Damon Lindelof On Star Trek Sequel Writing Process, Secrecy & Nerding Out On Trek | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Damon Lindelof On Star Trek Sequel Writing Process, Secrecy & Nerding Out On Trek May 2, 2011

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

Star Trek sequel co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof is a guest on this week’s popular Nerdist podcast where he touches on Star Trek, describing the collaborative writing process with (Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman), JJ Abram’s trademark secrecy and how cool it is to be writing for Trek. See excerpts below.  


Lindelof talks Star Trek writing collaboration, secrecy and nerding out

Damon Lindelof is a guest on this week’s popular Nerdist podcast with Chris Harwick. The hour long podcast covers a lot of ground with a little bit of Star Trek. Of interest was Lindelof talking about what writing is like for him in the post-Lost era where he no longer is working with Carlton Cuse and a writers room:

I function best in collaboration so I have sought out writing partners….On Trek 1, I produced it, but was obviously very involved in the story process with JJ [Abrams], Bob [Orci], and Alex [Kurtzman], so that was great. For Trek 2 I am actually writing, but again it functions a lot more like a TV show. We are all sitting in a room together throwing ideas around and seeing what sticks…I do not like sitting by myself staring at the blank page.

Damon also talked about dealing with the secrecy on Lost and Star Trek:

It’s tough. JJ is really good at secrecy and really good at playing the game because ultimately people want to know but they don’t want to have stuff spoiled for them. … We are working on Trek 2 now and there is such an expectation that it is top secret, because everything we do is top secret. And with that expectation comes this idea that "they are going to do something that is totally mind-blowing that is going to friggin’ fry our brains!" Because we are keeping it such a secret. As opposed to the fact that we are just keeping it a secret because we don’t want the audience to know too much going in. The fact that people went to go to see Trek and they didn’t know we were going to blow up Vulcan. They might have known that time travel was involved and they knew that Nimoy was in the movie, but they didn’t understand how it all worked so when you get to that point in the movie it’s cool because you get to emotionally experience it without being primed for it. It requires a
tremendous amount of – there are only so many people you can include in your circle of trust.

Lindelof defends "Star Trek" secrecy in order to maintain the "emotional experience" of big surprises – like the destruction of Vulcan

Damon also talked about being able to write what he called "professional fan fiction," in some of his favorite franchises, and specifically noting on Star Trek:

That is the coolest thing ever is playing in those universes and writing "Kirk" and dialog, and you are like "oh my god!" It was particularly awesome writing for – as he was slugged in the script – "ORIGINAL SPOCK." Because you are like "Nimoy is actually going to say these words!"

The podcast also contains some talk about how "awesome" the Star Trek movie was, with Chris Hardwick talking about going to see the movie with his friend Wil Wheaton. Listen to the full Nerdist Podcast with Damon Lindelof at Nerdist.com, to hear Damon talk more about Twitter, his favorite TV shows, how he got his start with JJ Abrams and Lost, nerding out meeting George Lucas, and more.

Lindelof still excited to be writing for Star Trek and collaborating with Orci, Kurtzman and Abrams (photo: Anthony Pascale)


1. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 2, 2011

Ok it’s a secret… but I want to know as much as possible… so I hope somebody gets it… because I say again, I like spoilers… and there are no spoilers to keep me away from what I want to see … on the contrary, I’ll be more curious!

But I do not need to know everything… I want to be surprised too!

:-) :-)

2. John E. Kirk - May 2, 2011

Keep it secret… keep it awesome… keep us surprised… but keep the clues coming… :)
You guys are awesome, and you’re all over it!

3. moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2011


4. Saavik - May 2, 2011

Blowing up Vulcan wasn’t emotional for me in the movie. Cause the movie involved time travel… and I was waiting, that the timeline was restored… Like in any other Trek plot.

I was even taking a look at my watch every now and then, wondering why they haven’t travelled back in time, already. The slight shock came after the movie. And when I watched the DVD I could take a closer look at my feelings.

5. Samuel - May 2, 2011

@4 – that was one of the themes I liked in STAR TREK: you cannot restore things and you cannot go back (a theme often found in LOST). You deal with what you have now and move on. it may not be the best of things; it is what it is.

6. Towaway - May 2, 2011

I really wish he would stop calling it Trek 2.

7. Browncoat1984 - May 2, 2011

To quote Gandalf “Keep it secret, keep it safe…” I like knowing some basic stuff like “time travel is involved” so I have SOME idea of what to expect, but I don’t like to know the whole story so that every big moment, whether its Spock dying in Trek II, Vader’s big reveal at the end of Empire or Vulcan blowing up in Trek 11 is a surprised to me when I first watch it.

