with Doctor Who…..just kidding…..although it would give me chills.

355. boborci - October 13, 2010

349. Vultan – October 13, 2010

Both Shatner and Nimoy made a specific point, the first time we met them, to single out Gene Coon as essential to Star Trek.

356. boborci - October 13, 2010

322. Hugh Hoyland – October 13, 2010

Both can work quite well. I tend to prefer less in the story and more discovery at script, but when you are working with others, clarity up front is maybe slightly more important.

357. Rosario T. Calabria - October 13, 2010

3D may have gotten a bad rap, but I’m still fully supportive of it. When done right — like with Avatar and How to Train Your Dragon — it really enhances the experience. So I for one hope they decide to shoot Star Trek 2 in 3D.

I’m curious though if the writers have had any discussions with regards to 3D, or if its strictly a director/studio decision.

358. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, ok that makes sense, like letting the story come alive as you progress. I also see how having partners would change that approach, their viewpoints would have to be considered to. Thanks for answering my questions!

359. Hugh Hoyland - October 13, 2010

Bob, ok that makes sense, like letting the story come alive as you progress. I also see how having partners would change that approach, their viewpoints would have to be considered to. Thanks for answering my questions!

360. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - October 13, 2010

Hey Bob. What is your favorite tos episode and why.

361. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

339 & 340: “And I have no clue as to why Im double posting, it just started the last couple of days.”

You have doppelgangeritis.

362. Red Dead Ryan - October 13, 2010


I think J.J Abrams said that he would only do 3D if it worked well. He has also said that he prefers to shoot movies on film, as opposed to going digital (which would be a lot easier to put into 3D). But ultimately it is Paramount’s decision to make a 3D version. I wouldn’t think the writers would have any say in the matter.

363. Thorny - October 13, 2010

341… “Harry Mudd – basically a space clown – should never be in the movies.”

He almost was in Star Trek III. The part of the backward-talking alien to whom McCoy goes seeking passage to Genesis was originally written as Harry Mudd, but Roger C. Carmel was too ill to reprise the role.

364. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Coon was THE man. It must’ve been so cool at Desilu in the 60’s with all that talent on the show…a room full of Sci Fi writers hatching ideas, Harlan Ellison hanging in there. Matt Jefferies trying to do the impossible with no money. What a fantastic cast of characters BEHIND the scenes on that show, AND Lucille Ball too!

365. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Wise men those two.

Bob, I thought I read that TNG was your favorite Trek series. If so, what is your favorite episode and why? Feel free to lump your answer together with #360’s question about your favorite TOS episode.

I hope all these questions aren’t keeping you away from the script. :)

366. Red Dead Ryan - October 13, 2010

339 or 340 (not sure which one of you is the original Hugh Hoyland)

“And I have no clue as to why Im double posting, it just started the last couple of days.”

Well, I just remembered the “Voyager” episode “Deadlock” where the ship travelled through a gas cloud and a duplicate ship was inadvertantly created. Perhaps something similar happened to you?

Either that or all you have is a twitchy mouse finger. :-)

367. Nathan - October 13, 2010

Good luck, guys. God bless you as you take on this great task…

Honestly, I don’t feel like I’m qualified to give any expectations on the new film. I certainly hope it will far surpass ST09, but at this point I just don’t have enough information to think much of anything on the subject. This creative team is certainly capable of making something great; but they’re equally capable of making something mediocre, or even bad. Time will tell.

Once more information comes out about the new film, I will certainly give my opinion; but until then, I will wait.

Good luck, guys.

368. Red Dead Ryan - October 13, 2010


Bob’s favorite episodes of TNG are “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, “Best Of Both Worlds”, “All Good Things…” and his ultra-favorite, “Parellels”.

His favorite TOS episodes (I’m guessing, hopefully I’m right!) probably include “City On The Edge Of Forever”, “Arena”, “Space Seed”, “Errand Of Mercy”, “Amok Time”, and “Journey To Babel”.

Am I right Bob? Please say I’m right! :-)

And its nice to see this thread still going strong at 9:30 pm pacific time.

I’m watching the Ducks/Canucks hockey game right now. Good game.

369. Vultan - October 13, 2010


Oh, thanks for answering our questions, BOB!

370. Red Dead Ryan - October 13, 2010


No, I’m not Bob Orci, but thanks anyway!

371. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Wink of an Eye was mind boggling.

372. dmduncan - October 13, 2010

Oh! What an amazing correlation. Look at Wikipedia’s summary of Wink of an Eye:

Overview: Invisible “time-accelerated” aliens take over the Enterprise and attempt to abduct the crew for use as “genetic stock”.

Sounds like the mythos of the Grays. And get this: I’ve been told by authorities I trust that when spirits speak, they speak so fast it sounds like a buzzing. Could that be evidence that Wink of an Eye is essentially correct, and that we share the same space with beings we cannot see?

373. Basement Blogger - October 13, 2010

@ 357 I agree with the two films you cite as 3-D done right. (Avatar, How to Train Your Dragon) If Paramount is going to release Star Trek 2012 in 3-D then shoot it in 3-D. NO CONVERSIONS FROM 2-D. The conversions i’ve seen are too dark.

If I were a writer, I would like to know if a movie were going to be shot in 3-D. I could imagine the action in that dimension and set up the action. For example rather than just write, “Planet killer explodes into thousands of pieces of debris.” You could write, “Planet kller explodes sending thousands of pieces of debris toward the Enterprise. The camera views the Enterprise from the top and behind the bridge as pieces hurl toward it. The pieces bounce off the shields distorting the space around the ship. As they bounce off the shields, some of the pieces hurl towards foreground.” Etc.

374. keachick - October 13, 2010

324 – I hope that the Star Trek sequel will be as good, if not better, than Star Trek (’09) and that it will get even bigger audiences worldwide as well. Curiously, since Star Trek, I have seen at least two of Chris Pine’s movies appear on the internet advertised in German – first, the Carriers DVD and now the Unstoppable movie poster. Have you seen them?

325 – Archer (Scott Bakula) can only appear in the sequel as long as that lost beagle of his is found by Scotty. Now there’s reunion worthy of a little screen time…:)

Although I agree that the Enterprise needs TLC because this vessel is the only home to 400+ crew for many weeks/months perhaps, this notion of the Enterprise being Kirk’s first “love”, only “love”, sounds and feels like some puerile “toys for boys” stuff. Sort of creepy in some ways.

I realise that, as captain, Kirk bears a heavy burden of responsibility, but a good deal of that would be delegated, and he would have down time, like everyone else. Actually, quite a lot, when things are quiet out there in space. Even with warp drive, there are still long distances to cover with not much to see sometimes. Such is the nature of space. It is in these periods that good character development and interaction can take place.

375. Phobos - October 13, 2010

woah this blog has grown wildly huge

I was just thinking how cool it would be to make a movie out of that TOS episode “Who Mourns for Adonais?”

376. USS Enterprise B - October 13, 2010

haven’t heard much talk about this, but how about ending on a Wrath of Khan note, by killing off a main character with a cliffhanger to have them revived in the final film of the new star trek trilogy? hmm

377. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@376 oh I dunno, I think killing off any character is a bad idea.
Look how we lost Amanda Grayson and ALL of a Vulcan in ST FS.

378. Boborci - October 13, 2010

368. All true!

U just left out balance of terror!

Thanks for covering for me!

379. Boborci - October 13, 2010

367. If you are posting on this site at this hour, you’re qualified!

380. Phobos - October 13, 2010

ohhh Boborci is here.
You know, it is really fun that you sometimes show up on this blog. I love coming home from work, rushing to this site to check the news, then sometimes seeing you here.

381. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@376 Although to qualify what I said, I must add that the death of Spock was one of the most powerful moments in the entire ST franchise. Then again, I was a kid when I saw it on TV and I remember being shocked, angry and betrayed by Paramount. Until ST III came about I actually despized Paramount in anger. lol ahh those were the innoncent years.

382. Chasco - October 13, 2010

Why is the Kahn question still hanging around like a bad smell? Poll after poll, thread after thread, have made it clear that the majority DON’T WANT KAHN.
And please – no Shat, no stupid Keenser, no brewery, no lens flares, no Spock/Uhura.

Please try to remember that Scotty is a Lieutenant Commander and a Chief Engineer, not a clown. Putting him in command of the Enterprise for a while (as often happened in TOS) would be a good opportunity to prove that you understand the guy should be authoritative, intelligent and respected, and is not there to provide laughs.

383. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@382 What is even more weird is people saying Shatner should not be in it.
Maybe people are scared that a new Khan could disappoint and would ruin the excellent Montalban performance.

But Shatner, my god people, that man has incredible charisma, I would jump at the chance to add him in the movie, even just a tiny role.

384. Areli - October 13, 2010


It’s not like they can ditch S/U. It was established in the first movie. They have to make it work or figure out a way to slowly break it down.

Also, Keenser isn’t a big character so he shouldn’t really bother anybody.

385. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@382 I agree with you on no Keenser (I mean what is that anyway? It barely talks. Just plain bizarre), no Spock/Uhura (risk ruining the Spock character – and in turn the franchise — at least the TOS rendition), no brewery (arrgh what a bad decision).

I actually liked the lens flares, it was lively.

386. Buzz Cagney - October 13, 2010

As long as Slimer is back i’ll be happy. ;-)

387. David G. - October 13, 2010

Put in some lines for Janice Rand.

Then hire Kristen Bell.

388. Buzz Cagney - October 13, 2010

#383 but he will not, apparently, accept a tiny role.
If you were William Shatner would you?

389. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@387 hey good idea, unbond the Spock/Uhura love thing, then in its place use Janice Rand/Uhura

390. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@388 Oh please, Shatner is just trying to save face. I suspect he played hard to get in ST 2009, was shocked Abrams passed, and now he will accept any role.
Shatner is 80+ years old and he knows being in the movie will further fuel the adoration he gets from his fans, not to mention increase his appeal for getting on other TV shows.

He will accept a cameo, I am sure of it. AND… he will do it at a bargain price.

391. Amorican - October 13, 2010

Look, I wrote a scene in the style of Orci/Kurtzman:

Scotty: My daughter only calls me Scotty. It makes me sad.
Kirk: LOL
Scotty: Don’t laugh at me. It’s not funny.

. . . later in the script. . .

Kirk (with a smirk): Beam me up SCOTTY!!
(Scotty looks annoyed)
(Kirk winks at the camera)

392. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@388 And to answer your question directly, if I were the actor who incarnated the original Kirk, I would put all issues aside and do whatever role Paramount/the writers need. 1) for adoration 2) because “sounds like fun” (from ST Generations when Kirk talks to Picard in the nexus about how Spock would says the decision would be illogical.

393. Thomas - October 13, 2010

387. David G

If Kristen Bell was in ST2012, it would be in all likelihood her first good movie. So sure, why not?

Usually, if I hear she’s in a movie, I avoid it like the plague. She’s a talented actress who happens to choose the worst movies to be in.

394. Buzz Cagney - October 13, 2010

Wow, Shat posts here in the name Phobos! I’m impressed.
Seriously, how can you be so certain he accept a small role for little money? Everything he says is contrary to that.
Perhaps he could be persuaded to make up as Keensers father? If he’s that keen i’m sure he’ll do it. I know he will. In fact he told me just the other day he would.
Guys, its just time to site back and see what the team has in store for us.

395. Buzz Cagney - October 13, 2010

# sorry, SIT back.

396. Phobos - October 13, 2010

The box office revenue this year seems very bad. Notice how ST in 2009 appears to have been responsible for kick starting the best year ever revenue wise for the movie industry. And without ST, revenue is going down fast. That is granting a lot of credit to ST, but I choose to believe in the correlation because it please me hahaha

But my point here is one of budget. I am scared that this year and the next will hit an already financially shaky Paramount hard, and they will have little money available for ST 2012. Before ST 2009 and Transformers, Paramount was starting to panic, they had plans to reduce the number of movies, they were looking for international investments, etc.

I prefer to see the same budget as ST2009, just in case ST2009’s success was a flook. Would be a shame to see Paramount lose faith in the ST franchise.

argh I pity boborci for the pressure they have and expectations surrounding them.

397. Phobos - October 13, 2010

@394 that’s odd, and here I was just thinking that YOU were Shatner in disguise. lol

398. Phobos - October 14, 2010

@Buzz. Agreed. First thing is for Orci and Kurtzman to squeeze Shatner in there somehow; even as a hologram. Not doing that considering Shat is saying publically he wants in, would be plain stupid. Even do 2 seconds of Shatner would account for thousands of extra sold movie tickets.

399. Phobos - October 14, 2010

You know what is cool guys? At this very single moment, as we chat away on here, boborci, is likely pecking away at his keyboard writing lines for the movie.

oh… there he goes again… i wonder what he just typed…

400. DJT - October 14, 2010

One of my favorite memories, will forever be, me and my friends at a midnight showing , waiting for Star Trek 2009 to premiere, and then having it rock my socks off. I look forward to repeating that experience.

401. Khaaaan You Feel The Love Tonight - October 14, 2010

“I hope there isn’t going to be more Spock/Uhura. I just didn’t like the way they portrayed it in XI, and more of it in XII would detract from the epic friendship/trust/t’hy’la thing he should have with another someone. *cough*”


402. James - October 14, 2010

Some very valid points but where does Tom Hanks as Commodore Matt Decker fit into all of this??

I must say echoing other comments on here that i went to see the last Star Trek at the imax with a lot if non trekkie friends and those first ten minutes had them gob-smacked. I think it helped hook a lot of non trekkies into the franchise so i hope you dont lose sight of the power the opening minutes a film can have on an audience.

403. Flake - October 14, 2010

I say have T’Pring turn up and ask WTF Spock is doing with Uhura and then we have an epic Star Trek love triangle folks! Dont forget Nurse Chapel will confess to a fling with Spock as well! Oh the possibilities.

Oh yeah ofc the klingons, borg, Q and whatever else will simply have to take a back seat to the epic Love Triangle. Star Trek XII: The Love Boat.

404. Flake - October 14, 2010

No to Shatner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

405. Flake - October 14, 2010

Johnny Depp as Q, you heard it here first.

406. Phobos - October 14, 2010

@403 Star Trek XII, The Love Boat. ROTFL

407. Phobos - October 14, 2010

Q would be fun. Maybe a bit of both, Shatner and Q.
I have a funny feeling though neither will be in the movie.

408. Phobos - October 14, 2010

@405 oh, and by the way, which Q specifically are you referring to? Is is Q, or Q, or that other Q?

409. Trek Lady - October 14, 2010

These threads inevitably take off with a long list of wants and wishes for the next Trek. I have my own, but I’ve posted them before and they haven’t changed. I just want to love it, as I have loved TOS for over 40 years. :) I’ll just throw in a request for the “kitchen sink” since it appears to be the only thing missing at this point. LOL!

Good luck to all those working on the new flick. No pressure, right?

410. Erik Parrent - October 14, 2010

Bob –

I trust you guys. Just go do good work, and in 2013 we’ll start arguing about Star Trek 3.

411. chrisfawkes.com - October 14, 2010

What i would like to see is a little referencing of other cultures when it comes to finding efficient ways of doing things.

How many times when illustrating a point do we look to other cultures and how they approach a certain type of problem different to what we in our western culture usually would?

We get references to klingon proverbs or alien drinks but i think seeing a lesson learnt from another culture during a significant crisis would add some depth and if appropriate could actually leave the viewer somewhat wiser too.

412. chrisfawkes.com - October 14, 2010

Can we have Emma Stone as a vulcan in the new film too?

413. Denny - October 14, 2010

bob there was a good piece i read in a magazine recently where it talked about hopes forthe sequel and it stated: “Its often forgotten that the original series had an eerie, uncanny vibe not a million light years from ‘The Twilight Zone’ charting a shadow haunted universe that hid some deeply odd things. Return a little of that supernatural awe and dread to the big screen adventures”

i hope we see some of that in the sequel!

414. Flake - October 14, 2010

408: Johnny Depp as the Corbin Bernsen Q ofc!

415. Alex Altorfer - October 14, 2010

I hope they don’t call it “Star Trek Returns”. LOL.

416. VOODOO - October 14, 2010

Denny #413

That is a great point! I would love to see a little of that weird/supernatural vibe return.

417. Ian Hayden - October 14, 2010

I liked Star Trek ’09, except for the bad language/sexual content.
Can you make the sequel more family-friendly, so that parents won’t have to be embarrassed about seeing it with their kids who like Trek?

418. janice - October 14, 2010

With Bruce Greenwood back as Pike, I’ll love it.
That’s what I want the most from the sequel–PIKE BACK!

419. MORN SPEAKS - October 14, 2010

Mark my words, the next villain will be a woman.

420. Jai - October 14, 2010

Some suggestions for supporting roles:

– [Mad] Man-of-the-moment John Hamm would make an excellent Starfleet captain; he’s definitely got the right persona for it.

– Black British actor Colin Salmon as Ben Sisko’s great-grandfather and another Starfleet captain. (Who’s to say that Ben was necessarily the first member of his family to go into Starfleet ?). It would obviously be a nice “easter egg” for DS9 fans, and Colin himself does have the appropriate persona to credibly play both aspects of this role, including Ben Sisko’s direct ancestor. Furthermore, he already has a very deep voice, has even recently shaved his head, and can do a very good American accent. Colin appeared in a couple of the Pierce Brosnan-era Bond films as a senior MI6 officer, and was so authoritative and commanding in the role that Brosnan personally recommended Colin as the best choice for the next 007 (obviously Daniel Craig eventually got the part in the rebooted franchise instead).

– Victor Garber (aka Jack Bristow in “Alias”) would be perfect as a Starfleet admiral, especially as one of Bruce Greenwood/Admiral Pike’s peers and/or friends.

– Tony Todd or Avery Brooks as the main Klingon villain, if the Klingons are going to play a major part in the next movie. Brooks has proven his ability to credibly portray a Klingon via the DS9 episode “Apocalypse Rising”, and Todd has many years of experience playing an imposing Klingon via his role as Worf’s brother Kurn on TNG followed by DS9.

– Ken Watanabe as a senior Starfleet officer (eg. captain or admiral).

– Indian actor Amitabh Bachchan as a Starfleet admiral or a senior member of the Federation government. Or, alternatively, the Indian actor Kabir Bedi, for the same role.

421. Damian - October 14, 2010

For those who always complained about Kirk’s death in Generations being a cheat, or unsatisfying, I think David George III described the scene of his death best in his Crucible: Kirk Book. I quote “He found that it pleased him a great deal that his death would be in the service of saving others–beings he hadn’t met and who would never know of his sacrifice.” (Crucible: Kirk, The Star to Every Wandering). Kirk died a hero in that movie. His death was even more heroic in the sense he willingly gave his life to people who would never even knew they needed a hero. I never understood why people were so unsatisfied with his sacrifice. He died standing up for the ultimate ideals of Starfleet and the Federation. William Shatner should be very satisfied that his character died in the service of a whole planet. What better way to go is that.

Perhaps the biggest fault I can find with the writers is that they should have driven that point home. Namely, Kirk was the ultimate hero because he gave his life to save an entire planet of people who never realized they were in danger. They should have reminded the audience that his sacrifice saved the lives of hundreds of millions on Veridian IV.