I loved Lost, Battlestar Galactica and Trek ’09 partly because I was never spoiled very much with either of those. I could sit down, watch it and have NO idea where they were taking the story. In fact, with Lost and BSG I just said “I’m gonna stop trying to figure it out and just enjoy the ride” and I’m sort of in the same mindset with the new Trek. Keep up the great work guys, I know whatever you deliver will be fun!

8. trekker 5 - May 2, 2011

well this is awesome! and i mean it. i’m happy,Damon you helped make my day very awesome!! thank you! i want to be surprised as well,i loved watching 09 and knowing Nimoy was in it but not knowing how. but at the same time,i want a little something something to smile about,you know? (like when its done and hopefuly J.J s at the wheel!) :)

9. Markonian - May 2, 2011

Trek 2 is not Trek II, so I see no problem in it. Yeah, I like surprises in movies, so keeping the secrets is cool, Imho.

10. Michael Hall - May 2, 2011

Why do I not find the phrase “Throwing around ideas and seeing what sticks” particularly inspiring?

11. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 3, 2011

As long as they are throwing our ideas around, especially mine…:)

12. Dr. Cheis - May 3, 2011

“The fact that people went to go to see Trek and they didn’t know we were going to blow up Vulcan.”

Sorry, I saw it coming. It was IN THE TRAILER!

13. Geekette - May 3, 2011

I thought the blowing up of Vulcan was a big mistake. It makes Spock an emotional cripple, and there will have to be numerous heavy references to it in the sequel. Boring. That and the big mistake of the Uhura romance boxes two main characters into a corner.

14. Christopher Roberts - May 3, 2011

4. I’m afraid I have to agree. The destruction of Vulcan wasn’t emotional to me. Shock and awe, certainly. But my reaction was more… “Okay. I know enough about Star Trek. I’m just going to wait them out, until they fix that.” I’m still waiting…

15. captain_neill - May 3, 2011

I wonder how Trek fans Damien thought he would anger or shock with the decision to destroy Vulcan.

I hated the decsion as people would already be aware of but I think it would be a crime if the repercussions weren’t addresed in Star Trek XII.

However, as far as I am concerned Vulcan is still there in the prime universe.

I kinda got spoil about Vulcan but was really shocked and suprised when you killed Amanda.

The destruction of Vulcan was the point in the film I was wondering WTF? I think this must have been the make or break moment amongst the fans.

Doesn’t ruin the film, and I guess it takes us out of the comfort zone which is probably a good thing. But its the one part of the film I find the most painful to watch.

Yet it is only fiction but still.

16. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


It was more for shock and I think it could have been more emotional. If it is not mentioned in Star Trek XII then some interesting dram will have been overlloked.

All I can say is thank god it is still there in the prime universe.

17. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2011

They should spend a day or two with Steve Jobs and talk about advancements in 30-50 years from now that they can incorporate into the movie now so Star Trek continues it’s reputation for being the precursor to modern technology.

18. Mel - May 3, 2011

I knew that Vulcan would be destroyed, before the movie came into the cinemas. There were spoilers about this.

19. Dr. Image - May 3, 2011

As long as it doesn’t suck as bad as the Lost finale, it’ll be fine.

20. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#19. Amen and pray to God!!

21. Christopher Roberts - May 3, 2011

I imagine the first spoilers about Vulcan emerged from that special preview screening, where fans attending thought they were there to watch “The Wrath of Khan”. Before that, secrecy was absolutely airtight.

The trailer clip was a unknown planet being destroyed and at the time, I’d defy anybody from clearly identifying it as Vulcan. It could easily be Mars or M-113 or indeed any desert-world.

22. Trek Nerd Central - May 3, 2011

Keep me in the dark, please. I hate spoilers.

23. Third Remata'Klan - May 3, 2011

These guys do it right. As much as I want to know, as much as I’m going to spoil myself, I’m glad they’re here to save me from myself.

24. Third Remata'Klan - May 3, 2011

@14, 15, 16

As horrible as it sounds, I’m fully in support of the destruction of Vulcan. (Yes, more emotion came from Amanda’s death than the death of the planet, but still.) It was absolutely the best way for them to show that everything old is new again, and anything can happen in this new universe, short of actually killing off one of the main characters, which they would never have recovered from.

25. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#24,beside looking at it with a writers point of view,(which i get because i my self write) you heartless person!! (just kidding.) but now that you bring it to light,who thinks they would kill off a main crew memeber? i think not;but i’ve made bad calls before,so,whata ya think?

26. Christopher Roberts - May 3, 2011

It’s a double standard. If you can be okay with something that upsets some, you should also be prepared for upset yourself… somewhere down the line.