422. P Technobabble - October 14, 2010

421. Damian
While I understand your point, I think it was simply the way he died, essentially falling off a rock, that really annoyed fans. Yes, he fought to save lives (as he always did), but in terms of the way Kirk was always presented throughout the history of Trek you’d think he’d go out in a somewhat more epic way. In addition, there was little emotional impact in the scene as filmed. Consider Spock’s death in TWOK. It was emotionally powerful because we felt the loss through Kirk (not to mention our own attachment to the character). And in spite of the fact it was a very personal and intimate moment, it was also truly epic because we knew who he was saving — the lives of his crew mates. Saving the lives of millions of faceless Veridians was, IMO, too cerebral to have such an emotional impact. And we can’t say Picard had any real emotional bond with an historical figure.
I, for one, would much rather the makers of GEN had let Kirk live, anyway. Killing him off was, IMO, gratuitous and unnecessary.

423. Damian - October 14, 2010

422–I will agree that they should have driven the point home what he died for. The audience forgot that there were millions of lives saved as a result of his sacrifice and that point should have been made at the end. Perhaps dying in a hand to hand combat with Soran that gave Picard the time he needed to stop the weapon would have made a difference.

Also, I think the writers were trying to stay consistent with what Kirk said in Star Trek V that he would die alone. While not alone, he died apart from his family (Spock and McCoy), almost the same as dying alone.

So while I agree, the reasons his death was heroic and the manner of death could have been handled better, I’ve always disagreed with those who say he died a senseless death. It may not have been sensational, but it made sense that he died for something greater than himself. The quote I made from George’s book summed it up the best.

424. VZX - October 14, 2010

a battle between the Organians and the Metrons

425. Will B90 - October 14, 2010

Please, way less lens-flares, and please make sure they don’t leave gaffer’s tape on the front console like last time ;-)

426. Red Dead Ryan - October 14, 2010


“Thanks for covering me!”

No problem Bob, and you’re very welcome! I may do it again if you’re too busy to answer questions about previous Trek movies and episodes. However, I’ll leave it to you to answer “Star Trek 2012″ questions since you’re the expert writer!


“I hope they don’t call it “Star Trek Returns”. LOL!”

And I hope they don’t call the third one “Star Trek Forever”!

427. moauvian waoul - October 14, 2010

422-423. Good points, all of them. I’d like to add that many felt Kirk should die on the bridge of a ship. Maybe something like his dad. Hand to hand combat might not have been well recieved since many thought no one was bad ass enough to take him out that way. And no one did, but it did lack the emotional punch it should have had.

428. trekpower.org - October 14, 2010

@HWX: great idea your dialogue!

429. BiggestTOSfanever - October 14, 2010

Trekmovie, we need a countdown!
I really hope that the Vulcans rebuilding is a big part of the next movie, otherwise it will mean they were all killed off for the spectacle. If we want new fans to consider the Vulcans an important part of Star Trek, we have to see what they’re up to.

430. BiggestTOSfanever - October 14, 2010

My guesses to answer the questions above.

* Who will direct (if Abrams decides not to do it, then who?)
-Nicolas Meyer!
* What will it be called (and will it have “Star Trek” in the title)?
-Star Trek: To Boldly Go!
* Budget (bigger than 2009 film, smaller? the same?)
The same.
* 3-D or not 3-D
* Who/what is the villain (Khan, Klingons, both, others?)
* Will we see new familiar Trek characters (Nurse Chapel, Harry Mudd, others?)
-I hope so.
* Will William Shatner be in it?
-No! (please)
* Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?)
-Sarek and Bring Back Amanda!! (that dang transporter)
* Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?)
-Clifton Collins except as a Klingon or Gorn; he has talent.
* Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props)
-Better engineering, cooler shields, and cooler phasers (give Scotty credit for all of them.)
* Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film
(Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.)
The Vulcans could accidentally colonize a planet the Gorn want.

And of course there will be Lens Flares.

431. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

51. DeShonn Steinblatt – October 12, 2010
“The story is done. Stop making story suggestions. At this point, the best you can do is suggest bits of dialogue.”

We can do what we want, don’t put a cork in the fun, the best we can do is still being creative not just suggest dialogue.

432. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

51. DeShonn Steinblatt – October 12, 2010
“The story is done. Stop making story suggestions. At this point, the best you can do is suggest bits of dialogue.”

We can also suggest changes i.e. engine room because the story might be written but wait! When writing the script they might say, “oh its better if we have this scene with Scotty and whomever in the engine room rather than the transporter room.” So in that sense there indeed changes which can still be suggested! Ah I love the creative stew!

433. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

81. Simon – October 12, 2010

Khan is fine.


434. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

I don’t get some people, some of you fans are so odd. I am a trekkie at heart and even I know what would be cool and what should stay in the TOS series. You say no to Klingons but then yes to Harry Mudd or Gary Seven and his cat, what kind of people are you LMAO!

435. Red Dead Ryan - October 14, 2010

Bob Orci is going to consider everything us fans post online. But he isn’t going to pander to anyone. He’s a writer first and a fan second. He, Alex and Damon have come up with the story ideas on their own, but they should only listen to fans when it comes to individual pieces of the previous film that worked or didn’t work. Things such as more McCoy, no more brewery etc. But even then the writers need to trust their own judgement and treat fans’ suggestions and ideas with a grain of salt.

The success or failure of any given film rests on the shoulders of the writers, not the audience. There is no guarantee that whatever the writers write will be successful, but it fans start doing the writing/brainstorming, then the film will be a guaranteed failure.

436. Buzz Cagney - October 14, 2010

I forgot what I was gona type there- that trailer for Film4’s Trekathon just came on the tv and my mind wandered!
Not to worry, I doubt you missed very much!

437. Buzz Cagney - October 14, 2010

#434 the kind of people that have seen one too many Klingons in there Trek’s. ;-)

438. Buzz Cagney - October 14, 2010

#THEIR Treks! I hate it when people get that one wrong too!

439. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

105. Daniel – October 12, 2010

“Regarding Scotty and the brewery, it would be cool if Scotty first appears in the brewery, and then he gets called to “main engineering” and he enters a set which is much more familiar to us.”

Very good, I like it. brewery = some other engineering section like deuterium tanks and “Main” engineering has that beautiful cylinder of swirling of lights which we call matter-antimatter reaction, mmm.

440. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

107. dmduncan – October 12, 2010

“Would like to see new ship sets. Briefing room. Stellar Cartography. Jefferies tube. We have to have the Jefferies tube. Even if it’s just where Scotty goes to eat his lunch in peace.”

LOL YES! Scotty eating a sandwich in the Jeffries tube!

441. Horatio - October 14, 2010


442. Damian - October 14, 2010

435–I agree. The writers will follow their own instincts. Most posters here are just posting things for fun, and maybe hope something will get in. I would say that if there was a general consensus on a subject (rare for Trekkies) that would get their attention. But overall, they know what direction they are going in.

443. somethoughts - October 14, 2010


It depends on the ideas presented to Bob, Bob knows what he is doing. He’s not foolish to reject ideas simply because a fan suggested it, if it’s good he will use it.

444. somethoughts - October 14, 2010

They get paid the big bucks to write it :) as fans it’s simply fun to collaborate with the writers of our fav show. To me it doesn’t matter if they use it or don’t, it’s just amazing to talk to bob and share what we like and dislike.

445. Rusty0918 - October 14, 2010


Ugh…Yeoman Rand was nothing more but a glorified maid/wench/bimbo/piece of meat. The only appearance of her that I could put up with were in TMP/TSFS/TVH/TUC when she wasn’t that annoying.

No…don’t go there. I think my idea of a female chief of security that I’ve been pulling about is much better (get rid of Cupcake), someone again who wears trousers on duty and not those cocktail waitress uniforms. Again, Uhura can still wear hers for all I care if they do this, just to please you fanboys (and they can continue the Spock/Uhura thing if they do this).

Besides, we all should embrace change, and this is a big fat change. Take some chances here!

446. Thorny - October 14, 2010

The problem with a Klingon main villain is all the makeup required. Paramount will probably want a big name (bigger than Eric Bana anyway) as the villain (to draw in international audiences), and there’s no point hiring a big name and then burying his face under five pounds of prosthetics and makeup. John Colicos was still recognized as Kor decades later, but all the actors playing later Klingons were essentially anonymous (except for the un-Klingon-looking Christopher Plummer “Chang” character in Trek 6.) Even Michael Dorn is hard to recognize out of his Worf makeup, despite 15 years playing the character.

So if we’re going to have a villain (and I think that’s a given) I’d say make him human or a close copy like Soran.

447. Ahkenatan - October 14, 2010

I just wanted to say it’s nice seeing guy’s around my age in control of this franchise now ( I’m 41 ) I know Bob is 37 or so. I wish I could see the things you have seen behind the scenes at Paramount and other studios. You’ve met some great stars and had great times I’m sure. While I will never be part of that kind of life I’m glad you guys are and that you don’t feel so elevated above us all to stick your head in places like this, say hi and give us tidbits.

I hope you guys become the next Spielbergs/Lucas’s of this coming decade. With all the money and fun to go with it. You work hard for it.

448. The Chief Engineer - October 14, 2010

I’m amazed Bob!

If it were me i’d probably hide away and do my best to avoid reading 400 fan posts on how to do your job! Ha ha!

Bob you must be mad! But seeing as you do read these… more serious/genius Scotty please (couldn’t resist!).

449. boborci - October 14, 2010

447. Ahkenatan – October 14, 2010

Too kind.

But thanks to dvds and behind the scenes commentaries, and the internet, and all the things around now, we all have more access to the behind the scenes than we had during our whole childhoods. Remember when you had to wait years to see a barely hour long prime time special to see behind the scenes of Star Wars?!

450. Ahkenatan - October 14, 2010

@449. boborci – October 14, 2010

Actually you’re right, I didn’t think of that. But still I was thinking of places in the studios most of us don’t get to see, maybe old props and all that stuff. Then again it might be my childhood imagination thinking there was stuff like that at movie studios.I used to imagine the big, dark warehouses full of old movie stuff. It’s probably nothing like that now, I mean why would a studio hang on to some old props and stuff taking up room and money to store?

And yes I do remember waiting for years to see those Star Wars specials. Then spending the first 15 minutes of it trying to adjust the roof antenna to remove some of the snow so I could watch it. lol

451. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

I see so many people commenting on the Klingons and how they should stay out of it. Aside from the Federation the Klingons and Romulans are the two other largest territories, so its inevitable one will be involved. We might be surprised, its possible that neither are in the new movie.

My argument is for Klingons.

– Television series aside, the Klingons had a small cameo in ST TMP (oh wow RIDGES!).
– They were the main villains in STIII (but the story was not revolve around the Klingons, it was about Spock).
– They had a partial role in ST V but could have done without, seems like the Klingons were just thrown into the movie with no good cause.
– ST VI was about a Klingon story with Klingon villains, in my opinion the only Klingon movie.
– In Generations Klingon had a partial as in ST V but again they were not the main villain nor was their involvement in the story necessarily important…… they destroyed 1701D.

So to recap, the main Klingons occurrences occurred in five movies. A cameo in one, partial roles in two, villain in one, and villain and main story in another. In my opinion there have been one MAYBE two “Klingon” movies. I would have no problem with the Klingons being the main adversaries.


#1) We KNOW this movie is going to be bigger and darker, who better than the Klingons to offer that darkness?

#2) With all the design work already done for the Klingons in the 2009 movie like makeup, costumes, even ship designs, its hard to imagine that Paramount will let that spent energy go to waste.

#3) Consider this, there were parts written for the Klingons in Star Trek 2009. There was a Nerada scene with the Klingon armada. Then the extensive Rura Penthe scene and those two were completely cut from the movie. Why do you suppose that is? Could be that some one said “since it is highly likely we are making the next movie about Klingons” and we need to cut the 2009 movie short “let cut the Klingons out of the first movie.”

#4) Now this one is the biggie, the one that Alex, and Bob, and JJ, and Damon have talked about. The main notion behind the new movie was to make it more accessible to the laymen and the non fans while still appeasing the fans was just slightly secondary. When you ask ANY person who does not know much about Trek and you ask them who the main villains are in Star Trek HANDS DOWN PEOPLE WILL ANSWER THE KLINGONS!!! That fact alone is enough to make the next movie about Klingons when it comes to ticket sales and drawing people in. The fact that many of the new non trek fans drawn in by the 2009 movie will undoubtably want to see the Klingons, the only bad guys they are familiar with.

……Harry Mudd will never be badass, Harry Mudd is bubblegum, Star Trek is NOT bubblegum.

452. Gary Neumann - October 14, 2010

@ boborci

Excellent to know! Greetings from Venezuela ;-)

453. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

@451: Yes, Klingons. The story I have outlined is about Klingons in nuanced ways you’ve never seen them before. Not simplistic bad guys with buck teeth. People who don’t want Klingons don’t know what’s possible to do with them.

454. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

To extend my #4 point in post #451 with regards to public polls on the most well known star trek villain. The Burger King promotions where the king was dressed and masked as a Klingon with two other Klingons characters. There were no Klingons in the movie yet at the all american burger joint they promoted Klingons for the new Star Trek movie? Why because they are the most recognizable figures in Star Trek. I guarantee they will be in the next movie, and in turn will attract a boat load of people who would never consider seeing star trek except for the fact that the 2009 movie was cool and that the bad ass Klingons are in the next movie.

455. gingerly - October 14, 2010

Ahhh!! I almost missed this thread!!


*woot!* I’m happy you guys are cracking on the script. As for the next film, as long as you guys love the characters as much we do (and judging by your presence you definitely do), I trust everything is going to be just fine. :)

As far as hopes:

I hope Uhura and her romance will not go in a similar disappointingly predictable trajectories as other recent black female characters in my favorite sci-fi. see: Zoe in Serenity and Dualla in Battlestar

I hope to see more of the Nero ripple effect, especially regarding the Klingons and the Romulans.

Given a choice, I’d rather hope to see Uhura being badass and sexy with her brains, than predictably kicking ass while wearing spandex.

I hope to see the big Trio have it’s moments AND also effectively expand to a Quartet (w/ Uhura) .

I really, really, hope to see more McCoy and Pike.

Given a choice at another female character being added, I’d really like to see Number One.

I hope to see another awesome opening, perhaps with the team (or just the Trio) doing some cheer-able awesome to get out of some harrowing situation while we the audience breath sighs of relief.

I hope to see some imaginative and scientifically possible space environments we haven’t seen in the movies before.

I hope to see the warp-core.

I hope to see Spock get to use more of his Suus Mahna.

I hope to see well-done Gorn.

I hope to see Uhura wearing something that would make sense on an active away-mission, in other words, not the mini-skirt. Though on the bridge, it’s fine.

I hope to see Uhura speaking some alien and domestic languages.

I hope to see more cultural Easter eggs. Like Chekov’s “Yomayo!” for the international and galactic crewmembers.

More geeky details, canon-fodder, and easter eggs for the Trekkies! Please, get some detailed Trekkie set-designers to place that stuff around….like the Vulcan lyre, 3D chess and the like.

I hope Keenser stays non-annoying.

I hope it stays relatively light in tone and fun and keep expanding those characters, we love!

456. captain_neill - October 14, 2010


Good luck with the script.

Please give the next one a stronger plot, a weak plot with contrivances were the weaknesses of the last one and DO NOT REHASH Khan.

Please don’t take the weak plot comment personally. You wrote some great character moments but I did feel Star Trek XI’s plot was weaker in comparison to some of the past movies.

457. captain_neill - October 14, 2010

Can I ask something?

Am I the only one on this site who thought the planned Shatner Hologram scene was forced and contrived?

It would have been great to see Shatner in the film but I thought the scene did not work.

Am I the only one who thought this?

458. Tibletcat - October 14, 2010

Hi Bob

Thank you (to the whole team) for keeping Star Trek alive.


My guesses to answer the questions above.

* Who will direct (if Abrams decides not to do it, then who?)
-Quentin Tarantino.

* What will it be called (and will it have “Star Trek” in the title)?
-Star Trek: Perchance To Dream?

* Budget (bigger than 2009 film, smaller? the same?)
The same.

* 3-D or not 3-D

* Who/what is the villain (Khan, Klingons, both, others?)

* Will we see new familiar Trek characters (Nurse Chapel, Harry Mudd, others?)
-Decker, Chapel, Rand,Edith Keeler, Mudd, Finnegan, …

* Will William Shatner be in it?

* Who else will be returning from 2009 movie (Greenwood, Ben Cross, others?)
-Pike, Spock Prime, (Ambassador) Winona Kirk…

* Who will be cast for key new roles (possibly big name star to boost int’l box office?)
-Matthew McConaughey (Decker), Amanda Sayfried (Rand), Megan Fox (Mudd Android), Zooey Deschanel (Mudd Android), Rachel Weisz (Edith Keeler) Etc…

* Will there be any changes to the look (ship, sets, uniforms, props)
-more primary colors used.

* Will/how much will sequel carry on storylines from first film
(Spock/Uhura, destruction of Vulcan, Spock Prime’s knowledge, etc.)
The Vulcans are being threatened by the Klingons, now that they are vulnerable.

And of course there will be Lens Flares, but only from the sun.

459. captain_neill - October 14, 2010


I am worried they might listen to the wrong ideas from fans.

I for one am really scared that they are going to redo Khan.

Nemesis rehashed parts of Khan.
Star Trek XI drew from Khan
Why must every film now draw from Khan.
As one of my friends said last night, that is just diluting a classic and frankly superior film.

I know that Star Trek XII will be a fantastic movie but I feel that it probably won’t be my all time fav.

Although JJ Abrams made a great movie I just can’t help but feel that he and these guys took away some of the stuff I loved about Trek just to get the mainstream audience in the cinemas, aiming it more for the people who don’t give a rat’s ass about Star Trek and damn the fans.

I enjoyed this movie, great fun but I do feel that something of the Star Trek I love has been taken away.

It is hard to explain but I guess there are elements that now bring Star Trek closer to a Michael Bay feel. When the shows were on the air this was a great fear of mine.

Anyhoo I am looking forward to the film and my fingers are crossed that there will be no Khan.

460. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

457: “Am I the only one on this site who thought the planned Shatner Hologram scene was forced and contrived?”

You are not the only one, but I think you are in a minority. Because that scene was BEAUTIFUL. There were a lot of good scenes in ST.09, but two really beautiful ones. One of them got filmed.

461. Aurore - October 14, 2010

Sorry. I noticed it just recently. In post 179 as I can see=as far as I can see.I know, I know who cares?…Good night.

462. Phil - October 14, 2010

Maybe its because I’ve done a little volunteer props and sets work, I was thrilled with the look of the sets…yes, all of them. Shuttles that looked like they had actually done work. Working bits and pieces on the starships. Actual structure in the shuttle bay. Something that always drove me nuts about Voyager, after seven years of lost in space, she shows up home showroom fresh. Waterworks on the Enterprise. Come on, Cap’t Picard washes his face at a sink in FC. That means pipes, and stored water.

I know scripting isn’t sets, but keep the look and feel. It was great….

463. gingerly - October 14, 2010


Yeah. On paper.

In film it would’ve been overshadowed the new crew’s accomplishments and might have come off somewhat cloying and awkward.

464. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

The Shatner scene gives the role of influencing young Spock to Kirk. For Spock to be so…touched…by what this older Kirk says to him such that he decides to rejoin the crew, also gives Kirk the role of healer, of making things right again. And that is the only way the timeline will ever be restored, in a manner of speaking, in this new franchise. And that’s also what Kirk so often did in TOS. That scene divides the responsibilities among characters. Spock causes something not so good to happen, and Kirk fixes it in a most unexpected and unusual way.

465. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

463: “In film it would’ve been overshadowed the new crew’s accomplishments and might have come off somewhat cloying and awkward.”

That’s what I expect someone who didn’t like the scene to say. Are you also one of those people who doesn’t like Shatner, the actor?

HOW would those two minutes have overshadowed the preceding 120? That makes no sense to me at all.

466. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

For young Spock to be so influenced also provides some explanation for how any residual ill will between KirkPine and SpockQuinto was dissipated. Which is more of a stretch to accept when you have Spock Prime just telling young Spock what a great time he’ll have. It just makes more sense, and erases a little question mark about the story.

467. P Technobabble - October 14, 2010

The extras included on dvds and the assorted production notes available on the internet are almost better than the movies!
Alright, I exaggerated.
But listening to a writer’s comments about his/her inspiration for a story, how the plot was arrived at, how the characters came about, etc. are, if you’ll forgive me, totally FASCINATING. And any behind-the-scenes stuff about directing, art design, SFX, etc. will easily keep me away from dinner, sleep, assorted chores… The entire process of screenwriting/film-making is so astonishing — to begin with a blank page and wind up with 2 hours of storytelling in pictures and sound on the big screen. Always a plus when those 2 hours are unforgettable… Star Trek has given us plenty of unforgettable hours. I can’t wait until “the guys” can finally divulge all of that behind-the-scenes info…

468. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

After all this talk I am currently watching the special features disc of the 2009 film…..and ill probably go back and watch the movie again for the oh…25-30th time.

469. patrick - October 14, 2010

in 2012 it will have been 3 years since TREK hit the screen, so:

ditch back-story AND any follow-up plots from TREK2009.

work on a stand-alone plot that leans on the established chemistry of the characters that audiences know.

470. Trek Lady - October 14, 2010


You must keep in mind that for some viewers, Spock didn’t return to Enterprise for Kirk, but for Uhura…For them, the “do what feels right” refers to Spock’s feelings for Uhura. To have included the “Kirk Prime” scene would mess with their personal interpretation of events and shift the focus away from Spock/Uhura. So although I would personally have loved to have seen the scene filmed because my focus is more on the growing friendship between Spock and Kirk, there are some who would rather ignore that scene’s existance.

Or so I gather from several conversations on the matter.

471. John from Cincinnati - October 14, 2010


Actually “Ted”, the fact the universe didn’t come to an end with both Spocks present is indirect evidence of a new alternate universe. As the writer of Star Trek 09 himself has stated:

199. boborci – August 15, 2009
Actually, there is a bit of implied evidence that the Prime universe still exists, and that is the fact that Spock Prime does not disappear! Chances that young spock will fall into a black hole 100 years later while being pursued by Nero are VERY SLIM. In a linear universe, therefore, Spock Prime’s presence would likely be affected by changing his past. But it didn’t. Also, he jokes with young Spock about Kirk’s assumptions when he says, “He (KIRK) assumed universe ending paradoxes would ensue…” essentially saying Kirk thought it was all linear time travel, not QMMWI.

So “Ted” the prime universe is alive and well. Sleep tight.

472. John from Cincinnati - October 14, 2010


I believe it was Gene Roddenberry that said as a writer just give the audience one thing. That thing being one science fiction concept and write the story around that so as not to lose the audience. Are you and Alex holding true to that when writing ST2012?

473. Phil - October 14, 2010

@ 465…it’s not about two minutes, or if you like Shatner or not. but if the folks running the franchise allow future productions to degenerate into a series of “proper send-off’s”, whatever the hell that means, then you end up with a movie where only the die hard geeks show up, scribbling there notes in the front row in an otherwise empty theater. Audiences are primed to tight sci-fi story telling, but the audience isn’t stupid, either. The Dark Knight was wildly successful because you didn’t have to be a Batman fan to watch it. Abrams and Company understand this, and seem to be guiding the franchise by this model.

Besides, Shatner will want millions for his scene. factor into that other production costs, and the fact that including him isn’t going to add anything significant to the box office total, and it comes down to a cost/benefit analysis. Does including WS make you any additional money, and the answer is no.

474. Pierre - October 14, 2010

Just want to say it is great again to read Boborci (and all others) on Trekmovie to participate in Fandom commentaries and to bring his insight and (maybe) drop some hints on the next script and story line. It makes us truly feel like we contribute to the process and it is enjoyable to read all ideas. Can’t wait to see what you’ll come up with. Thanks Bob.

475. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

473: “if the folks running the franchise allow future productions to degenerate into a series of “proper send-off’s”, whatever the hell that means,”

The Shatner scene wasn’t a “send off.” Spock Prime performed that function as a bridge between the old and the new. The Shatner scene improved the movie for the reasons I named. It wasn’t artificial or unnecessary. It did everything the pure Spock and Spock alternative we got did, plus it did something that the scene we got didn’t do.

ALSO, by having Kirk Prime recall the days when the Prime characters were young it marks a sharp distinction between the universes, and it sounds a sad note goodbye to the Prime universe and much of its stultifying canon.

Thus, that scene did something unique, that gave the film something it didn’t have — a goodbye that some Trek fans are still trying to reverse as if it were damage done.

476. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

It doesn’t ERASE Kirk’s death in Generations. It makes fans who were hoping for something else out of a Shatner appearance to DEAL with it. So in an odd kind of way, by making Kirk Prime into a hologram, it gives fans who do NOT want Kirk to come back exactly what they are hoping for: An end to Shatner’s involvement.

477. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

I’ll bet money this sequel is the most challenging writing assignment Bob ever had.

478. gingerly - October 14, 2010



Naw, Shatner is an entertaining guy; an underrated actor and person. I do however think that scene would’ve been eye-roll-inducing onscreen.

On paper, I did “aww” a little bit though.

Nothing can undo the wrong that was Generations.

479. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

@478: Re: Generations. You’re right. That one was phoned in to the secretary. But that scene would have given a reprisal to Kirk that would have replaced our poorly conceived last memory of him with something far more worthy of the character — the idea that even in death he is still saving people.

480. Thorny - October 14, 2010

457… Nope. That scene just didn’t work. Glad it was dumped.

481. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 14, 2010

There was, of course, tremendous fan outrage in July of 1981 when it was leaked that the “stupid, comic-booky” Khan would appear in Star Trek II. Indeed, the only thing that stopped it was news of Spock’s death which leaked 4 months later.

I dredge up the past only to remind the fans that the fans are complete idiots.

482. Tom - October 14, 2010


I think it would and could work. Think they should put more scenes of Shat in as well. Unless of course he insists on being paid by the millisecond.

483. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - October 14, 2010

Some random observations:

–The overwhelming majority of sequels underperform the first movie at the box office. Don’t forget that TMP was the all-time Trek box office champ (sold the most tickets) until Trek 09 squeaked past it last year. Trek 2012 has its work cut out for it. For every Dark Knight, or Terminator 2’s there are five Godfather II’s (GFII made less than half the original). Recent reboots such as Quantum of Solace (all time Bond champ, go figure), and the Spider Man sequels are exceptions.

–As far as the Shatner Debate, Shatner can only help box office. He may hurt artistically (may…) but he would absolutely sell a few fanboy tickets. Remember also, that Trek 09 fared badly overseas. Shatner alone will not help that. Trek 09 needs a big name to play a new (non-crew) character to help boost the foreign box office. Not sure who/what that is. Maybe a cool monster.

–I don’t like the emphasis on Uhura. Sorry. We only have two hours, and I vote more McCoy. Kirk (NOT SPOCK) needs a hot love interest. This is Star Trek, after all. I am telling you, I have a high school age daughter, and they love (I mean LOVE) Chris Pine. Give him a few on screen Kirk smooches, and you will get some of those young girls buying tickets. (See: “Titanic”)

What Trek 2012 doesn’t need is a mind bending science fiction story. It needs a great human story set in the future. “I’m from Iowa. I only work in space.” -James Kirk. Too true.

484. Vultan - October 14, 2010


Some random disagreements:

–Despite whatever it made at the box office, Godfather II is generally considered better or at the very least equal to the original, artistically speaking that is. Godfather III… now that’s a whole other can of worms…

–Casino Royale was the Bond reboot. Quantum of Solace was its inferior sequel, critically that is.

Whether the next Trek movie just barely breaks even at the office or rakes in enough money to buy the Western Hemisphere, I really don’t care; I just want a well-crafted, intelligent science-fiction story. Simple as that.

485. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - October 14, 2010


My turn!

Of course GFII is rightfully praised as the first’s equal. I’m just pointing out that The Godfather grossed over $130mm in 1972, and GFII grossed $47mm in 1974. There may be a reason we didn’t see a third for 16 years. Roger Ebert once defined the word sequel as “a filmed deal”.

I know QoS wasn’t the reboot. I was pointing out that QoS made more than Casino Royale, and that was a rarity. The sequel that outperforms the original.

These two are interesting also, because the critically acclaimed GFII didn’t make as much money for its studio as the widely panned QoS did.

You and I are true Trek fans, so we just want to see more well made Trek. Hell, I can even enjoy STV, in places. But whether we like it or not, Paramount won’t KEEP making Treks if they don’t make money. A “well-crafted, intelligent sci-fi story” that lays a big green egg would be a pyrrhic victory. The good news is I am confident that bobby-o and co seem to be able to chew gum and walk. That is, make an entertaining movie that will make money!

486. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

Yeah, what 485 saod.

I have to credit Bob with making me a fan again. I was done. I was never in here in the run up to the release. Afterward I ordered the Star Trek plate and T shirt from the Eggo boxes like I was 9 years old.

These guys brought a scope and an energy to Star Trek that I had not seen before.

487. dmduncan - October 14, 2010

“saod,” that’s Andorian for “said.”

488. Basement Blogger - October 14, 2010

1. How the new “Star Trek” can learn from “Fringe.” I just saw the episode Fringe episode “Do Shapeshifters Dream of Electric Sheep?” Since Star Trek and Fringe are Bad Robot productions, I want to make the argument that Star Trek can be as intelligent as Fringe. Both are science fiction. And while I’m worried Fringe might end up as the intelllectually dishonest “Lost”, so far Fringe’s serial story telling is compelling. I got into a fight on this website with Trekkie David who hated the “talky gooey” old Star Trek. Yet Fringe is “talky-gooey” and absolutely riveting. Tonight’s episode had no explosions or space battles.. And it was great television. Also the shapeshifter assassin was a complicated character that I sympthasized with. By the way, Fox screwed things up by moving the show to Thursdays. Addtionally, I do hope they get off the serial storytelling about alternate Olivia sometime soon.

Star Trek (2009) was a good movie but it could have been great. All it needed is more time to breathe, i.e. can the “Gi Joe” pacing. Kill the fast talking and yelling. And add a few minutes of dialogue to explore the althernate universe concept since many Trekkers didn’t get it and thought it was a “City on the Edge of Forever” type of time line change.

I’m going to quote consumate Trekker and psycohpath Harry Plinkett in his review of Star Trek: Nemesis regarding action and pacing.. ” Action propels the story.” I’ve linked the pertinent portion of the funny video reiveiw below.

2. What can the new Star Trek movie learn from Whoopi Goldberg? Goldberg played the wise Guinan on TNG. Today she protested conservative Bill O’Reilly’s comments about Muslims. When O’Reilly said Muslims killed us on 9-11, she protested and left the stage. Okay, , before you say O’Reilly is right, it was radical fundamentalist Muslim extremists that killed us. Finally, Barbara Walters gets Bill to concede that it was extremists that did it. Still Bill uses the same prejudicial brush to paint all Muslims the same way by saying that Muslims should not build a community center two blocks away from Ground Zero.

What does this have to do with Star Trek? Like it or not, Gene Roddenberry was a progressive. He wanted to end bigotry by having a multi-racial, multi-species crew at a time when conservatives didn’t want that. I’m reminded of Kirk lecturing an officer about his bigotry in “The Balance of Terror.” And what about the shows “The Devil in the Dark” and “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.” The theme? TOLERANCE.

I could go on about Roddenberry’s liberal views expressed in Star Trek but that might crash this website. : ) So as promised here’s some links with videos.

a. Whoopi “Guinan” Goldberg lets O’Reilly know how she feels.


b. Part 3 of Harry Plinkett’s well researched and hilarious review of Star Trek: Nemesis.


489. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

214. Jorg Sacul – October 13, 2010
@ BobOrci: How about filming 2 and 3 back to back, so you can get the most out of your actors and sets… and get on to making Star Trek IV! :)

How about filming 12 and 13 back to back and get on making Star Trek 14….so XIV….c’mon XIV is way more epic than IV!

490. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

217. Andrew – October 13, 2010
Any chance we could get a countdown clock widget going on the website?

That’s funny, I just made my own count down widget two months ago.

491. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

@ 221. Captain Hackett – October 13, 2010

LOL perfect!

492. Chadwick - October 14, 2010

225. John from Cincinnati – October 13, 2010 “I want to see Edith Keeler and the Guardian of Forever!”

“Ugh” and “Eww” come to mind. There are some things that just need to stay in the 60’s TOS and not be rehashed. Harry Mudd is another. There are far better ideas to use from the TOS universe.

493. moauvian waoul - October 14, 2010

“There was, of course, tremendous fan outrage in July of 1981 when it was leaked that the “stupid, comic-booky” Khan would appear in Star Trek II.”

mmm, tremendous fan outrage? I don’t remember that.

494. moauvian waoul - October 14, 2010

Ah yes, the ’81 trek riots. Geeks, nerve pinches, Vulcan deathgrips galore. The streets ran green with blood that day.

495. Hugh Hoyland - October 14, 2010

# 453 dmduncan have you ever posted your story anywhere so someone can take a look at it? Or do you wanna keep it to yourself, which is understandable.

496. Red Dead Ryan - October 14, 2010


Agreed! I would also add that Spock Prime continues to exist in the prime timeline while this new timeline movie unfolds. The prime timeline still has to exist to allow Spock Prime to travel back in time. In a way, there are three Spocks. The old Spock Prime who is now in the new timeline, the young Spock native to this new timeline, and the young prime timeline Spock who is living his life in the old timeline parellel to Quinto’s Spock, long before he travels back in time.

There are a lot of people on this site that for whatever reason, feel they required an exposition that the old timeline either still exists or doesn’t exist. They obviously needed it explained on screen because they couldn’t use logical reasoning or simple imagination. Or they discount Bob Orci (rather arrogantly because he wrote the script) because if it isn’t explained on screen, then it isn’t canon and the prime timeline is gone.

497. Aurore - October 15, 2010

“I dredge up the past only to remind the fans that the fans are complete idiots” Does that mean that you are not a fan,sir?

498. somethoughts - October 15, 2010

Here is my Klingon Story :) enjoy it or hate it :)

Kirk is ordered on a top secret mission by Admiral Pike.

Kirk steals the heart of the Klingon Queen, played by Beyonce.
In order to steal the plans/cloaking technology.

Explore cloaking technology as the sci fi idea.
Reimagined Birds of Prey and Destroyers.
Avatar style technology for makeup of Klingons.

Explains the Klingon backstory/homeland.

Troy/James Bond/Indiana Jones type story.

Cloaking technology tested on Enterprise with the help of Captain Khan (reintergrated into starfleet years earlier by Captain Pike, due to interference of Narada.

Drama between Kirk and Khan, egos clash, Kirk falls in love with Khans wife, Dr. Marcus played by Gwyneth Paltrow. Khan is torn and becomes a tragic hero/villain. Khan switches sides to the Klingons as a defector/traitor and as a gesture offers the Enterprise to the Klingon High Council and Kirk as a enemy to the state of the Klingons (stealing cloaking technology). Sulu is killed by Khan in the process.

We see the Klingon homeworld ala Avatar technology.

Cloaked Excelsior commanded by Decker, played by Tom Hanks is sent to rescue Kirk and the Enterprise.

Decker sacrifices himself to save Kirk and crew.

Khan vs Kirk in epic slow paced submarine style death match, Kirk wins but barely and due to “Kirk Luck”

Enterprise crashes lands on earth to a sad/joyeous welcome home, but looms is the start of the Klingon-Federation war, with Khan as the High Warlord of the Klingons.

Insert lots of slow motion anti gravity phaser/fist fights with yelling, love, happy and sad moments.

Lots of Kirk, Spock, McCoy moments.

Cloaking Device could be both a plot device/MacGuffin and a opportunity for Star Trek to explore possible science in the reality of cloaking devices.

Directed by Christopher Nolan and James Cameron :)
Music by Michael G and Zack Hemsey

The cinematography is dark like TUC, FC and Inception.

499. James - October 15, 2010

Agree with the comments about perhaps needing a well known hollywood star for it to perform well overseas hence Tom Hanks as Commodore Matt Decker (come on he rarely if ever makes a bad movie)

Bob do you have any feelings/thoughts on this re the use of a big hollywood star to help the movie perform better in the worldwide market? (you dont have to specifically comment on Tom Hanks!!)

500. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010

500 posts??? Yowza!!

501. S. John Ross - October 15, 2010

I’ve said it before but since it’s traditional to chime such things in on these announcements: if I had to boil down every concern and every complaint and every note of dread into a single pleading request, it’s just: challenge the characters this time, as characters, as people. I understand if you feel the need to once again have them traipsing through their set-pieces, ticking off the demographic checklists, the one-liner checklists, the in-joke checklists, mugging at the photo-op where they slaughter the villain while everything is handed to them on a silver contrivance because they’re the Chosen Ones, whatever. But somewhere in that cut-and-paste parade, challenge them. Give their midichlorians something to wake up for.

Challenge the characters this time.

502. P Technobabble - October 15, 2010

493. moauvian waoul

“…mmm, tremendous fan outrage? I don’t remember that…”

The biggest fan outrage about TWOK was when it was leaked that Spock would die. I don’t remember any fan outrage about Khan either.

503. S. John Ross - October 15, 2010

#502: Nor do I, and I worked at a comic book store at the time, so all the buzz was pretty present and noisy there. It was all about Spock.

Later on, when we dealt with the blow, other parts of the movie were available for consideration, but at first, there was nothing but Spock to talk about, really. Even the (still ongoing) split opinions on the new uniforms took several months to bubble into the dialogue :)

504. Damian - October 15, 2010

496–I agree. Bob Orci, who wrote the script, said the prime timeline is alive and well. That was enough for me.

497–It seems some people think because Star Trek fans disagree, that we are idiots. I think they forget, this is a democracy. And we are not mindless automatons. I think they forget also that there are fans who only maybe like one element of Star Trek (such as those who only like Deep Space Nine, which there are many, etc.). I am one who likes it all, from The Cage to Star Trek (2009), every show, every movie, and even the novels. But I don’t expect everyone to feel the same way.

Ultimately, what I want from the new movie is something brand new. If I want Harry Mudd, I can watch 3 episodes (including the animated episode) and read a book (Mudd In Your Eye). If I want Edith Keeler, I can watch “The City on the Edge of Forever” or read the Crucible Series (besides, wasn’ t Ellison practicaly apopletic when it was rumoured the Guardian might have made an appearance in the last movie). I am ok if they want to use themes from the past, but just give us something new. Isn’t that the whole point of this new alternate universe.

I have mixed feelings about Klingons. They just seem to be overused in the various series. I’m not saying a good movie can’t have them, I’m just not sure there is any aspect of Klingon society that has not already been thoroughly explored.

505. pock speared - October 15, 2010

well, this trek fan would love to see a story about a species on the verge of collapse, with half the population (call them ” the teapartisians”) addicted to anger, stupidity and rage, encouraged by an out-of-control, mind-controlling media megacomputer (call it “foxnewsicon 5″), while the other half strive to make first contact with anything even vaguely intelligent in the universe. kirk&co show up, drama ensues, and eventually kirk manages to talk the the computer to death, as only he can do. he then arranges to place the now enlightened yet sadly backward teapartisians on a cold rock out near the neutral zone with a very low oxygen content. we tag the film with spock noting that that the “human solution is illogical, but cute” and mccoy cracks wise about green vulcan semen, to which uhura takes offence. we all laugh and fade out.

and uh, the shatner scene, although it would’ve been fanwankery deluxe, would’ve cheapened the film for me.
i was sort of behind it, until i read that it opens with kirk singing happy birthday to spock. i cringe just thinking it. i mean, i realize that b’orci was writing cheese for a ham, but really. star trek: the musical?
i still haven’t recovered from the embarrassment of enduring the singing during a shuttle chase scene in insurrection, and worse yet, the data songbook that was actually used as a plot device in nemesis. starfleet captains and officers who sing their way through challenges should be airlocked.

506. pock speared - October 15, 2010

“…oh oh ooohhh, bitter dregs.”

507. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

229. Jai – October 13, 2010
Re: #170

“And the Federation itself wouldn’t carry on as though nothing had happened — not after something on that scale. As we know from our own relatively recent history, these things have a wide-ranging psychological and political impact on societies.”

Of course they did! Yea they offered aid, new settlement, helped in repopulation but starfleet and the Federation carried on as usual. They may have psychological impacts but they carried on. As Spock said, stay in stafleet, do what feels right, basically carry on.

508. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

231. Chris Dawson – October 13, 2010
“But somehow, the Ratpack needs to be involved: Sinatra, Martin, and Davis.”

lol ugh, how old are you?? Stand alone singers suck, snooze fest. Sorry to be a downer but srsy lol the Ratpack.

509. NuFan - October 15, 2010

502 & 503

So we can have Khan again. That’s good. I know these guys could do a great Khan movie without being repetitive.

510. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

P Technobabble – S. John Ross -Right on. That’s more of how I remember it. Space Seed was never my favorite episode but I was thrilled a second movie was being made (since I recall the first was not seen as the success it is today. Perhaps because it did not generate Star Wars type buzz or because of it’s budget or because of a lack of critical acclaim) and I liked the idea of a sequal from the original series. So the issue was a positive one. Now the Spock thing was another story.

511. Phil - October 15, 2010

@ 486 …me, too..

@505…give it a rest. Because someone my not agree with you politically that does not make them stupid. I hear a lot of talk about tolerance from Progressives, it would be nice to hear them practice what they preach.

512. Daoud - October 15, 2010

Are we there yet?

Bob, can you give us a storyline that WON’T be in Star Trek 2012? I mean, I know your and Alex’s rejects must be good reads….

513. CanOpener1256 - October 15, 2010

less lens flare .. god that was annoying. Plus beef up the engine room to look like it drives a starship instead of it looking like it makes beer. You can still film it there .. just beef it up. We know there are tanks on the ships (look at any starship diagram) but they should be feeding the main warp reactor. I mean, even the original series looks more modern.

And hide the steam and water valves. That is a dead giveaway and, as for me, takes me out of the 23rd century in a second.

514. Phil - October 15, 2010

What, beer seems like such an important part of space travel…

515. boborci - October 15, 2010

512. Daoud – October 15, 2010

Kirk and crew are shrunk to the size of mice and must violate the prime directive to get normal size again.

Sorry you asked;)?

516. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

Hi Bob

I like that you are chiming in every now and then. I wish you the best of ease with the script simply because you don’t need luck.

For me the Alexander Courage theme is special but for me its not the main Star Trek theme the way Star Wars has its theme. I would love to hear an updated version of the Jerry Goldsmith Motion Picture theme song. There have been many slight variations of it (TMP, ST V, TNG, TNG movie endings) so it would be great to hear a 2012 version of it. Giacchino did a great job updating the TOS theme, it was the same old music but sounded new and fresh. I also loved the theme for the new movie, fantastic. But I would really LOVE to hear the Motion Picture theme just because it’s so powerful, noble, and liberating, it is the glory theme, it is Star Trek’s theme.

517. boborci - October 15, 2010

Only problem with Hanks is that he is doing a show for HBO stating that Oswald acted alone. The bad news is that I don’t know if we’d get along as a result. The good news is, no matter what position he takes, if the show makes it to HBO, it will raise the issue again, and it will backfire for him, in terms of his intentions of convincing us that Oswald acted alone.

518. Phil - October 15, 2010

Oswald did act alone. Besides, how does that corrolate into mice sized Kirks and Spocks running amok, in search of beer?

Sorry, just trying my hand at rumor spreading…

519. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

504: “I’m just not sure there is any aspect of Klingon society that has not already been thoroughly explored.”

Comic book Klingons is what we got. Whether it’s the uniforms that never change or the snarling because “that’s the way Klingons act,” they were boring. And exploring their society is something a Trek fan may want to see, but I don’t think that sort of thing appeals to general audiences. I mean, of course, showing the Klingon homeworld because fans want more details about the Klingon Empire. That stuff is incidental in a good story. It isn’t the point. It is the…humanity…of Klingons that will make for a great story to tell.

495: “have you ever posted your story anywhere”

No, Hugh. Some of the themes and ideas I’ve had I’ve also posted in here as musings, but it wasn’t until a ray of light broke through the clouds one day and hit me in the forehead that I realized how to bring it all together in a story that is not a Frankenstein’s monster stitched together out of ad hoc fan demanded parts; although it does hit some of those targets, it happens because there are places in the story where those things naturally fit in.

I’m usually self aware enough to know when I’m deluding myself about how good an idea I have is, and I feel really confident about this. There’s only one scene that takes place on an unnamed world which is the original seat of Klingon power, so there’s no fan tourism going on here. I’m very proud of it.

I have an important obligation to take care of in South Dakota this weekend, but once back I’m going to finish it and send it to Bob. If Bob remembers what it’s’ like to be a Star Trek fan, he’ll read it. If it’s going in an opposite direction from where they are and they can’t use anything in it, who knows? If Star Trek makes it back to TV someday AND George Lucas does manage to figure out a cost effective way to bring Star Wars level projects to the small screen, it would make a spectacular two part episode.

520. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@515: LOL.

521. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Bob, I am in complete agreement with you! As I’ve stated on other threads, the Kennedy assassination is kind of an obsession with me. In the last 40 years I have probably logged a good 15,000 hours (conservative estimate) investigating every aspect of the JFK assassination. Anyone who really studies the event KNOWS FULL WELL that Oswald was only one piece of the puzzle and did not act alone.

Which begs the question, since my screenplay is about the Kennedy assassination, did you get my contact information postcard? :>)

522. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

!!!!I am going to continue my theory and rumors on the next movie being KLINGON!!!!

Those of you that have the special features, go back and watch the Aliens ‘Klingons’ section as well as the deleted scenes section of the Klingon prison with commentary on. Two minor Klingon hints.

#1) In the Aliens Klingon section the around 1:25 minutes in Joel Harlow mentions that you have to wait for the sequel to see more Klingons.

#2) In the Klingon prison sequence section around 30 seconds in JJ talks about how cool the entire design of the Klingon wardrobe is that they have to bring them back if they do a sequel.

Bob and crew are on the ball, ahead of the game, and never miss a beat. They had ideas, hints and rumors ready for the next movie when the first came out.

They were so meticulous with the Klingons costumes, appearance, and sets in the deleted scenes and they decide to just cut every Klingon scene out of the movie, something must be up. It also might have occurred to JJ and crew “wow the Klingons are really dark lets cut it and use it for the next movie and make it the dark knight of star trek movies.” With Victor Garber portraying the Klingon interrogator in the cut scene, his portrayal gave the brutal klingons a sense of higher intellect and sophistication that usually is not indicated with Klingons (but is a nice touch) which only happened once before with David Warner as chancellor Gorkon.

The 2009 movie was dark and heavy enough when compared to past star trek movie. Think of how bad ass the Klingons of “2012” could be!

Yes Star Trek needs the philosophy, humanity, the themes of good, but there is no reason why it can’t be bad ass.

523. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@521: Damn Harry, give me a clue! What do you think the real motive for killing him was?

524. Thorny - October 15, 2010

517… Bob, Hanks is great and I’d love to see him in Trek (although I don’t see Decker in him as others do). Just don’t talk politics with him (a lesson we all should have learned from the recent Patriot Act debate/fiasco here.)

525. Phil - October 15, 2010

@ 521…Yeah, whatca got? I’ve not heard anything to convince me Oswald didn’t act alone, and I won’t even get started on UFO’s and the moon program. Besides, isn’t the Discovery Channel the official network of Consipricy Theory?

526. boborci - October 15, 2010

525. Watch, on youtube, JFK EVIDENCE OF REVISIONS.

If that doesn’t make you question the official story, nothing will.

527. boborci - October 15, 2010

524. Thorny – October 15, 2010

That fiasco was fun!

528. boborci - October 15, 2010

Nothing yet! But it takes a second for mail to even get through security. If you can believe it, it gets scanned, etc….

529. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Phil, please don’t insult everyone’s intelligence by trying to mix UFO’s and the moon program in with the Kennedy assassination. Naysayers try that every time and it’s not going to work. Totally different, and unrelated, topics.

I would encourage anyone who is interested to simply read these two books: CONSPIRACY by Anthony Summers and CROSSFIRE by Jim Marrs. There are 600 books out there on the Kennedy assassination, but those two alone should convince even the biggest skeptic.

530. John from Cincinnati - October 15, 2010


Hi Bob, Have you read “”LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination”? Pretty interesting stuff. Even the History channel aired a special profiling LBJ as the main conspirator, that is until the Johnson family threatened legal action against HC which HC hasn’t aired since.

531. boborci - October 15, 2010

529. The best book I have read on the subject just came out:

JFK and the Unspeakable

532. boborci - October 15, 2010

530. John from Cincinnati – October 15, 2010

No, I haven’t. Thanks for the heads up. Love new books on the subject!

533. boborci - October 15, 2010

525. Phil – October 15, 2010

What do you mean about the Discovery Channel. Haven’t watched it lately. Does it cover conspiracies a lot these days?

534. John from Cincinnati - October 15, 2010


No, it was the History Channel and they did a special on the assassination and it centered on LBJ. I’ll look up the original airdates for you and try to get them to you.

535. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

Conspiracies and conspiracy theories: not the same thing. Disinfo leads to people throwing baby and bathwater all out at same time.

536. somethoughts - October 15, 2010


The JFK assassination came down to a mob hit with JFK not being a good puppet for the FBI/Mob/Grays and Dracos. It was ordered to ensure national security as JFK was about to tell the world about the existence of aliens.

537. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Bob, thanks for the tip! I’ll check it out!

538. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010

I can tell you, beyond a reasonable doubt, that LBJ was instrumental in orchestrating Kennedy’s death.

539. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@536: That sounds like a graphic novel that gets turned into a movie.

540. John from Cincinnati - October 15, 2010


“The night before the Kennedy assassination, Lyndon Baines Johnson met with Dallas tycoons, FBI moguls and organized crime kingpins – emerging from the conference to tell his mistress Madeleine Duncan Brown that “those SOB’s” would never embarrass him again. It’s a jaw-dropping deposition and it’s the biggest JFK smoking gun there is – despite the fact that it has received little media attention.

Before her death on June 22 2002, prolific author and lecturer Robert Gaylon Ross had the opportunity to conduct an 80 minute sit-down interview with Madeleine Duncan Brown and from that lengthy discussion the truth about exactly who was behind the assassination of JFK was exposed.

Though Brown first went public on her 21-year relationship with Johnson in the early 80’s, to this day her shocking revelations about how he had told her the Kennedy’s “would never embarrass me again” the night before the assassination are often ignored by the media who prefer to keep the debate focused on issues which can’t definitively be proven either way (or at least can be spinned and whitewashed).

541. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@540: So he was killed because Johnson threw a hissy fit?

542. John from Cincinnati - October 15, 2010

Sorry for going off topic, but the JFK assassination is a subject that still facsinates me. I live and work in Vegas and I have a friend who was bellman at the Sands Hotel, the same Hotel back in the early ’60’s that had JFK, RFK and members of the NY and Chicago crime bosses all stay there. My friend told me stories that sent chills down my spine. One of a photograph of JFK at the pool and it had Sam Giancona in the same frame. When he asked about the photograph (hanging by the front desk) a supervisor (who was in the mob) told him to not ask about that again, and the next day the picture was gone.

I still believe it was all LBJ, the Republicans at the CIA and the mob all working together. Jack Ruby was a runner for the mob in Dallas. He would get girls for mob guys when they were in town and he would do a lot of dirty jobs for them.

543. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


if you ever read about LBJ’s life, and all his criminal activities before becoming VP, you wouldn’t be surprised at his killing Kennedy to seize ultimate power.

544. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - October 15, 2010

So LBJ pulled a mirror universe Chekov? “Vee kill you , and vee all moof up een ronk!”

545. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Bob, thanks for the update! I sent the postcard to your offices at Universal City.

To keep things simple, for your information:

My real name is Michael Appleton and my e-mail is appletonmike@hotmail.com.

546. Doodle - October 15, 2010

Bob – would it be possible to explore some of the relationship between Kirk and Spock…if not romantic, at least close? Spock looked like he smiled a heck of a lot more at Kirk during the movie than he did at Uhura.

547. boborci - October 15, 2010

Speaking of JFK, I am reminded of a moment with Nimoy. He told me the story of how he was a cab driver in New York, and one day, he gave Senator JFK a ride!

548. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

Just kidding. If you start getting them, it’s NOT me!

549. Vultan - October 15, 2010

I’m not sure whether or not Oswald acted alone in the actually killing, but I am sure he was involved and took the shot that killed Kennedy. If he was innocent, then why would he kill a police officer shortly afterward? As for the conspiracy, I think it was the Mob behind the hit (Jack Ruby, who was known to have Mob connections, was obviously paid to quiet Oswald). And as for Johnson or Castro’s involvement… I doubt it.

Anyway, before Khan and Nick Meyer entered the picture, didn’t Roddenberry plan for Star Trek 2 to be centered around the Kennedy assassination?

550. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@548: You spoke to Nimoy about the Kennedy assassination? Or that just came up?

551. boborci - October 15, 2010

550. I can’t remember how it came up! But I assume so, since I bring it up too often.

552. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@543: But LBJ didn’t seize power. Speaking of which, read The Plot to Seize the White House. That was a genuine conspiracy to push Roosevelt aside, to send him on the road kissing babies and playing golf while someone else made the decisions.

553. gingerly - October 15, 2010


Excuse me intrusion into the JFK assassination theory talk, but I just wanted to link this essay.


I have a feeling it might have been mentioned already, but just in case, you and some of the other posters here may want to give it read.

554. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@552: Well I won’t ask what Nimoy thought. I would consider that confidential if he was talking to me. What is your particular fascination with the case? What does it represent to you?

555. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010

For those of you claiming the mob killed Kennedy, simply go to Youtube and type in the words “JFK secret service stand down”. A 2 minute 55 second clip will pop up showing Kennedy and party leaving Love Field in the limo. At the last second his secret service detail is ordered off the back of his limo, leaving him totally unprotected. Do you really think the mob had the power to do that?

p.s. TPTB claim Kennedy ordered them off that day, but it has been corroborated that Kennedy NEVER interfered with the function of the Secret Service or how they went about protecting him.

556. boborci - October 15, 2010

554. He didn’t say.

What does it represent? I suppose the answer to the question of who killed JFK represents an answer to a very broad question: “Where do I live?”

557. boborci - October 15, 2010

555. Harry Ballz – October 15, 2010

The book JFK and the Unspeakable has documented proof that JFK DID NOT ignore secret service procedures.

558. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


How can you possibly say that Johnson didn’t seize power? By having Kennedy killed he automatically became President. If that’s not seizing power, what is?

559. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Bob, I am going to have to read this book ASAP! :>)

560. Denny - October 15, 2010

Han Solo should be in this movie over Hanks! esp since bob is working with him in the wild west!

561. Thorny - October 15, 2010

534. John from Cincinnati… “No, it was the History Channel and they did a special on the assassination and it centered on LBJ. I’ll look up the original airdates for you and try to get them to you.”

It was a series called “The Men Who Killed Kennedy”. The hour long episode that blamed LBJ was called “The Guilty Men”. It has been widely discredited and History Channel apologized for airing it.

562. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@559: Yeah, in the short term, that is true. That’s not what I was thinking though because he’s not our president today. Read the Plot to Seize the White House. That conspiracy — which was NOT a theory — was a permanent plan to turn America into a corporatist state.

Wait a minute…could it be that they actually succeeded?!

@557: Certainly not in the best of all possible USAs. I know that better than many people because I see the results of what happened to Americas most invisible minority, people who know exactly what it means to have their religious freedom shut down, to have their lands stolen. That’s not old history. Look what happened at Diego Garcia. That was people’s HOME.

563. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

And that was in the 1970’s, so what really has changed?

564. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Bob, I just want to clarify. I’m saying Kennedy never usually interfered with how the Secret Service protected him and you’re saying “JFK DID NOT ignore Secret Service procedures”. I assume you mean that he generally never tried to override or countermand any of their usual rules or policies in protecting him. If I’m correct with that assumption then we’re both on the same page, right?

565. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

@554: You are NOT invisible.

566. Denny - October 15, 2010


remember GRs original idea for Trek II was the crew go back and save JFK or something…(although im sure there was more to it than that)

imagine if theyd made that movie…a shame they didnt use it for a TNG episode

567. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


The History Channel only apologized after being threatened with a MAJOR LAWSUIT from the Johnson family!

568. Aurore - October 15, 2010

I’m a born-again Star Trek fan; I felt “offended”; I reacted. It was deliciously pathetic I must say:I just wanted to answer while being well aware of the fact that, this was nothing.

You know,I’m definitely not a Plinkett-type of fan.Reading through the boards over the past few months,I realised words such as “canon”, “nacelles”,”Prime Directive” etc…,were highly important to some people.And don’t even get me started on the dreaded “lens flare”.

Me?I just fell in love with the original series in the 80’s(reruns).If I care for the characters on the screen, if I don’t feel cheated after a 2 hour long movie, I’m satisfied.

By the way, I loved what you had to say recently about Kirk’s death(though some of the discussions on this site are clearly “out of my league”. I’m not lamenting it at all. It’s just a fact).
I learned about Kirk’s death in 1999 or 2000. It was a shock.It felt like someone was saying: Now, you’ll love me.Forget about the old guy”.By then, I was just glad to never have invested anything in what had followed the original series(I mean no disrespect to the people who enjoyed those shows, believe me).