27. Danpaine - May 3, 2011

Vulcan being destroyed wasn’t emotional for me whatsoever, and I really had no problem with it. Unfortunately, most of the the shots of the new E didn’t provoke much of a response in me either (except when they come out of warp into the field of destroyed ships – that was cool).

Anything really stirring came from the entire Kelvin scene, Nimoy’s lines, and the death of Amanda. In my humble opinion, of course.

28. Dom - May 3, 2011

No issues with destroying Vulcan. It’s an alt-universe anyway and I really doubt on a practical level that it’ll change much in Star Trek other than if they go the TNG route of mooching around Federation space on diplomatic missions, rather than properly exploring far outside Federation space. Away from Starfleet, Klingons and so on, who really cares?

Vulcan’s destruction was spoiled early on by Ain’t It Cool, but Amanda’s death was the bigger shock. I think Spock should be back to normal by the next film. In early TOS he usually referred to his parents in the past tense anyway.

As for killing off an established crew member, I’m all in favour. Keep Kirk, Spock and McCoy, but any of the others should be viable targets. Sulu or Chekov are obvious ones to get killed off. Maybe Sulu bites the dust and gets replaced by his sister! ;)

29. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#28. (rolls eyes at Sulu geting replaced by his sister) let me guess,shes hot too right? but if i was gonna kill somebody off,it would be Sulu,i got no beef with him or anything but,i like Chekov! :)

30. rogue_alice - May 3, 2011

I have my fingers in my ears. Why you ask, when this is a text media? Because it feels good.

31. TOM DUMAS - May 3, 2011

Please !!! Please!!! Please!!! Whatever you do if not done already don’t let these fans (OK, which I happen to be one of) influence you in bringing back HARRY MUDD as a major character involved with the plot. In fact, if I were you, I would’nt bring the “KLINGONS” back until the 3rd film. Reason being, the anticipation for it would be so big, it would have to feel like you’re going through the motions of the first film, making it that much better than planned! But, if I know you and studio heads, they’re probably laid out in plot for this film! In any event, good luck!!!!!!!!!!

32. GaryP - May 3, 2011

Blowing up Vulcan didn’t affect me as emotionally as destroying Romulus in the TNG timeline, which is exactly what they did.

It’s a shame that they were willing to do something so bold and yet almost make it an afterthought. I would have love to have seen the TNG timeline reconcile with such a huge ordeal.

That’s the real tragedy.

33. Danpaine - May 3, 2011

…come to think of it, since we’re in an alt-universe now anyway, it dawns on me that it really doesn’t matter too much to me who/what they kill off in the future film(s).

I’m a Prime timeline guy – no way around it. And that’s history.

34. CmdrR - May 3, 2011

I’m just hoping the Supreme Court doesn’t buy into the Hollywood sequel tradition of blowing up stories. We don’t need to make the story bigger, just better. We don’t need: 4 separate villains, the death of a main character, “the universe on the brink of winking out.”

Just a good story, PLEASE.

35. AJ - May 3, 2011

Guys, this is all orchestrated PR.

JJ needs zazz and image-appeal for his personal “brand.” Lindelof is doing the same thing, especit.ally as his cred grows on Trek and the “Alien” prequel/non-prequel he’s writing for Sir Ridley Scott.

I just hope ‘boborci’ is not an army of young, unpaid PR interns, but the real deal. His writing style seems to match how he speaks….

36. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

Bob Orci and his team are the best damn writers we could hope for Trek,and i’m glad they took it,because StarTrek scares alot of film makers and writer teams,heck,it scares non-fans before they watch it!!

37. Dee - lvs moon' surface - May 3, 2011

The Lost finale was GREAT! … And I’m not expecting disappointment in Trek 2 (? )!

:-) :-)

38. Thorny - May 3, 2011


– Nero wants to destroy the Federation because they, uh… did nothing in particular to him.

– NewKirk and Spock Prime just happen to meet in a cave in the middle of a frozen wasteland.

– NewKirk makes Captain a few hours after graduating Starfleet Academy.

Best damn writers? Uh, if you say so.

39. Bucky - May 3, 2011

No surprise for me. Blowing up Vulcan was spoiled by me by this site about 3 days before I saw the movie, and it was just some random interview with Zoe Saldana and it’s like “Oh, you blow up Vulcan in this movie, what do you think about that?” It’s hard to even lightly browse Trek sites before a big opening otherwise you’re going to have random stuff spoiled.

40. Neumann - May 3, 2011

I actually think Trek II would make a decent title, helps distinguish it from the first movie series and avoids confusion with “Star Wars” (LOTS of people keep confusing the two because of the common word). Besides, when you say “Trek II,” people will probably figure out it means “Star Trek II” (heck, the first posters just had the darn icon without words and people knew what it was).