At times, I would imagine the old crew could be recast for the “missing years’ adventures”; the show only lasted for three years after all.

“The wait is over”.Sweet music to my ears those words.That’s exactly what I thought when I saw Star Trek 2009 for the first time…in November 2009(DVD).I wasn’t joking when I said I didn’t know a new Star Trek movie had been in the making.

569. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

I keep telling people to beware, not to buy into this left/right business or any of the other false dichotomies of choice. Republicans and democrats — not widely divergent on major issues. Example: Sooner or later we will have RFID licenses or IDs. Demos will argue it’s needed for healthcare efficiency and to save money; Repubs will argue it’s to combat terrorism and illegal immigration. Whatever the excuse, the end result will be the same and the state will have yet another layer of control.

570. P Technobabble - October 15, 2010

I don’t know if anyone’s brought up those pics of LBJ and Albert Thomas immediately after Johnson’s swearing in?

571. Phil - October 15, 2010

Hmmm….maybe Nimoy killed Kennedy. Does anyone really know where he was that fateful afternoon?

History Channel runs it’s fair share of conspiracy programming, too

Conspiracy, be it Kennedy, UFO’s 9/11, or what ever tends to have a fatal flaw, being that it requires no consideration that the most plausible explaination not be considered, regardless of the amount of evidence presented. It’s not a question of insulting anyones intelligence, but I have yet to see any information that cause me to question the most plausible explaination. I know others have different worldviews, but when someone asks me to believe that my gov’t, which demonstrates with astonishing frequency that it cannot perform to the equivilent of walking and chewing gum at the same time, is capable of orchastrating massive coverups, credibility is strained….

572. boborci - October 15, 2010

571. Phil – October 15, 2010

I think one of the mistakes conspiracy theorists make is to blame “the government.” Obviously, when someone says the “government” did this or that, they are not saying that the post office was in on it, too. I think a more precise thing to say would be that the o”government” is a cover used by those who conspiracy theorists are talking about. If “government” is truly incompetent, than it should not be hard to believe that well funded, motivated conspirators can use it as a cover.

573. boborci - October 15, 2010

571. One last thing on your good point:

The most plausible explanation MUST explain all known facts. While a lone gunman theory may seem like the most plausible explanation absent any other considerations, the facts surrounding the case must also be explained by the “simplest” explanation. The devil, as usual, is in the details.

574. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

259. dmduncan – October 13, 2010

Exactly, you have Captain Robau coming down in a turbo lift on the Kelvin. He is already in the top of the ship, in the secondary hul which is the hanger bay…the bridge would technically be below, so where is he coming down from? But it was a great looking shot, made the ship feel massive.

575. Vultan - October 15, 2010


But isn’t the “simplest” explanation that Oswald killed Kennedy? There is plenty of physical evidence that he did in fact pull the trigger. Whether Johnson or Castro or the Mafia or the CIA was behind it is a moot point now since most (if not all) the conspirators are either pushing up daisys or very close to doing so. We’d might as well be discussing a conspiracy behind the Lincoln, Garfield or McKinley assassinations.

“Was Booth the lone gunman? Was there another shooter in the orchestra?” :)

576. ensign joe - October 15, 2010


“The most plausible explanation MUST explain all known facts. While a lone gunman theory may seem like the most plausible explanation absent any other considerations, the facts surrounding the case must also be explained by the “simplest” explanation. The devil, as usual, is in the details.”

sounds like boborci is in “Spock” mode ;)

now if you can only get Quinto’s voice down a couple octaves..

577. Vultan - October 15, 2010

Correction: daisies, not daisys.

578. Anthony Pascale - October 15, 2010

Although I am always a skeptic on most topics including conspiracy theories, I do very much enjoy discussing them and I am a fan of portrayals of conspiracies in fiction. I like that new show RUBICON and one of the reasons STAR TREK VI is one of my fave Trek films is the conspiracy theory angle.

It would be great to see some of this interest of yours in the next Star Trek. With all the galactic politics with the Federation, Klingons, Romulans, etc, and of course factions within each, there is lots of opportunity for conspiracies. How each reacts to the destruction of Vulcan seems like an interesting area to examine.

579. Thorny - October 15, 2010

567… “The History Channel only apologized after being threatened with a MAJOR LAWSUIT from the Johnson family!”

So? Wouldn’t you sue if someone broadcast a documentary saying your father/husband/uncle/whatever was complicit to murder, but only produced the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence for the charge?

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”

580. Phil - October 15, 2010

572…I’m in sales, and I understand that belief yields considerable power. Government tends to be that glittering generality when people actually mean “CIA, FBI, LBJ, or Castro, the mob” or whatever entity they beleive to be responsible. It’s not so much that gov’t is incompetent, it’s just not capable of keeping a secret for too long. Nixon tried to cover up Watergate, and failed. Yeah, I know there are people out there who think he was set up, too, but that’s another discussion. Conspiracy theorists continue to enjoy acceptance because the people who listen to them want to beleive that a great man cold not have been taken out by an individual acting alone – there has to be greater meaning to what appears to be a senseless act. Again, a demonstration of the power of belief. However, for that belief/theory to become fact, there needs to be evidence to support it, and this is where conspiricy theorists fall short. Can I beleive the gov’t is capable of some dasterdly deed, yeah, but if you include killing the president among them, that’s setting the evidence bar fairly high….

581. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

Anthony makes a great point. Star Trek VI is solid because of the conspiracy angle, always been my favorite trek film. I have a feeling the third of the Orci Star Trek movies will have more of a political aspect then this next one as they have hinted at the dark side. Would it be possible to have a dark movie, with political intrigue and still satisfy the fans that want peaceful exploration and morality? Star Trek XII Zeitgeist.

582. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

*Sigh* I feel its going to be a while until we have another Star Trek movie article which seem to be the only ones which induce us to exceed 600 or 700 posts with such great discussion and expression.

583. somethoughts - October 15, 2010

1- The Kennedy family were/are members of “the elite” (players in international high finance circles) since the early days of Joseph Kennedy. John F. Kennedy was elected to office through monetary power and with the help of the Mafia. Without the total support of other members of “the elite” – he would not have become President.(2)
2- JFK and his brother, RFK, attacked organized crime in an effort to expose the Mafia to the public and curtail its power. JFK and Chicago mob boss Sam Giancana shared the same mistress, Judith Campbell Exner. Giancana helped JFK win the election in Illinois and on the east coast.(3)
3- Since 1942, the CIA and the Mafia have worked together in numerous clandestine operations.(4)
4- JFK refused to allow the CIA and American troops to attack Cuba thereby creating the infamous Bay of Pigs fiasco in 1961. Following that incident, General Charles P. Cabell, Deputy Director of the CIA, went around Washington calling President Kennedy a traitor. The CIA solicited the services of the Mafia to kill Fidel Castro.(5)
5- International bankers have controlled America for over 100 years.(6)
6- The Vatican Bank is one of the most powerful international financial institutions in the world. Paul Marcinkus, the sole American ever to rise to an executive position in the Vatican Bank, was from Cicero, Illinois, a legendary Chicago mob stronghold. In 1994, Marcinkus was accused of money laundering drug profits in a USA Today news report. Now a resident of Arizona, Marcinkus declined to comment.
7- CIA operatives and former covert agents using CIA planes and vehicles often control the transportation of narcotics from the source. The Mafia controls the global drug distribution network to the consumer. The defunct Nugan-Hand Bank in Australia as well as banks in the Cayman Islands and Switzerland have also participated in CIA/Mafia money laundering of drug profits.(7)
8- The public execution of John F. Kennedy was accomplished by a three man Mafia/CIA “firing squad” in association with a patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald. The CIA was aware of the attempt on JFK’s life prior to 11/22/63 and flew in an “abort” team to Dallas on the morning of the “hit.”(8)
9- In 1963, John F. Kennedy was preparing to amend the National Labor Relations Board statutes and various Internal Revenue Service statues that would prevent foreign flag shipping from being exempt from American income taxes. These amendments would have seriously affected Liberian shipping magnates and the assets of men such as Aristotle Onassis. Billions of dollars were at stake. President Kennedy was killed three days before he was to make these amendments public.(9)
10- In 1979, The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that there was a “probable conspiracy” in the murder of JFK and that organized crime members “possibly” were involved.(10)
The world will never know who the persons were that gave the “official” order to kill John F. Kennedy for those persons are either already dead, close to death, silent in fear of death, or they choose to remain silent until death.


584. Phil - October 15, 2010

573…It seems to me that in a criminal proceeding the burden of proof must be beyond a reasonable doubt. Other considerations, absent proof, are simply conjecture. As we don’t have to meet evidence standards in this type of forum, it does make for rousing debate on means and motive. Can I accept that an action is plausible, sure. But to move an audience from probable to possible, that does require a little evidence.

585. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

573: “The most plausible explanation MUST explain all known facts.”

Bingo. Occam’s Razor is sorely abused. The criteria of simplicity, by itself, is meaningless. Completeness with regard to all the known facts is far more important. OR is an inductive argument that is most useless where people most often try to use it, i.e., with regard to unusual claims that do not fit the usual experiences. Ironic.

586. dmduncan - October 15, 2010

Hot thread. Wish I didn;t have to leave so soon.

587. captain_neill - October 15, 2010

As I said earlier please make sure that the next movie has a stronger plot.

588. captain_neill - October 15, 2010

I know for a fact that the next Trek movie will not become my favourite, it has been changed too much from the way I like it.

However, I still look forward to the film because the last one was still a good film.

589. captain_neill - October 15, 2010

sorry forgive me about the plot thing

But did anyone think that plot was sacrificed in the last movie for character?

The good thing was that those character moments were good.

Yours and JJ’s fast paced more mainstream way may not be the way I want my Star Trek but I cannot deny that I enjoyed the film.

I do thank you that you did not destroy the prime canon with the movie, though I do feel if it was defined clearer in the script you might have got more hard core fans off your backs regarding things being erased.

590. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

583. somethoughts if you have not seen the Zeitgeist movies you need to!!!

As a Canadian I don’t care much for U.S. politics outside of the Daily Show or the Colbert Report. I am an avid supporter of the Zeitgeist moves. After being pumped full of “facts” from one side, its nice to hear an avid supporter from the other side. I highly suggest watching the Zeitgeist movies especially the discussions on religion and money, very interesting. The 9/11 segment is also great, seems very believable. But w/e, I am here for Trek not Johnny F Ken.

Just a quick thought, the fact that Vulcan is gone may somehow elude to a physically or politically weakened Federation ripe for attack.

591. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

582. Chadwick
“*Sigh* I feel its going to be a while until we have another Star Trek movie article which seem to be the only ones which induce us to exceed 600 or 700 posts with such great discussion and expression.”

unless of course Anthony and Bob will it. ;)

592. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

591. moauvian waoul

Very true.

593. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

305. Ted – October 13, 2010

I agree on both points, nothing to prove its another universe, they may be only one universe and it itself was altered, not a “second” alternate universe in co existence with the prime universe.

And with regards to Archer, Bakula would have to play John Archers son, I doubt John would be alive in 2258. Archer went on to become admiral, then ambassador to Andoria and then to become the Federation president. “Admiral Archer” must be John Archers son. Ugh, I wish more people watched Enterprise it was the last good Star Trek since the last 4 seasons of DS9. Enterprise was so good, so fresh, shame shame shame.

594. pock speared - October 15, 2010

hip hop killed jfk with its big black dick.

595. pock speared - October 15, 2010

or perhaps; “Star Trek: Hip Hop Killed JFK With Its Big Black Dick” (2012)

596. pock speared - October 15, 2010

…and hey! we’ve already got greenwood to play JFK!

597. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

342. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. – October 13, 2010

I agree with you, but at 27 I am a youngster when compared to those who grew up with TOS. But I pride myself on remembering the people – from Gene L. Coon to Matt Jefferies, to the people at Desilu studio’s – and what they did for Star Trek. I grew up with TNG and TOS reruns and loved them both even at a young age. Its a nuisance that people like most trek iterations except TOS. Without the pioneering Gene Roddenberry did we would have not have the wonderful excess of Star Trek we do today.

On a side note it would have been great if TOS had double its budget and if Phase II was a 5 year (mission) TV series from 1973-1978. The 70’s was an epic time for sci-fi and no trek to be seen. A 5 year tv series would have given us a trek in that classic 70’s style of buck rogers and battlestar galactica – which I love – leading right into the movie The Motion Picture in 1979. With regards to Orci and crew they seem to eliminate those “what if’s” and “if only’s.” I never said either of those phrases during the movie, I walked out pleasantly shocked and in silent awe at the epicness I just experienced.

598. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

363. Thorny – October 13, 2010
341… “Harry Mudd – basically a space clown – should never be in the movies.”

He almost was in Star Trek III. The part of the backward-talking alien to whom McCoy goes seeking passage to Genesis was originally written as Harry Mudd, but Roger C. Carmel was too ill to reprise the role.

Wow did not know that, that I would have been fantastic! What I meant to say was “should never be reprised in the new movies.”

599. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

306. Dave – October 13, 2010
Dave I agree with on the ship being a character I felt the same way you did with the opening scene. Never has a Star Trek movie made my jaw drop in awe (for long periods of time), heart beat fast, sit the edge of my seat, and tear up at the same time let alone in the first 12 minutes of a movie. Talk about an epic opening, its like Star Trek is finally “in your face.” I knew then this was the beginning of an exciting new era for Star Trek. I mean I got misty eyed when Data dies, but this opening had such an emotional impact as you said from both the character AND the ship, how do I imagine the next movie larger and richer.

316. Damian – October 13, 2010
I agree with you, I loved Enterprise and I loved Bakula as captain Archer.

324. Stephan Seifert – October 13, 2010
Awww Stephan, tell you girlfriend she is cool! :)

327. Tanner waterbury – October 13, 2010
LOL, YES! I love that little jingle, makes me smile.

402. James – October 14, 2010
Yes, I agree the first 12 minutes had everybody hooked! It was so important and after learning of the other possible openings I am so happy the opening scene turned out the way it did.

600. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

BAM! 600!

Have not really made a demands list lol, putting my foot down.

No removal of Star Trek from the title
No Harry Mudd
No Edith Keeler
No Q
No Khan
No Borg (but would be really cool to see what they look like in Kirk’s time and alternate universe.
No more Spock prime (he gave it the praise and send off, job done)
No TOS rehashed themes
No more time travel, alternate universe, or mirror universe (too soon)
No more Keenser
No upgraded ship unless its “5 years later”
No over indulging on lens flares (although it didn’t bother me)
No over indulging in shaky cam (although it didn’t bother me)

Yes to fresh ideas in a new universe
Yes to epic space battle (you did say star trek need rock and roll like star wars)
Yes Bakula cameo as Archer
Yes to Shanter only if it fits and feels natural otherwise forget it.
Yes to 3D but if there is 2D option as well.
Yes Klingons
Yes Political theme

I do love the tech side of trek, I was hoping for a bunch of transporter shots and I got them, great! Not enough shown of the starships, I mean after the ships warp off, I would love to see what they could do in a battle like *cough cough* the battle in First Contact.

601. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

Lol its Friday just after midnight Toronto time, 4 hours ahead of the west coast, didn’t feel like going out drinking with the crew tonight, sitting here enjoying some of the green like a good Canadian boy, reading all the posts (at #418) and all this talk I started watching TOS episodes, just watched the Cage, Where no man has gone before, the Man Trap, now Charlie X…yea ill end up watching the series again.

417. Ian Hayden – October 14, 2010
NO WAY, the movie is already PG what more do you want? Spock would say your illogical lol. it was just right, could have use more but then again its PG which is why they took the genitals off the polarilla that chased Kirk. Funny isn’t it PG = sexual content and foul language ok but anatomical correctness is not.

602. Red Dead Ryan - October 15, 2010


You’re actually three hours ahead of us on the west coast. I’m from Victoria and I enjoy chatting with Harry Ballz who lives in the same city you do, Toronto. Nice to read posts from fellow Canadians, even those of you who are living in a city that is already planning the Stanley Cup parade route for the Make Beliefs…..errr….Maple Leafs!

603. boborci - October 15, 2010

575. Vultan – October 15, 2010

“But isn’t the “simplest” explanation that Oswald killed Kennedy? There is plenty of physical evidence that he did in fact pull the trigger.”

He may have pulled the trigger. But, for example, Tom Hanks wants to adapt the Bugliosi book, which makes many claims. Let’s take one, for example. Bugliosi says that Oswald had no connection to the CIA. But let’s look at some facts and see what is the “simplest” explanation:

Fact: Oswald was stationed at a U2 spy plane installation in Japan run by the CIA.

Fact: Oswald DEFECTED to the soviet union and told them whatever he knew.

Fact: Oswald returned to the U.S., and rather than being arrested as a traitor, he was re-intorduced into polite society by people with CIA/military connections.

So, what is the simplest explanation — that our “government” is so incompetent that it had no idea it was reintegrating a traitor? Or something else.

604. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

602, my bad, typo yes 3 hours and I am from Hamilton Ontario, currently at university in Guelph. And yea your correct the leafs are Make Beliefs lol. Nice to know you and Harry Ballz are fellow Canucks.

605. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

Yay! another post by Bob! Oh wait, more CIA Kennedy stuff, (laughs) I find the conspiracy surrounding 9/11 more interesting (probably because its more relevant to my time.) There are very strong cases that “government” was the puppet master in it.

606. Chadwick - October 15, 2010

419. MORN SPEAKS – October 14, 2010
Mark my words, the next villain will be a woman.
Good call, no one has mentioned that yet!

424. VZX – October 14, 2010
a battle between the Organians and the Metrons = poop

435. Red Dead Ryan – October 14, 2010
I dont recall anyone saying he would pander to us, I think people should say what they want no matter how skilled or unskilled the individual is at diceting and anyalising a film to improve upon it, its fun sharing. Everyone on here is spewing it out, and its great.

437. Buzz Cagney – October 14, 2010
“#434 the kind of people that have seen one too many Klingons in there Trek’s. ;-)”
I roll my eyes at you, no such thing as too many Klingons. :p

607. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010

#583 somethoughts and #603 boborci

That’s a nice overview. Other people here keep harping about how “the government” were too incompetent to pull off the assassination of Kennedy and keep it a secret. I never said “the government” killed him. I said (post #538) that Lyndon Baines Johnson and a powerful group of people working with/for him killed President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. After that they destroyed key evidence, killed witnesses and shut everybody else up.

Read the two books I suggested at post #529 and I would be shocked if you don’t all reach the same conclusion.

608. Vultan - October 15, 2010


Actually, yes, the government is incompetent enough to allow a traitor back into the country. They have a pretty good track record for incompetence—look at Pearl Harbor and later 9/11. All sorts of warning signs before they happened, yet…


FACT: Oswald took a shot at far-right segregationist General Edwin Walker in April of 1963. Bullet fragments were later tested and given an “extremely likely” chance of matching the make and caliber of Oswald’s rifle.

Now, doesn’t it seem against the supposedly fascist CIA’s nature to target such an individual? Or if Oswald was acting alone in the Walker case, if the CIA were tailoring Oswald to be an assassin or a ‘patsy,’ logically they would’ve kept a tighter leash on him leading up Kennedy’s assassination? Or were they simply incompetent in April, not so in November?

609. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

All right, I’ll bite. Not the big conspiracy type. Don’t believe in Bigfoot or 9/11 government involvement or much of any other plot you could conjure up. However I do have a problem with the Warren Commission and a hard time believing the single gunman theory. Never seemed right. And never watched Oliver Stone’s movie. Just seems unlikely when you look at the facts.

610. S. John Ross - October 15, 2010

#585: “Occam’s Razor is sorely abused.”

I think it’s mainly just misunderstood, because it’s most often bandied about in (ironically) oversimplified form.

611. Phil - October 15, 2010

@ 603….given LHO’s background it’s very plausible that he had contact with the CIA. It’s quite a leap to assume that contact included being recruited to kill a president. Yeah, we would also like to think that given his background he would not have been able to regain entry back into the country, but if he back-doored his way in and some civil servent just rubber-stamped him in, it ends up being a series of unhappy coincidences. Nothing more, nothing less, except for the fact that a president died as a result.

612. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Vultan, don’t forget that it’s not like Oswald KNEW he was being set up as the patsy for JFK’s murder. His operatives had regular contact with him, but he was still a “free agent” for portions of his schedule. The fact that Oswald took a shot at General Edwin Walker in April 1963 only goes to show that Lee was psychologically unbalanced. It also probably explains why his “handlers” picked him for the fall in the first place. It’s pretty hard to frame someone who always acts perfectly normal, isn’t it?

613. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Phil, it’s hard to go into lengthy explanations here, but Oswald arranged his return to the U.S. from Russia in quick order, with more money than he had in his possession. Not to mention he returned with a Russian bride, no questions asked. That alone would never have been allowed in those days.

614. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

And what about Ruby? How does he fit in?

615. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

Ruby’s no bureaucrat.

616. Vultan - October 15, 2010


But what if Oswald had been successful in killing Walker and had been caught or killed in the process? What if Oswald took a shot at another public figure before November? Did the CIA have a backup ‘patsy?’ Did they have a list of these unstable guys living in Dallas… who previously lived in the Soviet Union… who were trained to shoot in the Marine Corps… who happened to work along JFK’s parade route through the city?

The plan seems pretty unstable and far-fetched for such a competent, highly-trained squad of black-op assassin commando boogeymen like the CIA, don’t you think?

617. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010

Oswald was never meant to be taken alive. It was planned that he would be shot and killed upon being arrested. There’s a good chance Officer Tippit was in the process of doing that when Oswald shot him in self-defence. LBJ’s people, who orchestrated JFK’s murder, were using some Mafia “talent” in Dealey Plaza that day. When Oswald was captured alive, it was decided to use an old ploy from the Mafia rulebook: Assassinate the assassin. Some calls were made to Chicago (where the original Mafia talent was procured) where it was decided to use Jack Ruby to get to Oswald. Ruby was well known as a friend to the Dallas Police and had easy access to Police Headquarters where Oswald was being held. The rest is “history”.

p.s. there’s a short, but telling, interview years later (on Youtube) where Ruby mumbles to the interviewer how it was an inside government job! Check it out!

618. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


Originally Kennedy was to be killed a few weeks earlier while visiting Miami. That attempt was called off for unknown reasons, but it suggests that there were a few contingency plans in place to get rid of Kennedy. Once the President’s trip to Dallas was confirmed, and Oswald was still set-up and in place, JFK’s fate was sealed.

619. Vultan - October 15, 2010


Oh, so now Officer Tippit was in on the conspiracy! God, was there anyone in government not involved? Somebody should really look into that suspicious-looking mailman on Oswald’s street that day! And the trashman! The guy with the Dallas water department! They’re all in on it! The pod people! They’re already here!!!

Oy, I better get the crazy glue—’cause you guys crack me up!

620. moauvian waoul - October 15, 2010

Then our work here is nearly complete

621. Harry Ballz - October 15, 2010


In all fairness I can’t say that Tippit’s role was to kill Oswald. Another theory is that Tippit was shot and killed by the person who was sent to silence Oswald. This all happened not far from Oswald’s rooming house. Tippit, thinking this person looked suspicious, maybe stopped him for questioning and was killed for his efforts.

622. Phil - October 15, 2010

The LBJ theory, like most others, has been beat to death on a number of occasions. Makes for entertaining reading, but hardly rises to the level of proof. There is no new information, and if put in the position of having to toss aside the plausible for the improbable, I have to stick with the plausible.

623. Phil - October 16, 2010

Worldviews being what they are, I’m not under any illusions that I’m going to change anyones mind on this. As an individual, the only point I’m trying to make is that the plausibility of a conclusion to an investigation gaining acceptance in greatly improved with a solid explaination, and proof.

624. keachick - October 16, 2010

Wow. More than 600 posts and now the board is talking about the JFK assassination, an event that took place 47 years ago. I’m not sure what this has to do with the Star Trek sequel, but I hope, nothing at all.

The plethora of conspiracy theories have abounded since JFK’s death. I guess this is one man who won’t get to rest in peace (R.I.P.). There are even some people who think that Nostradamus predicted Kennedy’s assassination. Certainly, there have been rumours (and I believe, even evidence at times) of corruption of various kinds within the Halls of Congress and the White House and they have been around for quite a while.

The real question is: How has this particular assassination caused a change in direction in the hows, why’s, what’s, when’s of the USA today as people now know it or has it had any impact at all? For example, had Kennedy still been alive, would the USA have gone to fight in Vietnam? Would there have been an escalation of the Cold War with all the M.A.D. stuff etc?

417 wrote: “I liked Star Trek ‘09, except for the bad language/sexual content. Can you make the sequel more family-friendly, so that parents won’t have to be embarrassed about seeing it with their kids who like Trek?”

LOL! Bad language? What – a carefully timed, quietly spoken “Bullsh*t” when prime Spock tells young Kirk (whom he has never met before) that he is Spock and then tells him that he always has been and always will be Kirk’s friend? I’m sure other people, presented with this kind of information, may use words of a more graphic nature. I cannot recall any other bad language in the movie. Star Trek has always been noted for its care when it comes to the use of bad, foul, crude language in that there generally isn’t any, which is good.

Sexual content? If only. With Gaila, it was more the case of a romance/sex scene that wasn’t… Spock and Uhura shared affection and a little kissing. Hardly rampant sexual content.

601 wrote: “it was just right, could have use more but then again its PG which is why they took the genitals off the polarilla that chased Kirk. Funny isn’t it PG = sexual content and foul language ok but anatomical correctness is not.”
You’re kidding, right? It is not surprising really, since neither of those ice planet creatures could be described as anatomically correct in any way (at least the polarilla had fur), so I guess – why put in genitals (or did they just forget?). Yes, well, it’s OK to show a man being punched several times in the face by several guys, but to show, even a glimpse of an animal’s genitals, let alone, part of a woman’s breast – gosh, no, we can’t have that, can we? DUH! Sorry, but this sort of thing really irks me.

625. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

457. captain_neill – October 14, 2010
“Am I the only one on this site who thought the planned Shatner Hologram scene was forced and contrived?”

Oh god no you are not, I agree with you, I almost forgot about it because I didn’t really care for it. Indeed it would have felt forced, would have been a mistake just like the Hayden Christensen version of the spirit at the end of Star Wars Return of the Jedi. Big mistake and luckily JJ and crew are talented AND tasteful.

459. captain_neill – October 14, 2010
“435 I am worried they might listen to the wrong ideas from fans.”

I disagree, we are not suggesting anything huge. The make or break aspects will be left to the pros. The only ideas which might sway Orci and crew are “oh lets put in a warp core” or something minor. I would not say blatantly you are wrong but indeed unwarranted. They need to make at least two movie to bounce off one another before you can even dread a bad movie. One movie will not do, if it did from what we have seen it would only mean the next movie will be phenomenal and superb.

460. dmduncan – October 14, 2010
“You are not the only one, but I think you are in a minority. Because that scene was BEAUTIFUL. There were a lot of good scenes in ST.09, but two really beautiful ones. One of them got filmed.”

I have no idea which part you or other see as beautiful. Its too forced and fake (the hologram and Spock’s reaction) to feel beautiful. Again I relate it to the Hayden Christensen at the end of Return of the Jedi…OUT OF PLACE. I like Shatner and if they put him in fine, but if they don’t put him in its definitely time to close that book.

462. Phil – October 14, 2010

I agree, I like the industrial feel, even though there is a shiny side, it is covering up a crude functioning side. Something else comes to mind DS9 and Rom working on the waste extraction system….what the hell does that look like?

483. Gene L Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. – October 14, 2010

Well said on all fronts!

504. Damian – October 15, 2010

“I have mixed feelings about Klingons. They just seem to be overused in the various series. I’m not saying a good movie can’t have them, I’m just not sure there is any aspect of Klingon society that has not already been thoroughly explored.”
Ok yea for the fans but not for the audience that the new movies are targeting.

626. somethoughts - October 16, 2010

Kennedy was angered with the CIA’s failure (Bay of Pigs Invasion) and claimed he wanted to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the wind.

Anytime the CIA is threatened with budget cuts you get assassination in JFK or 911.

What better way to get funding for anti terrorism, than to create a need.
Who was going to fund anti terrorism if there is global peace.

627. rangerone314 - October 16, 2010

I keep thinking of the Orions as the villains in ST2012. Not entirely sure why.

I do think they have been under-used. Consider they first appeared in “The Cage”, and were pivotal in “Journey to Babel” and in the Enterprise episode finally… (also the Syndicate in B5 episode with Miles O’Brien undercover)

They were all good episodes.

I was intrigued by Kirk having an Orion cadet as a fling in ST2009…

I’d also like a subplot with Kirk and Dr Marcus… Kirk actually getting into a relationship with someone (blond lab technician re: Gary Mitchell) and almost marrying her (I assume the was Dr Marcus being referred to in “Where No Man…”

I think the relevance to Kirk is going from flings to a relationship, and then realizing the long-term relationship he really wants is with the Enterprise…

628. somethoughts - October 16, 2010

Very simple, Kennedy was targeting the Mob and wanted to dismantle the CIA. The Mob and CIA did not want to lose power/money and put a hit on JFK.

The assassination came down to not wanting to lose money and power.

You have to look at who was in charge of the Mob and CIA during the years JFK was in power to understand who ordered the hit.

629. Harry Ballz - October 16, 2010


Yes, and all spearheaded by LBJ. Please don’t lose sight of that. I know it’s 47 years later, and a lot of you want to just disregard it, but it was the “crime of the century” and they got away with it!

630. Stephan Seifert - October 16, 2010

599. Chadwick – October 15, 2010

Thanks, I will tell her. ;-)

631. Hugh Hoyland - October 16, 2010

Wow I go back to work and the thread takes an interesting turn while Im gone, cool deal. I just got in from work so this will be short, but Im one of the many that think there was a major conspiracy involved in the JFK assasination. (Waves at the CIA hack who might be reading this) :]

632. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

@629: Harry, sounds like you may have put together a well informed script!

633. Daoud - October 16, 2010

@618 Harry, but although they didn’t kill JFK in Miami, exactly that concept has now been presented to us in THEEV3NT on NBC, with a U.S. President aiming to shut down the CIA’s operations. I’ve always gone with the theory based on Oswald having not been a very good sniper, and that the key target was John Connally. Connally was on the edge of being too powerful and seen as a threat to LBJ, the mil-industrialists, and to the left wing side of black ops. I thought that the assassination of Connally, or even of Jackie Kennedy, would have put JFK into a different mode of operation and sent him rightward in reaction.

But I’ll grant you there’s clearly something going on that would eliminate the two most qualified Kennedys: Jack and Bobby, through assassination. Oswald is rivaled by the sheer weirdness of سرحان بشارة سرحان.

@Bob. So, as much as I enjoy your thoughts on JFK, I’m more interested in your thoughts on one JTK! You can’t undo the murder and conspiracies with JFK, but you SURE can undo the murder of JTK! ;)?

And hahaha, I like your “rejected idea” you offered up, but Star Trek: TAS and DS9 already did that miniaturization gig with “The Terratin Incident” and “One Little Ship”. But good to know you said “Prime Directive”. There was no guarantee that it existed in the Parallel alternate universe and not just in the Prime Universe. Now I have you clearly noting the Prime Directive exists in the altered universe! Hope you find a way to use it in the script! ;)?

634. Harry Ballz - October 16, 2010


Thank you, dmduncan! I appreciate your positive feedback!

635. boborci - October 16, 2010

608. Vultan

The allegation of his earlier assassination attempt is not a fact.

Regardless, the best theories on the subject do not involve LHO actually having anything to do with JFK’s murder. He was a PATSY. So even if what you claim above is a fact, it makes him the perfect patsy.

636. P Technobabble - October 16, 2010

Any time the government doesn’t want the public to have certain information, that information is hidden as “a matter of national security.” How many documents released under the Freedom of Information Act, for example, still have huge blotches of black ink burying a sentence or a paragraph which contains information that is still deemed “not for public eyes?” The government (and all its agencies) manipulates every bit of information we get, allow smatterings of this while concealing that.

Deception and deniability is part of the government’s method of operation. And very often one branch of the government may conceal information from another branch. But because the government is made up of fallible human beings, it is understandable that ordinary greed, desire, deception and concealment enters the picture. The Watergate incident is still one of the greatest examples of human beings in positions of power making terrible decisions and and severe mistakes in judgement. Five men caught breaking into the Democratic National Committee offices with the intention of planting bugs, the subsequent attempted cover-up, and, finally, Nixon’s resignation are all evidence that human beings are capable of greed and deception, whether they work in a factory or in the White House.

At the same time, the public does not have access to the truth at any present moment. We do not directly know what goes on behind the closed doors of the White House, the CIA, the FBI, and so forth. We only know what we’ve been told, whether by the news, an author, or by rumor. Knowing the truth tends to require first-hand experience and knowledge; otherwise all we have is second-hand information. Since we cannot possibly fulfill this requirement, we have to TRUST that everything we are told, everything we are given, is the truth. And when a good number of truths eventually come out which shatters our trust in our leaders and authorities, we become disillusioned, isolated and alienated. Unfortunately, these are the signs of the times.
To quote a very famous Doctor once again: “It’s a wonder these people ever got out of the 20th century.”

637. boborci - October 16, 2010

611. Phil – October 15, 2010
@ 603….given LHO’s background it’s very plausible that he had contact with the CIA. It’s quite a leap to assume that contact included being recruited to kill a president. Yeah, we would also like to think that given his background he would not have been able to regain entry back into the country, but if he back-doored his way in and some civil servent just rubber-stamped him in, it ends up being a series of unhappy coincidences. Nothing more, nothing less, except for the fact that a president died as a result.

So you agree Bugliosis book is probably wrong in its claim that LHO had no ties to CIA.

As for being rubber stamped, LHO wasn’t just allowed back as some oversite. He was actively helped.

Finally, as stated above, if LHO was a patsy, then he was not recruited to kill the president.

616. Vultan – October 15, 2010

But what if Oswald had been successful in killing Walker and had been caught or killed in the process? What if Oswald took a shot at another public figure before November? Did the CIA have a backup ‘patsy?’ Did they have a list of these unstable guys living in Dallas… who previously lived in the Soviet Union… who were trained to shoot in the Marine Corps… who happened to work along JFK’s parade route through the city?

The plan seems pretty unstable and far-fetched for such a competent, highly-trained squad of black-op assassin commando boogeymen like the CIA, don’t you think?



Look up Edwin Black’s article on the Chicago plot to kill JFK that was foiled 3 weeks before actual assassination. To make a long story short, they arrested a man in Chicago who was a former marine, like Oswald, who was stationed previously at a U2/CIA installation in Japan, like Oswald, and who happened to have gotten a low paying job in a building overlooking what would’ve been the motorcade route in Chicago, EXACTLY LIKE OSWALD!

638. boborci - October 16, 2010

I’ll save you the trouble. Here’s the article:


639. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

627. rangerone314 – October 16, 2010

Yea I would agree Orions would be cool but I don’t think they want to deal with so many people wearing green make up smudging it on everything! I think the green paint used in the movie was terrible. The makeup on the Orions in the last season of Enterprise was great.

640. Hugh Hoyland - October 16, 2010

Ok before I hit the hay I would like to say I find it really cool that a succesful writer takes the time out of his busy schedule and interacts with fans as much as he can, in the middle of doing a ton of other work, and on top of it he isnt afraid to tell it like he sees it, either on the subject of Trek, talk in general, or government graft! Pretty dang cool in my book.

641. Hugh Hoyland - October 16, 2010

Ok before I hit the hay I would like to say I find it really cool that a succesful writer takes the time out of his busy schedule and interacts with fans as much as he can, in the middle of doing a ton of other work, and on top of it he isnt afraid to tell it like he sees it, either on the subject of Trek, talk in general, or government graft! Pretty dang cool in my book.

642. Hugh Hoyland - October 16, 2010

#519 dmduncan

Ok cool deal, well good luck, Im sure its a good story.

643. Hugh Hoyland - October 16, 2010

#519 dmduncan

Ok cool deal, well good luck, Im sure its a good story.

644. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

This is fascinating. So who was this Vallee character? The science fiction fan? What became of that guy?

645. boborci - October 16, 2010

644. In the excellent book JFK and the Unspeakable, the son of Chicago cop who arrested Vallee recounts how his dad, after JFK’s assassination, received an anonymous note saying simply, “THANK YOU.” Both believe it was from Vallee, who realized he had been on the road to be set up as the assassin of the president.

Vallee’s sister, I believe, also later expressed that she felt her brother had been saved Oswald’s fate thanks to his arrest.

646. boborci - October 16, 2010

564. Harry Ballz – October 15, 2010

Right. Same page.

647. Hermioni - October 16, 2010

@ 636. P Technobabble – October 16, 2010


From my perspective, your post really does sum up the whole situation in a nutshell. And not just with regard to government practices in the US, but to those in my own home country/ies as well.

648. boborci - October 16, 2010

580. Phil – October 15, 2010

I hear this argument a lot, that people want to believe a conspiracy because it somehow makes them feel better. So speaking of evidence, I don’t know what evidence exists to support this claim. I can tell you that I don’t feel better thinking it was a conspiracy. I would much rather believe that Oswald acted alone.

I notice that when conspiracies come up, debunkers often like to avoid the evidence and instead resort to theorizing about what makes us feel better, and intuiting laws of nature (like “no one can keep a secret”) that are not based on evidence or logic.

649. boborci - October 16, 2010

and finally, JFK: Evidence of Revision



650. moauvian waoul - October 16, 2010

And we can never no about kept secrets because they are um… secret

651. moauvian waoul - October 16, 2010

No, know.

652. James - October 16, 2010

I blame it all on MI5 personally…

653. Vultan - October 16, 2010


“I notice that when conspiracies come up, debunkers often like to avoid the evidence and instead resort to theorizing about what makes us feel better.”