41. captain_neill - May 3, 2011



That’s unfair to DC Fontana, Gene Coon, Gene Roddenberry, Ron Moore, Michael Pillar, Brannon Braga, Rene Echevarria, Mike Sussman, Jeri Taylor and others.

A lot of the writers I have mentioned have written stonger Star Trek.

DC Fontana helped develop the TOS characters.

Orci and Kurtzman wrote a great event movie but compared to a lot of the shows it doesn’t compare.

42. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2011

I remember seeing Logan’s Run as a teenager and the sexiness of every girl on screen was just so impressive. Tasteful but good.

Would like to see that taken up just a notch in the sequel.

It would be congruent with the original series too.

43. Simon - May 3, 2011

#17 – Spend a day or 2 with Steve Jobs to find out new tech?

LOL: Jobs just refines and markets EXISTING TECHNOLOGY!

44. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2011

and makes it cool and desirable. The guy still knows where things are heading.

45. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2011

I would have suggested Bill Gates but the Enterprise would have to crash six times during the movie.

46. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


No I think the TNG approach is the best way Star Trek then semi colon then title. No number and definitely keep Star Trek in the title.

Star Trek II is Wrath of Khan and always will be.

47. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

i’m talking about Trek after 45 years! and 6 shows,and 10 (now 11) movies! thats alot to take on now you have to admit!! and theres us,and you know,were demanding sometimes,i know i am. and that scares some people,as far as what i said about the writers being the best,i still mean that,and no story is without flaws,not even the ones in TOS. i’m not trying to make people mad,i’m just speaking my mind.

48. River Song - May 3, 2011

Shhhh! Spoilers….

49. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


Fair enough, Just pointing out that the current writers are not the best ever writers in Trek IMO.

I think DC Fontana, Ron Moore, Michael Pillar and Brannon Braga are stronger.

50. Corinthian7 - May 3, 2011

I love Damon’s work on Lost so I think he will enhance a great writing team. As for the audience not knowing that Vulcan was destroyed, well I have to assume that Damon was referring to the portion of the audience that did not see the theatrical trailer. Mr Orci, if your reading this can you please tell the guys that put the trailers together not to spoil all of your surprises. Don’t get me wrong it was a fantastic trailer but it did give away far too much and seemed to undermine all the secrecy JJ had previously done well to maintain.

51. SirBroiler - May 3, 2011

They don’t need to throw ideas around – I gave them the entire storyline several months back. Hope they take my advice.

52. Trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#49.thank you for understanding!:) my favorite episode of TOS is ‘Amok Time’ i think it was by Gene Coon,i’m not sure,but i do love all the TOS writers,they gave us what we have today.

53. SoonerDave - May 3, 2011

@49 true, but keep in mind the body of work from the old crew is a lot larger than what the new crew has done…

54. Harry Ballz - May 3, 2011

42. “the sexiness of every girl on screen…would like to see that in the sequel”

Chris, that is the most logical, yet horny, request I’ve ever read on this site! :>)

55. Simon - May 3, 2011

45 – Windows crashing jokes are as tired as the original cast. I see some people are still butthurt that they have utterly failed as a computer company and rely on phones and MP3 players.

Besides, TREK 2012 will have less than a $200 million budget. They can’t afford Apple’s overpriced plastic.

56. Vultan - May 3, 2011

If these kids can’t handle a deadline, get some adult supervision from Nick Meyer or, better yet, have him rewrite this thing. I could go for a few more Shakespeare and Melville references in Trek. Better than Bud and Nokia.

57. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


Theodore Sturgeon wrote the original story and DC Fontan tweaked it to the one that was filmed.

58. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


Sorry for not sharing your thoughts on the new writers. Just whenever i think of the new writers I just cannot shake the pain that is Transformers 2

59. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 3, 2011

Spock now an emotional cripple? When wasn’t he? In TOS, he definitely was at times – eg Galileo 7 and That Which Survives. He was often mean and sarcastic to subordinates. He was not a good commander, which is why Kirk got that job, because he was good at it. When Spock ever had to take over, even for a short time, he became a mean SOB. Kirk kept him in line. The episode – The Doomsday Machine was an exception and of course, one of the best episodes of TOS.

Neither the Spock or Uhura characters are “boxed in”.

60. Admiral Obama - May 3, 2011

@56 – apparently theres gonna be some Nicholas Meyer news announced by AICN tomorrow so we’ll see

wonder if it’ll be anything to do with Trek 2? (script polish? directing?!)

61. Chadwick - May 3, 2011

Well said Damon because that is exactly the way it is. I want to know, I’m dying to know but I don’t want to be spoiled, I want surprises, I want the anticipation.

“when you get to that point in the movie it’s cool because you get to emotionally experience it without being primed for it.” So true. I was not ready for that opening scene, it blew me away. It was badass then made my heart sink because of this man who’s son was JUST born and now he has to sacrifice himself, it was a tear jerker and then BAM this brilliant opening theme music and with the bold, gleaming STAR TREK in your face. Masterfully executed.

I can’t wait for the next movie and to be blown away again. To hear that this movie is even more secretive than the previous is great. I want it on complete lock down, as much as I want to know, I hope there are no leaks. Which sucks for trekmovie.com but would be better for people to be surprised.

62. Josh - May 3, 2011

While I love the 2009 movie, I do take issue with the destruction of both Romulus and Vulcan. The supernova the destroyed Romulus in the prime universe could have eradicated much of Federation space as well. How far is Romulus from the Federation border? Nero could have destroyed large portions of the surface would out destroying the whole planet. It would have been nearly as dramatic would out having to close off future stories, especially when Vulcan personnel, research, and technology is so vital to the Federation. This would have serious consequences for the Federation. I’m sorry but it still bothers me, but I suppose that is the point. The new ship design updates the Enterprise well. Filming the engineering section in the brewery was a good trick that allows JJ to film in large shapes giving the ship huge scale. It would be expensive to recreate that scale in a studio. Fans who are considered with Kirk’s age need to realize that Chris Pine it 30 years old. The actor is in shape so he looks younger than he really is.
The next movie should utilize some of the main alien species in an original way like the last season of Star Trek Enterprise. The screenwriters shouldn’t be afraid to continue approaching Star Trek from a different angle that “blows up” the formula. The sequel could also start a larger story arc that will take 2 films to conclude. Maybe you could incorporate elements from the political thriller/ conspiracy genres as a guide post. Some hidden threat (attempted coup or subversion) that place the Federation at risk from the inside with help from the Klingons or one of the other species. Maybe something that resembles Spock’s World, but that doesn’t deal with Vulcan’s potential succession from the Federation with more dramatic elements. Replace Vulcan with Andoria. Or the screenwriters could also create a story in which the Federation experiences a technological/economic/political crisis. You could start the film with some dramatic or disorientating scene with Kirk and crew trapped in Starfleet HQ, Federation Council, or some other planet or location under siege. They need to forge some despair way back to the Enterprise and escape to another Federation world, such as Andoria, to get help. Or they need to escape San Francisco on foot to escape or travel to another part of United Earth to save Star Fleet and the Federation. God speed with the finishing the script; I cannot wait to see what you all have come up with. I’m sure you’ll do a great job. Best of luck.

63. Mike - May 3, 2011

Josh, buddy: it’s just an entertainment franchise. All that energy you expended could’ve been used for something better in your life… really, dude. It’s just STAR TREK.

64. Christopher Roberts - May 3, 2011

56. & 60. Yes, I’m wondering about that too.

Incidentally Meyer’s DVD commentaries on STII and VI (with Denny Martin Flynn) are simply the best I think I’ve ever heard.

65. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#58,captain,now THAT,my dear friend,was,and is painful until this day!!!! but i love them none the less.

66. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 3, 2011

#63 Really, Mike? Josh’s post is nothing to what many have written in relation to Star Trek, even on this site. What about the fanfiction, for a start? He presented some good ideas and possibilities. This site seems to allow for some venting of imagination. Besides, we are Bob Orci’s consultants. He said so himself. Pretty cool stuff!

67. Vultan - May 3, 2011


Agreed! Meyer’s commentaries have some great insight into how those Trek movies were made, as well as the creative process and the balance between art and entertainment. Highly recommended.

Also, Moore and Braga’s commentary for ST: Generations is a good listen… though not so much insightful. It’s entertaining (and a bit surprising) to hear a couple of writers tear apart and bash their own movie!

68. dennycranium - May 3, 2011

Reading some of these posts and I just go “geez”
This is why latenight talk show hosts blast and ridicule Trekkers.
“I’m glad Vulcan still exsts in the Prime Universe?”
Guys, Ladies- it’s FICTION.
I wonder is Shatner giggles like a schoolgirl when he sees or hears this stuff at conventions.
He probably mutters his now infamous SNL line under his breath

69. Rocket Scientist - May 3, 2011

49. captain_neill

I’m with you on the subject of Trek writers. This latest movie was fun, but it’s hardly the zenith of all Treks. Much better stories have been told by other writers.