You’re speaking of yourself, my friend. Conspiracy theorists often ignore evidence, take a pile of half-truthes and hearsay, then run wild with it… oh, and then turn it into a screenplay. :)

But despite our disagreement over this issue (and pretty much everything else), you have to hand it to the US government for stimulating the economy in this way. Just think if there were no secrecy, no CIA—Hollywood would be depleted of hundreds of paranoid movies and TV shows, David Duchovny would still be working at Sears, there would be no late night radio call-in shows, bloggers would have to discuss sports and the weather, and sales of aluminum foil would be virtually cut in half.

A scary alternate universe, no? Happy Halloween, Bob! :0

654. boborci - October 16, 2010

653. Vultan – October 16, 2010

What is your response to the Chicago plot article?

655. boborci - October 16, 2010

653. Vultan – October 16, 2010

Or the revelations within JFK: Evidence of Revisions?

656. boborci - October 16, 2010

653. Vultan – October 16, 2010

And happy Halloween to you, too!

657. James - October 16, 2010

Also nearing the end of Star Trek 4 on Film4 (UK) Cant believe this is the first time all 10 films have been shown back to the back here!

658. Vultan - October 16, 2010

#654 & #655

See above:

“Conspiracy theorists often ignore evidence, take a pile of half-truthes and hearsay, then run wild with it… oh, and then turn it into a screenplay.” :)

Look, I’m not saying there wasn’t a conspiracy. I’m just leaning more towards the Mafia, Johnson, (or possibly, though it’s a long shot, Soviet/Castro) theories. I just find it hard to believe the CIA would throw such a hissy fit over a cut in their funding, “scattering them to the wind” and so on. They’ve been reorganized and had their funding cut a dozen times without killing the man in charge.

Anyway, I just wish the OSS had never been disbanded. Now that was a cool outfit—Wild Bill Donovan, the Jedburgs, Carl Eifler, etc. Worthy of ten movies!

659. boborci - October 16, 2010

658. Vultan – October 16, 2010

GREAT! So we agree that Tom Hanks is full of it. Lovely.

660. James - October 16, 2010

OSS werent a patch on the SOE. Fact.

661. Vultan - October 16, 2010


Nah, I’ll always like Tom Hanks (how can I disown the guy who helped bring Band of Brothers to the screen?), and I look forward to seeing his JFK production. As a skeptic, I always like to entertain any and all theories no matter how wild they there—it’s entertaining!

And I think Bosom Buddies was a bigger slap in the face. :D

662. James - October 16, 2010

On the subject of Tom Hanks if not him then how about ALAN RICKMAN! Seriously has he ever played a good guy??

”Im going to get you john mclane!”
”Im going to get you robin hood!”
”Im going to get you harry potter”

You noticing a pattern here?

663. James - October 16, 2010

Vultan if you liked band of Brothers then you may also enjoy ”Pegasus Bridge” by stephen ambrose

664. Vultan - October 16, 2010


SOE? Is that some sort of military organization?
Just kidding!

And how about the SAS Desert Raiders during the war? Great stories there!

665. Vultan - October 16, 2010


I’ll check it out, James. I really enjoyed the Pegasus Bridge sequence in Call of Duty… or was it Medal of Honor? Uh, I can’t remember…

Anyway, the movie The Longest Day did a good job with that part of D-Day. Not so much with the beach landings though… Private Ryan blew them out of the water with that—no pun intended.

666. James - October 16, 2010

There are some great true war stories out there such as the raid on german u-boat pens in France by british commandos (ballsy to say the least!)

In terms of modern ones look up ”operation certain death” Which is about the SAS and paras rescuing captured british troops in Sierra Leone in 1999

667. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

@609: Bigfoot is not a conspiracy. Cryptid would be the word.

610: “I think it’s mainly just misunderstood,”

That’s why it gets abused. It is forced into service on occasions where it has nothing to say. If those who did this knew it, they wouldn’t be using it to do it.

625: “I have no idea which part you or other see as beautiful. Its too forced and fake (the hologram and Spock’s reaction) to feel beautiful. Again I relate it to the Hayden Christensen at the end of Return of the Jedi…OUT OF PLACE.”

Totally disagree with you on both. Hayden Christensen fit in BETTER at end of ROTJ because for two whole episodes HC was the face of Annakin. The actor we had, HE was the one that was out of place and inexplicable in the context of the whole series.

As for the Shatner scene, I’ve given good reasons why it works better. I’m not just saying “it’s better.” When something affects me in a powerful way I come back to it and try to analyze how it did that, why it works so well.

As far as JJ’s judgment is concerned. I took the summer filmmaking intensive at NYU, and I’ve tested my own judgment in some cinematic techniques I was thinking of — against what we were taught to do, by the way, because I was convinced the teacher was wrong — and the result proved to be correct, admitted even by the teacher.

Now I’m not a professional like JJ, true, but I also would NEVER have any of my characters stumped about which wire to cut to disable the bomb, either. Something we’ve seen what? 2 BILLION times by now? JJ, apparently, would. So maybe there’s something to be said for having an outsider point of view.

668. Harry Ballz - October 16, 2010

#653+658 “and then turn it into a screenplay.:)”

Vultan, I LUV your teasing nature. Hey, they say write what you know about, so I decided to write a screenplay involving the Kennedy assassination. That’s why I called it……(wait for it)……………………


(most people know of the connotation to that phrase and that’s where a lot of the action in my story takes place)

669. Phil - October 16, 2010

648. boborci – October 16, 2010

I’m not a psychiatrist, so I am probably guilty of oversimplifying the concept a bit. Given the level of distrust in gov’t that exists today, I can understand why people may be predisposed to conspiracy theory.

I probably consider myself more of a skeptic then a debunker, actually. The problem with being a skeptic is I won’t necessarily dismiss something out of hand, I just need more then conjecture to accept it. The two previous points are good examples – given Oswalds background, I have no issue with the idea he may have had CIA contacts. If you can except that it was a precursor to something sinister, you also have to accept that it may have also been entirely coincendential. Oswald getting back into the US unnoticed – come on, really not that hard in the early 60’s. You stop at a border town on a weekend, and make your way back with thousands of other Americans who spent the weekend drinking. Hide in plain site. In the early 60’s, Oswald would have been one more white guy in line and getting waved through. Circumstantial evidence can point to something sinister, or be completely innocent.

I don’t think it’s so much a question of debunkers (or skeptics) avoiding the evidence, but getting over that initial hurdle of denial where both sides fall down a bit. Both sides do require a bit of faith to make their point, which gets back to the power of belief discussed earlier. When I hear someone link together a series of plausible observations, but then arrive at multiple conclusions, that gives me reason to be skepticial. I would think that evidence and logic should consistantly arrive at one conclusion. It’s that consistancy, even if the conclusion seems highly improbable, that gives strength to the arguement.

670. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

This is very interesting. The “Unspeakable” part of the title was coined by Merton then? Interesting. I grew up a block from where Malcolm X used to live. The place that was firebombed in the 60’s. My friends and I used to play handball on the wall of a bearing company like 25 yards from the front door. When I was growing up the house had been kept by the Black Muslims, and I was friends with the kids who lived in it. Douglas thinks the murder of Malcolm X was related?

671. James - October 16, 2010

Just watched Leonard Nimoy introduce Trek5 and talks about how bill believed if he had a bit more money for the effects it wouldnt have been half as bad.. at which point Nimoy looks at the camera and sniggers! Brilliant!!

672. boborci - October 16, 2010

669. Phil – October 16, 2010

Glad you have no issue with idea that LHO had CIA contacts. You, therefore, disagree with Bugliosi and Hanks. Great.

As stated above, Oswald didn’t just sneak in, he was actively HELPED by people with CIA/military contacts. Ruth Paine, George de Mohrenschildt, etc… Oswald was even interviewed by FBI prior to assassination, but notes of the meeting were destroyed. You’re argument that he maybe just went unnoticed is demonstrably false.

You say you need more than conjecture, which I have provided — so what is your rebuttal to the Chicago plot article?

And again, you are resorting to philosophizing about conspiracies instead of dealing with evidence.

673. boborci - October 16, 2010

your argument

674. Harry Ballz - October 16, 2010

Bob, instead of us getting into long-winded explanations here, I suggested that some of the doubters should read Summer’s CONSPIRACY and Marrs’s CROSSFIRE. I know you’ve recommended the new book, JFK And The Unspeakable (which I’ve ordered), but have you read the two books I recommended and, more importantly, what did you think of them?

675. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

Yeah, plausible arguments are not conclusive. They are actually weak arguments. If you’ve got a shootout between two plausible arguments, you’ve got to give it to the one that has the greater balance of evidence — certainly not to the one that has been better publicized which may NOT have the greater balance. It sounds to me like the official narrative may be wrong.

676. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

669: “I would think that evidence and logic should consistantly arrive at one conclusion.”

But we’re humans not computers. That’s not so easy to admit when the conclusions are disturbing.

677. Phil - October 16, 2010

653. Vultan – October 16, 2010

There, there, now, be nice to Mr. Stone…..

678. James - October 16, 2010

Or Jack Nicholson as Commodore Matt Decker…

679. Harry Ballz - October 16, 2010

Here’s the funny thing about anyone here asking for evidence. If you read any of the books recommended here, you will be astounded at how much detailed research has gone into writing them. Conjecture is at a minimum, with most of it being carefully researched evidence, data, first-hand interviews of witnesses, autopsy reports and countless other details amassed by bonafide researchers. And, even after reading said books, if you were to cynically discount 90% of what you read due to bias, there is still enough evidence (in the remaining 10%) left involving complicity in Kennedy’s murder to clearly point to CONSPIRACY!

680. Vultan - October 16, 2010


Haha! Actually, I enjoy Mr. Stone’s movies. I rarely agree with anything he has to say, but I do find them very entertaining, especially Wall Street and Platoon. Oh, and JFK is a good flick as well…. But the Seinfeld spoof was even better!

“That is one magic loogie!”

681. Vultan - October 16, 2010


Harry, that’s a great title for your screenplay! I’ve tried writing a few times myself and have always found choosing a good, snappy title one of the most difficult tasks. I wish you the best of luck! Can’t wait to see it on the big screen.

p.s. I was on a college field trip to the Dallas art museum a few years back. On the way from the museum, we drove past the book depository, and I pointed to the building and shouted something about the grassy knoll. My teacher didn’t know what I was talking about! She’d never heard of the grassy knoll! Yeah, I was disgusted to say the least—especially since she grew up in Texas! Sad… just sad…. :(

682. moauvian waoul - October 16, 2010

667 Ah, but the Great Bigfoot cover up is. Do you really think he acted alone?

683. Phil - October 16, 2010

679. Harry Ballz – October 16, 2010

Here is the problem with this statement. If you also read books that conclude that LHO acted alone, if you dismiss 90% of that evidence, then the remaining 10% solidly supports Oswald acting alone. All of what has been discussed here is every interesting reading, but it also forces one to take this information, judge the validity of it, and ask if it provides reason to question and dismiss known evidence. For me, as a skeptic, the answer is no. I can concede that there were people who may have wanted Kennedy dead for some reason or another, but that arguement can be made for EVERY president, so that, by itself does not rise to the level of evidence.

684. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

679: “Here’s the funny thing about anyone here asking for evidence. If you read any of the books recommended here, you will be astounded at how much detailed research has gone into writing them”

Well I don’t doubt it. And that marks an important distinction between this case and reptilians under the Denver airport which, even without them, is still kind of a strange place.


Blucifer is GIANT, and yes, it’s eyes glow red.

685. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

683: “Here is the problem with this statement. If you also read books that conclude that LHO acted alone, if you dismiss 90% of that evidence, then the remaining 10% solidly supports Oswald acting alone.”

Contrary to what many people think, there IS a way to prove negatives. You do it by disjunctive syllogism. But even in those cases there is no “evidence” of the negative. If there were, one wouldn’t need to deduce the conclusion because it wouldn’t be a negative: It would be a positive, which is evidence that such and such IS the case. On this contentious subject, Bob and Harry are trying to point out a positive — that evidence which indicates the greater probability that Oswald did act in concert with others.

When you say that Oswald acted alone, you ARE saying what you cannot possibly know but through disjunctive logic.

There can be no direct evidence that he acted alone, that there was NOT anybody else.

Which raises the question: Which conclusion does that balance of evidence which does exist lead to more persuasively?

686. Phil - October 16, 2010

680. Vultan – October 16, 2010

The problem with Mr. Stones JFK was that my son got to enjoy it, too….in his HS history class.

687. Vultan - October 16, 2010


Ooh, sorry to hear that Phil. That’s a poor decision on the teacher’s part. I hope he or she at least showed the students a documentary of the official record afterward… then let them decide for themselves.

JFK is an engaging movie, but it’s hardly the definitive historical resource on the assassination. If anything, it’s a historical example of post-Watergate 90’s paranoia—the same kind in which the X-Files and now Fringe have flourished.

688. Vultan - October 16, 2010

Correction: an historical

689. Phil - October 16, 2010

685. dmduncan – October 16, 2010

Good point. I suppose that’s why people keep writing books.

690. Phil - October 16, 2010

687. Vultan – October 16, 2010

Nope, did not get the documentary. I had to de-program him myself.

691. boborci - October 16, 2010


Chicago plot? Any comment?

692. boborci - October 16, 2010

687. Vultan – October 16, 2010

You seem confused. Earlier you said you thought a conspiracy was likely. Now you are advocating documentary of official story. Which is it?

693. Phil - October 16, 2010

691. boborci – October 16, 2010

Not really. An attempt on Kennedy was foiled, and the investigation was botched.. I suspect the Secret Service asesses and acts on tips all the time, so by itself, it’s an interesting footnote to the Kennedy presidency.

694. boborci - October 16, 2010

693. So you think nothing of the fact that a man with an identical background to Oswald was arrested 3 weeks before assassination?

That makes you are a coincidence theorist.

695. boborci - October 16, 2010

That makes you a coincidence theorist.

696. Vultan - October 16, 2010


No, there’s no confusion here. By official I meant the ‘official’ government/media story that Oswald was the lone gunman. As I said, the teacher should have given this ‘official’ version, then show the Oliver Stone conspiracy film, expose the kids to the whole picture with ALL the different theories in play, and then let them decide for themselves.

Personally, I don’t buy everything presented by Stone or everything by the government. I’m somewhere in between.

We cool now?

697. DGill - October 16, 2010

As long as they ‘x’ out three things in this sequel (Khan, lens flares and more needless William Shatner casting talk), I will jump back on board the hype machine.

698. Vultan - October 16, 2010


But I should add that the Kennedy assassination really isn’t that important to me as it obviously is to you, Mr. Orci. As government secrets go, I’m more interested in the Bay of Pigs/Cuban Missile Crisis/Gary Powers/Lost Cosmonaut aspects of that era—more James Bond us-versus-them and less of the Oliver Stone hate-America vitriol. :)

699. boborci - October 16, 2010

698. Vultan – October 16, 2010

Don’t know how you can be into cubanmissilecrisis/bayofpigs and not see it’s connection to assassination. You gotta read JFK and the Unspeakable. It connects your favorite subject to the assassination.

And we are always cool!

700. boborci - October 16, 2010

Vultan – October 16, 2010

And Gary Powers, too!

What did he fly? U2 spy plane.

Where was Oswald stationed in Japan as a marine? U2 spy plane installation.

701. pock speared - October 16, 2010

b’orci: JFK was in fact shot by a guy named “eddie”, who only had one arm, and when you die, your soul goes to a deli in smithtown, long island.

so that’s settled.

now, are we gonna see uhura’s space-tits in the next one or what?

702. boborci - October 16, 2010

701. pock speared – October 16, 2010

perhaps Anthony can take a vote?

703. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

694: “So you think nothing of the fact that a man with an identical background to Oswald was arrested 3 weeks before assassination?”

Not quite identical. Looks like Vallee was a Bircher while Oswald was a Communist. So can I infer from this that “they” didn’t mind who took the rap so long as it didn’t point to THEM?

And is this sentiment of yours popular out there or does Hanks/Bugliosi sum it up?

704. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

You’ve convinced me to read Unspeakable.

Hey uh, Khan Noonien Sigh emerged to power from conspiracy, didn’t he Bob?

705. pete - October 16, 2010

Gimme Klingons as main villians and Khans backstory – so he can become the main bad guy in the 3rd and final movie of the trilogy.

706. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

Hey come on Bob, that was just a semi loaded question!

707. Charlene Ramirez - October 16, 2010

Star Trek 2009 was the best yet! I doubted they could pull it off, but I was so impressed. We have watched it over and over and it never gets old. Special effects can’t be beat! Keep those effects, and head into the future. The new alternate time line established in 2009 opens the future to all new alternatives, so the universe is the limit! How about the new Vulcan colony tries to contact the Romulans to avoid the future disaster to their planet and provokes the Klingons to feel threatened? They star a war that the federation has to get involved in in order to protect the few Vulcans that remain?

708. pock speared - October 16, 2010

oh, gilligan.
hey you know anthony has way too much integrity to stoop so low as to poll on space-tits.

but since you’re the b’orci, and you asked first, i say, well, i’m for it.
as long as the story is perfect, of course.
and that you promise to use ALL of the suggestions made on trekmovie. particularly the weird, banal ones.

709. Basement Blogger - October 16, 2010

Let’s get back to the new Star Trek film and the state of science fiction. I just heard this interview on NPR where author Edward Epstein says that TV is now smarter than film. (interview posted below) He says the studios market to the one audience that comes out to the movie theater, the teenagers.

Is he right? Somewhat. I’ll just use the TV show “Fringe” as an example of intelligent television. Smart, sexy, and it has heart. Love John Noble as Walter Bishop. Then when I see “GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra” I see where Epstein is coming from. Star Trek was once accused of being too cerebral. But that’s what made it Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry’s vision was an intelligent one. Thankfully, Christopher Nolan has made two very smart films that made a lot of money in “Dark Knight” and “Inception.” District 9 was also a smart movie that did well with critics and at the box office. Star Trek need not cater to the lowest common denominator.

NPR story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130612646

Finally, it’s Saturdany night. How about some fun? Jon Stewart of the Daily Show used clips from an Isabella Rossellini avant garde film about bed bugs in his story about New York’s bed bug problem. I’m going to guess that Isabella Rosselllini’s nature movies are not going to get big box office. Here’s the video.


710. somethoughts - October 16, 2010

Give the Klingons the Russian Cold war treatment and give Pike/Kirk a bay of pigs and missile crisis of their own and assassination/conspiracy :)

I loved The Undiscovered Country, imagine TUC on steroids with the younger actors, and special effects.

Bob there’s is no use convincing others to change their beliefs, even if you brought them back in time and showed them first hand, they won’t believe it.

For me, it’s simple, I look at the facts and evidence and factor in human greed and behaviors and conclude that Kennedy had made his own bed.

JFK threatened the Mob and CIA, if the CIA is capable of hiring the Mob to kill Fidel, why can’t they do the same with JFK. CIA did not want to be dissolved nor the Mob and the obvious outcome is a sequence of murderous plotting and conspiracy to ensure their survival, was to remove Kennedy.

To pull off assassination or 911 requires months of planning and motive(s), $ and power. I just don’t buy the lone gunman crazy story, obvious LHO was a patsy with connections to the CIA/KGB/Mob.

711. Vultan - October 16, 2010


Yes, but I see all those “connections” as more a periphery to the core subjects—i.e. how close the US and the Soviets went to war over Cuba, the spies stealing/trading nuclear secrets, the space race, etc.