70. Star Trek Sequel Fan Already - May 3, 2011

As much as I love spoilers, I love feeling the emotional experience when I watch the movie for the first time more. Good call, Lindelof (as much as the waiting and suspense will kill me until the movie premieres…)

71. Rastaman - May 3, 2011

I’d at least be interested in some casting rumors for supporting roles … even if we don’t know what those roles are.

72. Red Dead Ryan - May 3, 2011


You forgot about “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country”, when Spock had to take command of the Enterprise after Kirk and McCoy were arrested. Spock was able to come up with a plan to enter Klingon space undetected and rescue the captain and the doctor while avoiding detection. He also figured out that the torpedoes that hit Chancellor Gorkon’s Battle Cruiser came from a cloaked Bird-Of-Prey.

Also, Spock was able to retrieve Kirk from the anomaly in “The Tholian Web”. He was also able to get the Enterprise free from the web, which would have destroyed the ship otherwise.

73. gingerly - May 3, 2011

“they are going to do something that is totally mind-blowing that is going to friggin’ fry our brains!”

ಠ_ಠ Ya’ damn right.

And it had better be.


No offense, SirBroiler, but I hope they don’t take your advice or anything more specific than just making a quality film.

Extensive fan-service is always a bad idea.

Fans usually ask for things that either only matter to a very small subset of people or retain a status quo in the fandom that comes across as the same old, same old…

Which, when you think about the subject matter and stars of TOS and (especially!) given era that it aired, ironically goes against *the true spirit* of Trek.

74. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

#70,i agree!! i would love to hear something like that! and i just wanta stop right now and say,i kinda like the pharse,’Nerding Out’. i’m pretty sure i’ve done that before.

75. trekker 5 - May 3, 2011

sorry,i was talking about #71.

76. D-Rock - May 3, 2011

I remember seeing an interview one time that fans like star trek because it makes them feel comfortable, like wearing a familiar pair of slippers (paraphrasing). I think that’s true and not necessarily a terrible thing for the shows, but the writers (like Moore and Braga) have admitted that stuck them in a box creatively. Hard to remain fresh after all the little rules and canon and facing the fist-pumping from fans if all the little pieces don’t come together it, must be.

With the movies, the stakes must be bigger, more radical steps must be taken especially since we’re only seeing these every couple of years. And if you want to have trek as a spectacle, gonna need general audience dollars.

Loved the lens flares, the brewery, Spock/Uhura and the fact that Kirk was cocky but kept getting his a$$ kicked in hand to hand fights….kinda like Indiana Jones. He is easier to root for and relate to.

Little tired of the constant wingeing about the lens flares, shaky cams and ESPECIALLY the brewery….No ESPECIALLY the lens flares. Liked all of this, I understand some people don’t, but I’ve seen these boards fill up with the same commentators saying the same things over and over. And over. Get that you like Trek, but all that stuff still exists.

I hope the makers of this just do their thing.

Final note to a long post. I actually haven’t seen the entire movie, I left immediately when Robau sat down in his captain’s chair and was missing his Starfleet badge.

77. sean - May 3, 2011


Hello sweetie

78. Basement Blogger - May 3, 2011

I dont’ really want to know a lot of the details of the movie unless they throw out a concept like alternate reality. That’s so I can research the topic and not get confused about how the writers handle time travel. The good thing about this website, is that it interviewed Bob Orci a few months before the 2009 movie and he explained it was like TNG “Paralllels.”

The problem in the 2009 movie was that they explained parallel universe in two words, “alternate reality.” End of discussion. Okay, there was a short comment about the destinies changing.. Still, it was not a major plot point since the whole idea was to break away from the old canon or prime canon. And before you say, it was a major plot point, I bet money they’re not going to try to restore the old universe in the next movie..

You see many Trekkers went by the old rules of time travel. (link) Go back in time, mess up the timeline. See “The City on the Edge of Forever.” DS9’s “Trials and Tribble-ations.” Countless episodes of Voyager.

My fear is that Damon Lindleof will bring a “Lost” philosophy to Star Trek. The reason why he and Cuse didn’t want to explain major things in Lost was what I call “the fear of midi-chlorians.” That’s the overexplaining of the Force in Star Wars: The Phantom Menance.” Yet it wasn’t the thing that killed that movie. Try things like the annyoying kid and Jar Jar Binks.

Remember his season six of Lost? Sideways world was purgatory. No explanation of the supernatural stuff of the Island. The castaways survive a nuclear explosion! And my favorite, the explanation of Sideways world. “They made a world so that they could find each other.” So why did Sayid create an unhappy existence until the end? Lazy and contrived.

The good? Lost is not Star Trek. I also trust big time Trekker Bob Orci. Memo to the writers too, please watch the use of undefined Macguffins. (Link.) . They can be overused.

1) Trekkers at Las Vegas convention confused over parallel timeline vs. the old view of time travel.

2) definition of Macguffins

79. sean - May 3, 2011


The reason Apple has focused on mobile tech is because that’s the future. The era of the personal computer is slowly winding down. Ask most kids what they want for a present, most will ask for an iPad or a smartphone over a PC. Also, Windows crashing jokes will continue to be funny until Microsoft actually decides to vet an operating system before launching it.

80. Basement Blogger - May 3, 2011

@ 78

Sorr, about not giving you a reference to where Lost writers are afraid of midi-chlorians. In Entertainment Weekly, 2-5-10; Lost writers refuse to explain things because of “midi-cholrians” refering to the explanaiton of the Force in Star Wars: The Phantom Menance. Page. 31.

81. Cogitator X - May 3, 2011

Let’s be honest, the 2009 movie was 75% scenes from previous Trek shows & movies. Everything from the ceti eel from TWOK to Nero’s targeting computer (& accompanying music) from STVI. It would take an entire page to list the scenes lifted from more original writers.

82. Red Dead Ryan - May 3, 2011


So, what’s your point?

“The Original Series” was “lifted” from “Forbidden Planet” which in turn was lifted from “The Tempest” but takes place in space. TOS also “borrowed” from “The Twilight Zone”. “Star Wars” borrowed heavily from “Lord Of The Rings” as well as “Flash Gordon”. Ron Moore’s “Battlestar Galactica” borrowed from “Deep Space Nine”, “Space: Above And Beyond” and the original BSG, which was a poor man’s “Star Wars” in of itself. I could go on and on, but everyone borrows something from someone else these days.

83. Jack - May 3, 2011

82. Hey, they called those homages. I know.

I’m wondering how much the writers/producers were worried about the fans, as in, we gotta show/mention _________ or the fans, who are already a little oversensitive because JJ liked Star Wars, will flip out. Or whether it was their own fannish, “wouldn’t it be awesome if…” which, looking at a lot of the story suggestions made on this site, mine included, rarely works out well.

The best Trek movie (Star Trek II), and we can argue this, wasn’t made for TOS fans, didn’t have “hey, look fans” moments (even with using Khan and staying true to the world of the series), and had a coherent story, rather than, “hey, we’ve never seen Kirk (ride a bicycle, climb a mountain, make eggs, whatever) before.” Well, it had, hey we’ve never seen Kirk deal with loss, death, his own mortality before — but that’s the coherent story part.

84. Vultan - May 3, 2011

To me Trek ’09 was just Nemesis but with a younger, more energetic cast and director. Pretty much the same storyline there.

But please, no more mad villains with superweapons. Ming the Merciless can only be done so many times.

85. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2011

@79 “Also, Windows crashing jokes will continue to be funny until Microsoft actually decides to vet an operating system before launching it.”

Spot on.

Though comparing them to the original crew was not so bad, if they were remotely tired they would not have used those same characters for the new movie.

86. captain_neill - May 3, 2011


Which is why I am against another supervillain out for revenge. It can become passe as if they are trying to do a villain to rival Khan and never quite achieving it.

Sorry bout criticising the writing of the new team but its just it did not feel as strong this time. I think saying they captured the fun aspect of Trek is right but maybe it doesn’t fully have the heart of Star Trek.

As long as the writers understand Star Trek then future movie will still be good entertainment.

87. Keachick (rose pinenut) - May 4, 2011

#72 Spock improved his people skills as he got older. I was not talking about him doing what needed to be done as in working out what a problem was and finding a solution. He did that. However, it was the way he treated some of the subordinates is what I did not like. He improved by the time they got to do the movies, but in TOS, well, I think everyone was more than pleased to have Kirk back in that chair.

88. Dom - May 4, 2011

29. trekker 5 ‘rolls eyes at Sulu geting replaced by his sister) let me guess,shes hot too right?’

Well the ‘;)’ was hint that I was joking! Grace Park perhaps? (joking!)

But seriously, I’m all in favour of shaking up the supporting cast a bit. For a start, the original lineup is still a touch male-centric, so a female helmsman or navigator wouldn’t go amiss. Also, I’d love to see Arex and M’Ress get a pop at live-action, big screen star(trek)dom!

The great thing about the new universe is that we get new adventures with Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Seeing them head off in a slightly different direction is part of the fun of the new Star Trek!

As for stories about Federation economic crises, the fallout of Vulcan’s destruction, the Kilingons and so on: no thanks! That’s for a hypothetical TV show to explore perhaps. Just put the Enterprise on its own, far outside known Federation space, exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new life and new civilisations, boldly going where no man has gone before. It worked in the 1960s and ought still to work now!