Assassinations are just too depressing for my tastes. After all, a war hero and a father of two small children was murdered in front of the world, signaling the end of America’s so-called age of innocence. I’d rather read about PT-109 and other inspiring stories. But that’s just me.

Good luck with the Trek sequel, Bob! Looking forward to seeing where this all goes….

712. Vultan - October 16, 2010


“…911 requires months of planning…”

Actually, it took Al Qaeda YEARS of planning to pull off 9/11.

713. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

I loved TUC. My favorite of the old school films. But contrary to the utopian image of Star Trek, TUC shows that all is NOT well in the 23rd century.

714. somethoughts - October 16, 2010


TUC is what made me watch TOS, I was a TNG fan first :)

I always thought TOS was lame and cheesy until I saw TUC and from that point on I was hooked to TOS and had to watch all the movies and episodes.

715. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

705. pete – October 16, 2010
“Gimme Klingons as main villians and Khans backstory – so he can become the main bad guy in the 3rd and final movie of the trilogy.”

Sorry Pete, this star trek thread ended a long time ago.

All this conspiracy talk, makes me think of how great a conspiracy star trek movie would be. Star Trek VI is more or less 20 years old now, so its dated, its gotten soft.

716. Chadwick - October 16, 2010


But Pete….I like your idea.

717. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

707. Charlene Ramirez – October 16, 2010
Star Trek 2009 was the best yet! I doubted they could pull it off, but I was so impressed. We have watched it over and over and it never gets old. Special effects can’t be beat! Keep those effects, and head into the future.

I agree, I have probably seen it now oh about 30 times and its still fresh, I am still impressed by it. The special effects where also second to none. I was mainly impressed by the new warp effect and the federation starships. The starships seemed tangible and real. The scene where they drop out of warp at vulcan with the shots of the Enterprise doing a barrel roll and the sounds of the ship were just so great.

718. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

708. Basement Blogger – October 16, 2010

Hear Hear! Should I throw a Palin tea party to get this article back to track lol. I like my neighbors to south of me to be run by the donkeys not the elephants.

“Thankfully, Christopher Nolan has made two very smart films that made a lot of money in “Dark Knight” and “Inception.” District 9 was also a smart movie that did well with critics and at the box office. Star Trek need not cater to the lowest common denominator.”

I agree, I love batman, but I really enjoyed Inception and District 9, so fantastic. I agree, trek has yet to cater to the lowbrow like oh..the A Team or G.I. Joe – I am sorry but both terrible movies – which is why I have no doubt the next Star Trek movie will fallow suit with ‘intelligent action’ like Dark Knight, Inception, and District 9, rich movies that satisfy.

719. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

712. dmduncan – October 16, 2010

713. somethoughts

TUC is also my favorite TOS movie with TWOK and TMP coming next. TUC was also the first TOS movie I had seen and for me as well it was what coaxed me to what the other movies. As child I grew up with new airings or TNG and reruns of TOS.

There was a time TOS bored me but at 27 compared to oh 16 I have matured and I love TOS so much. For all its success, failings, zest, improvisation, psychedelics, morals, bad acting, over acting, cheesy FX…….I love it so much.

I would love a TUC style movie of Kahn any day.

720. somethoughts - October 16, 2010


I’m with you, intelligent movie with drama and action rocks, Inception is one of my all time favs now. I love the dual possible ending and the fact that you had to watch it a few times to solve the maze.

I have a feeling the next Star Trek will be HUGE

721. dmduncan - October 16, 2010

Inception was fun, but I loved The Losers. I love an ensemble of great characters. Anyone remember Sneakers? Another really cool film I love.

722. Chadwick - October 16, 2010

719. somethoughts – October 16, 2010

I agree, inception is such a standalone, so fresh, it’s now in my all time favorites. Yea, I just coined “intelligent action” when trying to think of what District 9 and Inception offered which G.I. Joe did not. When speaking of intelligent action with regards to the next Star Trek movie I have no doubt they can step it up and offer more action and plot then the last film as well as induction of prime directive morality and that “next step” ingredient be it the great villain, the conspiracy theory, etc without falling into the category – again – that G.I. Joe is in.

723. somethoughts - October 16, 2010


Ironic how Jospeh Gordon Levitt was in both G.I Joe and Inception, who got the ridder part for Batman 3, Tom Hardy (Shinzon) or Jospeh Gordon Levitt.

What about Billy Bob Thornton for Decker since Hanks is busy spinning his wheels with JFK?

724. Jeff n Dallas - October 16, 2010

Bob Orci,

Just in case you are still looking at this post, loved the Enterprise being in H50…..I got chills…what an great way…..now I’m just waiting for McGarrett to ask, no, tell Dano to get him a Slusho….lol

725. somethoughts - October 16, 2010

Oh my


726. Peon - October 17, 2010

No way possible it’ll be the worst Trek movie ever…….TNG has that particular distinction pretty much wrapped up 4 fold.

727. Jack - October 17, 2010

My two cents (Canadian, so really, one-and-half cents).

I loved, in the early episodes, the sense that they were on a frontier and far-from-home, with all the Western-inspired elements (colonists in distress, weeks for word from home, being judge and jury on the spot) in a way that later series didn’t quite match (Picard’s Enterprise was as self-contained as a cruise ship and Voyager’s crew didn’t take much thrill in the journey).

I don’t know where I’m going with that, but

-i say no plots from TOS or the movies unless they make sense to the story and the characters.
-20 years ago, when i was writing my own (lame) prequel in high school, i didn’t really get past a scene where a young Spock gets some sort of lame (or maybe great) advice from Guinan in a Starbase watering hole. this is probably a very bad idea.
-so, yeah, no nods unless they make sense. No in-jokes. No campiness. Everyone uses the dark knight as a template here, but i think that’s right… It treated its characters and universe as part of our world, with real-world consequences and possibilities,
not this crazy comic place. I think it’s why bsg and caprice work as well as they do, and they work bestwhen it’s basically us, with a few not too distracting differences (keep the ambrosia and pyramid).
-itwouldbereallygreat to see strange new worlds, and it’s something the starwarsfilms did well (conveying tis really complex society of myriad species and cultures and incredible diversity), but keeping the ‘thisisforreal’ aspects that made Trek 2 work.
-no Shatner unless the scene is spectacular and essential.
-villains, if any, that are part of something larger, and with varied agendas and motivations — and human doubts, frailties, all that crap, being part of the problem (fringe, lost, this season’s smallville, unforgiven, moon)
-some mystery, Some hard sci fi
-basically more of what you started with Trek 09. You got the camraderie right, you got the characters right and you got the fun, suspense, action and emotional heft right. i say, don’t be limited to whereTrek has, er, literally gone before


728. Cygnus-X1 - October 17, 2010


Having the story of the ST sequel center around the crew and their relationships with each other is a good approach. But, can you tell us your thoughts about the role of Scientific concepts in the sequel? TNG being your favorite Trek series (as it is mine), and being as interested in cutting-edge topics in Physics and Cosmology as you are (you read up on Quantum Mechanics in preparation for the first film), aren’t you tempted to put some mind-blowing Scientific phenomena into the second film? Apart from the main plot device of the parallel universe via the worm-hole, the first film didn’t really try to blow our minds in the way that TNG episodes regularly did. Would you like to give that a try with the second Trek film? Or do you think that have to shy away from it for the purposes of mass-marketing?

729. Cygnus-X1 - October 17, 2010

(That is, to retain as large an audience as you got for the first film. Which, I don’t see as necessarily an issue, being that TNG managed to stay in business for 7 seasons with shows rich in Scientific concepts.)

730. P Technobabble - October 17, 2010

721. dm

I remember “Sneakers.” It’s a great movie, and I enjoy watching it from time to time. The cast is excellent.

731. Aurore - October 17, 2010

To Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman

Gentlemen,last time, you had the audacity to write a script
for a Star Trek movie without telling me ANYTHING about it.

This time, and although I know you NEED me to deliver your Oscar-worthy sequel, I’ll refrain from making any suggestions.

Yes, I’m petty like that.

732. pock speared - October 17, 2010

…oh sure, go ahead and use khan if we must. but can we use the new timeline to establish him as plucky, comic relief? a sort of one gloved, slightly fey, not-so-baddie?

cue bob marley:
“one glove,
one glove,
let’s get together
and kill jim kirk!”

p.s. khan had the best space-tits ever.

733. Red Dead Ryan - October 17, 2010


“p.s. khan had the best space-tits ever.”

Um, I kinda have to give that award to Seven Of Nine. But if you’re a fan of man-boobs, all the power to you!

I much prefer to see “space-tits” on women!

734. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010


Yes, just as long as there isn’t too much space between those tits!

735. Red Dead Ryan - October 17, 2010

Speaking of boobs, I hope we don’t see anymore “engineer Olsens” from now on! Olsen is what I’d call a “space boob”!

736. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010

Hmmmm, I think it’s time someone invented an anti-gravity bra! Yes, I’m going to start working on that right now!

737. Red Dead Ryan - October 17, 2010


A bigger and bolder shoulder boulder holder!

738. pock speared - October 17, 2010

you go, harry. although in space, space-tits are not troubled by gravity, as is evidenced by seven of nine, t’pol, etc.

is there is a consensus here that space-tits are more important than shatner cameos?

739. dmduncan - October 17, 2010

736: “Hmmmm, I think it’s time someone invented an anti-gravity bra!”

Already done. They’re called implants.

740. dmduncan - October 17, 2010

Any Syd Mead fans out there? Remember the self balancing unicycle he designed?


It’s finally here! Coolest mode of transport EVER!!!


741. Charla - October 17, 2010

The discussion degraded after #701.

742. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010

738. pock speared “space-tits are more important than shatner cameos”

Hey, just pay the Shat a bit extra to take his shirt off and you can have both!

743. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010

Q: The German word for bra?

A: Holtzemfromfloppen!

744. Phil - October 17, 2010

741. Charla – October 17, 2010

Just a bit…..

745. keachick - October 17, 2010

You guys crack me up – “holtsemfromfloppen” and they do too! This could be the longest thread ever, getting the largest number of posts. Anthony – am I right?

My problem, with all the talk about the JFK assassination is, if there was enough evidence found to prove collaboration and conspiracy, could the murder case be reopened and a prosecution made? It is not a matter of disregarding the events, but wondering if anything practical can done to bring any collaborators to justice? I find it curious that this topic should get so much attention on a thread that is supposed to be the writing of the Star Trek sequel. It would be more understandable if this were discussed around the time of the anniversary of JFK’s murder (for that is what it was), which is 22 November.

As for degraded – “space tits” are important. They have rights too – to be seen, especially since I did not know that there are such things as tits in space. Now that is surely a must-see…:))

What does SOE mean? Where I come from, in NZ, SOE stands for State Owned Enterprise like TVNZ (the government funded television network).

Also, does SAS mean what it means here – ie, Special Air Services, which are now mainly small groups of highly trained army personnel used on special, covert and high risk situations?

Please remember, we are now on the worldwide web which is wonderful and this is supposed to be about Star Trek, the writing/scripting of the sequel. I have read some comments which suggest that this Star Trek did not do as well outside the USA as was hoped. Well, I don’t know if that is true or not. I’ve always been a trekkie and I live on the other side of the world, which is where I first saw TOS.

746. Daoud - October 17, 2010

@743 It’s all clearing hiding in the physics of weight under gravity:

\./\./ = mg²

And we all know it was Professor ΘttΘ von Titzling who invented the Over-The-Shoulder-Boulder-Holder, although Monsieur Philip de Brassiere stole his ideas!

@JFK I strongly believe that Occam’s Razor holds here that a conspiracy is the simplest of answers as to how Oswald and Sirhan both managed to take out the brothers Kennedy. Heck, even the death of Joe Kennnedy is fishy as hell. Were we really stupid enough to fly explosive-laden planes kamikaze style, however with last-minute ejections? The whole APHRODITE project during World War II smells. To think the son of FDR was literally filming the end-moment of a Kennedy son’s life. Tie that into THE GRASSY KNOLL, Harry, and I’m buying quite a few tickets.

I also see the Chicago business as another backup plan. I don’t believe in coincidences. When I marched through Dallas in the 1986 Cotton Bowl parade with the Auburn University Marching Band, marching right past the Grassy Knoll in Dealey Plaza, we knew that the horse poop on the ground as we marched was intentional. Of course they had a Texas A&M equestrian unit first, followed by our band, rather than the Texas A&M band. THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE POOPER!

Anyway, I’ll be glad to see the PRIME DIRECTIVE and Kirk facing the choice between what is right morally, and what is right legally in Star Trek 2012.

747. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010


it sounds like when you were marching through Dealey Plaza, a second shit came from the direction of the grassy knoll! :>)

748. Phil - October 17, 2010

747. Harry Ballz – October 17, 2010

Freudian slip?

749. Harry Ballz - October 17, 2010


Nah, read his post about the horses crapping all over the street before his band came marching along. I thought it was a good “crap” pun!

750. Disinvited - October 18, 2010

The only thing I can think to add is that when it comes to following the flow of money in a conspiracy, I like to start at the top, His Imperial Highness Prince Don Louis McKinney Knight Dillon Kennedy Frazer Longton Palmer De Leon Caraway Pèpin, heir to the Carloginian and Holy Roman Empires, head of the Order of the Holy Ghost and the Order of the Paladin Knights, aka, Dr. Donald Lee Pippin, Jr:


751. Daoud - October 18, 2010

@747 Well, that horsecrap was indeed pretty grassy! But I think we’re making a straw argument. :o)

752. Harry Ballz - October 18, 2010

Q: in Amish country what do you call a guy with his arm stuck up a horse’s ass?

A: a mechanic!

753. --isobel - October 18, 2010

Two words — Pon Farr!

I ship Spock/Uhura, you see.

Shatner could play Tiberius Kirk and sing “I am my own Grandpa.”

754. Joey - October 20, 2010

I’d love to see Harry Mudd or Gary Seven in the next film.

755. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2010

And if Harry Mudd gets vaporised to a puddle of goo at the end, would that be called a mudd-puddle?

Anf if Gary Seven is tossed off a cliff by the Gamesters of Triskelion, wanting to see if he survives, should they all be shouting out (Vegas-style), “C’MON, SEVEN!”

just askin’…..

756. S. John Ross - October 20, 2010


Just a semantic difference, then. For me, the difference between “abuse” and “misuse” is intent. So, someone failing to understand Occam’s Razor might misuse it, but not abuse it, since abuse is deliberate rather than accidental.

Certainly, it’s occasionally abused as well (as I use the term) but much more often simply misused.

757. Harry Ballz - October 20, 2010

When I think about the difference between abuse and misuse, I finally do conclude, “ah, what’s the use?”

758. James - October 20, 2010

Bob Orci, I think you guys are trying to soften the blow/justify using Khan before it’s officially announced aren’t you? I’m cool with whatever you guys want to do. :)

759. Tommy - October 21, 2010

I just have 1 request – Pleaseha salot less lens flares. As much as I loved the 2009 movies, I think it would have been better with fewer lens flares.

760. skyjedi - October 21, 2010

I wish the real star trek i know and love would return, but that ship sailed in 1991.

This is star trek universe B or Alternate, but for some fans even calling it star trek is the rankest of heresies.

My favorite name is Star Trek in name only.

761. dmduncan - October 21, 2010

756. S. John Ross – October 20, 2010

If you’re trying to misuse the word abuse to confuse me, I’ve got news for yous: the blues that ensues when you lose your shoes after Hamley, Porco, Bacon, and Rind sues yous.

762. dmduncan - October 21, 2010

That wasn’t as good as V’s introductory speech.

763. Chadwick - October 23, 2010

760. skyjedi – October 21, 2010
I wish the real star trek i know and love would return, but that ship sailed in 1991.
This is star trek universe B or Alternate, but for some fans even calling it star trek is the rankest of heresies.
My favorite name is Star Trek in name only.

Just another person who can’t accept change. You come on here and make one comment and a negative one at that. The true fans are on there every day discussing all matter and you come one here and make one comment. Let me say that the people who post on here everyday, majority of them embrace ALL Star Trek from TOS to 2009!!!! Do you need to stick to the familiar because you are scare of what might happen? Don’t you dare tell me it just what you like and that its personal taste alone. I have been a Star Trek fan for twenty three of my twenty seven years of life. I was watching the premier of TNG Encounter At Farpoint with my father at age four not to mention TOS reruns, and I can’t stand the old mentality of no change is good change rhetoric!!! Star Trek has said its self more than once that “those people, those civilizations, those cultures that don’t embrace change, die.” Do you embrace the past and welcome to the future or do you just clutch to the memory of the past and past alone? Sorry but I dislike when people hate on the new movie while clinging to the original. I welcome and embrace all Star Trek for it teaches of embracing change, respecting past, welcoming all.

764. long time fan - November 6, 2010

I liked the new movie.I just wish that they would use some of the great stories from pocket books.Best Destiny,Strangers From The Sky,Prime Directive, Time For Yesterday,all were great stories.Any of these would make great movies.

765. steve - November 21, 2010

Bloofthirsty Klingon’s! – that look like us and lots of ’em! And lets leave the space/time continuum alone! Harry Mudd tries to con Uhura into a tribble but Kirk says “dont even think about it”.

766. Todd B - December 29, 2010

Please no Shatner, no Khan ( however if you do do a Khan remake get Antonio Banderas, would be a very fitting Khan! ) and NO MORE LENSE FLARES!!!!! That was annoying!!!

The one thing Trek seriously lacked in the past, was bare knuckle brawling and epic space fights. The closest we saw to that was the DS9 War with the Dominion.

Damn the prime directive and the political BS. This is KIRK, this is the ENTERPRISE and this is a brand new universe !!! We don’t want a happy ending, we don’t want another plot where we, ( The Federation), create a problem, just to solve it ) Let’s see what this baby can do!!!

Maybe this is a good script Primer.

Setting – A Federation Laboratory working on a secret project. The project allows Federation starships to fold space and instantly appear at any point in the galaxy. Klingons get word of this and after their own battles for territory with other aliens and the Romulans, get desperate. They see this as a first strike opportunity to take down the homeworlds of the Federation.

The Drive a hard vanguard into federation space to get their hands on the new drive technology. Killing and destroying anything in their path. Using new cloaking technology they get what they wanted. What the feds and klingons don’t know yet was that the scientists haven’t perfected the technology.

The scientists had kept this information to themselves to keep funding going. Several Federation battlecruisers were destroyed in the attack and of course enterprise is en-route to help but too late. Enterprise has to retreat after fighting off several Klingon warships. But this gives them a chance to regroup and come up with a plan to defeat the cloaking technology and get the fold-space drive back or destroy it.

Insert Blood thirsty Klingon General on a mission to become Emporer and topple the Federation at the same time. Federation and Klingon imperial forces end up having to work together to stop the General. Kirk Spock and Sulu fight side by side with Imperial warriors to Navigate the general’s ship and take him down along with the drive, and in the end they succeed after heavy losses and lot’s of blood drawn… both sides limp back to their corner and lick their wounds and keep a very uneasy eye upon eachother. An uneasy and very short truce is agreed upon. BLAM!!! Movie Finished!!!

SO, When do i start working with the writers :)

767. Vec - January 3, 2011

No villans! Just great Star Trek style sci-fi! Throw in some klignons!

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