89. Barney - May 4, 2011

Plot secrecy is good. But I’d like to know if there’s a role for Shatner. Will they do something with Kirk Prime? I don’t think it’s too much to ask and it’s not a spoiler either way. If Shatner’s in the movie, the buzz and debate becomes over how he’s used. If he’s not, then at least we get a straight answer and they won’t have the disappointment of his exclusion. I’d appreciate the honesty.

90. chrisfawkes.com - May 4, 2011

I’m thinking that if after the next batman film they do Frank Millers The Dark Knight Returns about an aging batman and it does well at the cinema then we will suddenly see a film about a restless aging Kirk staring William Shatner.

91. Daoud - May 4, 2011

Must be a film using only the established characters somehow… if there were a major character, wouldn’t we be seeing a casting call right around now?
Something like… Pike, injured again while saving cadets when a baffle plate explodes, uses a method of time travel and attempts to go back in time to save the Kelvin? Kirk is sent to retrieve him, and must choose to beam his father out or not in time, etc.

92. chrisfawkes.com - May 4, 2011

Given the secrecy no we would not be seeing any casting call.

93. Simon - May 4, 2011

#79-85: Windows 7. Look it up, it’s been out for almost a couple years now. But that would require taking off the Apple Reality Distortion Field. Kids ask for the shiniest toys, and then get bored with them (plus they don’t have to pay the dataplans). Just look at all the Wiis and Tickle Me Elmos gathering dust. *Mature Adults* want something more practical. For business, they use Windows and Office, for home productivity they use Windows and Office. For games they use PC, XBOX 360, PS3, even Wii. For trendy gimmicks, they use Apple products.

94. Jack - May 5, 2011

91. Please, no time travel. Or TOS retellings. Or revenge. Or resets. Or sudden, improbable romances. Or any of those famous lines which were never actually ever said on TOS, like “beam me up, Scotty,” “Damn it, Jim,” and, “she canna take much more of this, Captain.”

95. Jack - May 5, 2011

ps. the romance part wasn’t a dig at Spock/Uhura, it was a dig against the convention in which heroes have time for an all-consuming, slow-motion-lovemaking-required romance with a ridiculously hot someone they’ve just met and will likely never see again, all while all hell is breaking loose and they, and maybe 2 or 3 of their pals, must fight to stop it.

96. Rusty0918 - May 5, 2011


I didn’t care much for the lens flares myself, but here’s why people didn’t like the brewery:

1. It was anachoristic looking, out of place on a 23rd century starhsip. That’s not to say want a shiny gleaming area with glowing warp core, blah blah blah. The basic idea, the more utilitarian with pipes and such is actually not a bad idea. But the execution of it was atrocious. In fact, I know someone who couldn’t stand the brewery who actually has been on naval ships. So there’s my support.

2. Cheap. Well, not just the engineering but that communications center. I keep thinking about movies that I saw on “Mystery Science Theater 3000″ such as “Space Mutiny” and others which went for that schlock.

3. Possibilities of horrible bloopers: I heard some people say they saw concrete walls or bricks, although I can’t fully confirm it.

I agree with captain_neill about a lot of things, although of course, I can’t fully support Brannon Braga, who gave us some really bad trash e.g. Voyager’s “Threshold” and Enterprise’s “A Night in Sickbay.” I also think it’s a horrendous insult to call “Star Trek (2009)” the zenith of all Treks.

The idea of a Spock / Uhura relationship isn’t that bad of an idea. But it’s how it’s executed. I mean, this sounds like a romantic relationship between student and professor, and that can scream scandal big time. Furthermore, they made Uhura the pining damsel pretty much.

You know, I think the supporters of a higher scope do have a point here. Are we going to see Earth bite the dust? Yeah, I know, call me crazy but who knows? They MIGHT destroy Earth in the sequel (or devastate it) and they have to settle someplace else (New Earth). I wouldn’t put it past them to do that.

What irks me is mainly if the next movie is basically “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” with the “Star Trek” name slapped on it. And what would be worse is if despite how bad it was, it gets praised like a “Dark Knight.” OK, that’s far-fetched, but while Trek 2009 was a fun but flawed romp, it wasn’t “Ben Hur” or “Patton” like some make it out to be. But at this point, I can believe this.

Jack, I can say that I doubt there’s time travel OR resets in the sequel.

Khan? It depends on how it’s done. They would have to go about the character with a different angle. Mish-mashing “Space Seed” and TWOK won’t work. I’m not against them using Khan, but it depends on how he’s used.

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